Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20181113aPSsm2CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR November 13, 2018 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Policy and Services Committee Recommends the City Council Accept the Code Enforcement Audit In accordance with the Fiscal Year 2017 Annual Audit Work Plan, the Office of the City Auditor has completed the Code Enforcement audit. The audit report presents three findings and seven recommendations. The Office of the City Auditor recommends that the Policy and Services Committee review and recommend to the City Council acceptance of the Code Enforcement audit. Respectfully submitted, Harriet Richardson City Auditor ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Code Enforcement Audit (PDF) Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor Page 2 Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit November 6, 2018 Office of the City Auditor Harriet Richardson, City Auditor Yuki Matsuura, Performance Auditor I Attachment A Page intentionally left blank for double-sided printing Attachment A th OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Code Enforcement Audit November 6, 2018 PURPOSE OF THE AUDIT inform them CONCLUSION The City code enforcement cases and in a timely manner due to factors such as unclear roles and responsibilities The City’s records on code enforcement complaints and cases are inconsistent and incomplete and useful information for management decisions The City’s has opportunities for further in regard to code enforcement processes It is essential for the City to guide and support its code enforcement functions to ensure that any barriers to useful data is collected and REPORT HIGHLIGHTS Finding 1: many code enforcement fragmented Municipal Code timely response and resolution (Page 9) been hampered by factors such as fragmented Municipal Code re enforcement efforts by addressing those factors and realigning its code Key Recommendations: Clarify and confirm the City’s code enforcement strategy and priorities is Attachment A Finding 2:The City does not code enforcement data to useful information for management decisions (Page 28) decentralized recordkeeping system produces incomplete or inconsistent The City can capture stakeholders and designing standardized code enforcement data tracking and reporting processes to mee Key Recommendations: terminology Reconfigure Accela Code Enforcement to enhance data collection and Finding 3: responsible for code communication on code enforcement efforts (Page 38) arding Municipal Some nearby City can adopt some o Key Recommendations: the enforcement functions across the City Attachment A TABLE OF CONTENTS Background Scope Methodology fragmented response and resolution Recommendations information for management decisions Recommendations compliance but Recommendations Code Enforcement Functions Across the City Code Enforcement Functions and Primary Enforcement Responsibility Appendix ABBREVIATIONS C&D Construction and Demolition CAD Computer Aided Dispatch FTE Full- PAMC Palo Alto Municipal Code TDM Transportation Demand Management Attachment A Page intentionally left blank for double-sided printing Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 1 INTRODUCTION Objective Does the City useful information for management m about the Background Goal is to achieve compliance rather than to sanction violators The City’s code enforcement processes encompass efforts by responsible for certain sections of the guidance regarding code enforcement authority and other uidance regarding Appendices the code enforcement functions across the City and their The City’s goal is to rather than to impose sanctions through formal enforcement and penalties City staff r seri may also initiate a code enforcement process based on completing other duties or referrals The of the Planning and complaints by the public as the function generally responsible for enforcing code Exhibit Attachment A 2 Code Enforcement Audit EXHIBIT 1 Planning’s Code Enforcement High-Level Process SOURCE: Auditor’s analysis of Accela Code Enforcement data Code Enforcement Officers The Municipal Code defines ode enforcement officer as any of the Municipal Code title The City has four fulltime the title of code enforcement officer T position ’s Code Enforcement and report directly to the chief planning official O ’s deputy d Other City positions are designated in specific Municipal Code Appendix affected the code enforcement officer Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 3 EXHIBIT 2 Municipal Code Titles That Code Enforcement Officers Are Authorized to Administratively Enforce Municipal Code Title Title Description Title Business Licenses and Regulations Title Title Animals Title Trees and Vegetation Title Public Title Public Works and Utilities Title Title Building Regulations Title Title Zoning Title Parks SOURCE:PAMC Sections and Enforcement Responsibilities Planning’s code enforcement officers are responsible for codes and and Building staff percent of each of Planning’s three code enforcement officer positions lead code enforcement officer in January some of the leaf bl and to The lead code Attachment A 4 Code Enforcement Audit The Police Department enforces the City’s noise ordinance including cons animal control regulation parking regulations and and solicitors The Fire Department code s related to fire safety and hazardous materials and identify and abate s that All t the Public Works Department enforcement responsibilities o properties and streets o items placed or performed in the City’s right-of- encroachment o al and for including container i such as Enforcement Options The Municipal Code remedies to as cost-initiating formal V notices to inform the alleged that a or that a Citations to encourage compliance through assessment of o itations issued by authorized City staff penalty schedule Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 5 the listed penalty for a a - of the listed penalty for a a - The responsible party can appeal to the City’s hearing officer o Criminal citations can be Compliance orders for cases that and specific penalties comply attend a hearing before the City’s hearing o to The City Attorney’s Office supports the code enforcement functions Scope code enforcement processes and related complaint and case records for FY for six departmen Planning orks further focused on Planning’s code enforcement cases opened January and June Methodology s Attachment A 6 Code Enforcement Audit Information Technology Departments to understand the City’s code enforcement functions and processes and identify enhancement opportunities Municipal Code sections understand code enforcement organizational structure of the City’s code enforcement other budgets to identify their Conducted a risk assessment to identify and prioritize areas on code enforcement data and department records to understand the o o Planning’s FY code enforcement case data in Accela in detail all Accela code enforcement and June o A judgmental sample enforcement issues in detail to assess accuracy and o Building’s FY inspection data in Accela related to code enforcement o Police’s FY nonemergency call data in the Computer ystem for Municipal Code and noise s o or FYs o Public Works Watershed Protection’s FY Accela is the City’s permitting system for planning and Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 7 o Public Works Refuse’s FY o Golf citations issued in FY the code enforcement functions Because highly depend on the nature and complexity of based on that context rather than a specific timeframe or outcome Sampling methodology code enforcement issues based on public interest identified on The sample case types We chose this sample design to address public concerns to identify the cause of any deficiencies to inform our conclusions cannot be projected to the total population of code Data reliability the Accela code enforcement data and cross-referenced it against supporting documents recorded in PaloAlto assess the accuracy and completeness of the code enforcement performance on code enforcement cases and timeliness of that different departments use to track complaints and enforcement We identified data reliability concerns that became a focus in our audit j We chose some of Attachment A 8 Code Enforcement Audit Code Enforcement Community Survey the National to conduct a statistically assessment of the Compliance with government auditing standards We conducted this audit of code enforcement our FY Annual Audit Work Plan and generally accepted ble basis for our findings and and conclusions based on our audit Planning Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 9 Finding 1 The City resolves many code enforcement cases effectively; but unclear roles and responsibilities, fragmented Municipal Code requirements, and staffing limitations have hampered timely response and resolution Summary The City has many code enforcement functions Each function has its responsibilities departments many enforcement program is administered based on clear roles through numerous organizational changes that staffing and priorities causing roles and responsibilities to become unclear for some functions The City focuses its limited resources on situations that pose a serious risk Timeliness and such as fragmented that do not difficult cases that consume a significant amount of staff time its code enforcement efforts by addressing those factors and realigning its code enforcement prior staffing Timeliness or effectiveness of code enforcement varies by function, nature of violation, and workload factors primarily by complaints from residents issues that trouble residents City staff prioritize complaints based on the situations that pose a ser This is the rated prioritizing enforcement based on health and safety risks as enforcement function and the Attachment A 10 Code Enforcement Audit Planning’s Code Enforcement their in the second half of FY Building s but Police enforces the City’s noise ordinance but response times are affected by other public safety priorities Fire enforcement but Park rangers enforce park and open space regulations and Planning’s Code Enforcement resolved 81 percent of their cases within 60 days lead code enforcement o i its timeliness in closing cases Exhibit Planning opened code enforcement cases in FY and closed of December bit percent of the cases opened during the first half of FY closure percent cases opened in the second half of FY o better and more timely recordkeeping and may not necessarily reflect the timeliness of maintenance cases to their complexity Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 11 EXHIBIT 3 Planning’s Code Enforcement Cases Opened During FY 2017 and Status as of 12/31/17 Case Type Number of Cases Opened Status as of 12/31/17 Jul-Dec 2016 Jan-Jun 2017 Total %Closed Open # Citations3 - % - 4 Encroachment % - Property Maintenance % % - - Zoning % Building % Fences % - - Short-Term Rental % Long Term CM % - - - - - - - Vehicles - - - Grand Total 435 331 766 100% 752 14 17 The home o leaf b short-term rental case types in z - We recategorized them to more accurately present the The larger in the first half of FY resulted from political the the fall The number of citations is based only on 4 Police issued four s SOURCE: Planning Department - Accela Code Enforcement data EXHIBIT 4 Planning’s Code Enforcement Cases - Number of Calendar Days from Case Opened to Closed Cases closed within: Number of Cases Opened During 1st half of FY 2017 (Jul - Dec 2016) 2nd half of FY 2017 (Jan-Jun 2017) # Cases %# Cases % Same %% Could not determine Total 435 100% 331 100% SOURCE: Planning Department – Accela Code Enforcement data Attachment A 12 Code Enforcement Audit s for code enforcement officers to open a case because of data reliability issues are discussed in Finding based on the case records it is likely that their timeliness has been affected by a large increase in the Enforcement Issue as complaints Most residents EXHIBIT 5 Number of PaloAlto311 Service Requests for “Code Enforcement Issue” Code Enforcement Issue Type Number of Service Requests FY 2016 FY 2017 - Property Maintenance - Zoning Compliance - Fences - Signs - Weeds Other Total 188 575 All Includes SOURCE: Planning Department – Planning has an internal guideline for priorities and response It took Planning Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 13 Many minor encroachment or property maintenance cases are simple and the need to e items from the take longer for a code enforcement officer to get to these cases due to other higher priority cases that pose a risk to health or safety It may also take longer for Planning to respond if a com Planning staff generally do not respond to calls during those In FY Enforcement Issu hours After lead code enforcement officer led to Planning’s code enforcement Ensuring that all three officers are certified by the California Association of Code Enforcement Officers Enhancing Attorney’s Office and ing enforcement of gas-s through additional need to be made for actions taken Building Division works closely with Code Enforcement, but cases involving a building permit take a long time to resolve Building staff typically conduct an inspection one to three days after If Building staff confirm during a routine inspection or in time to than simpler cases and It Attachment A 14 Code Enforcement Audit confirmed Police response times to nonemergency complaints are affected by other public safety priorities Police o and enforce the City’s noise ordinance depending on the ue and impact on public Police also enforce certain business regulations such as taxicabs the Police Department’s FY other higher priorities often take olice officers from getting to the site in progress and correct the same police o and identify it as such may only be on site for a short period of ti only temporarily EXHIBIT 6 FY 2017 Police Nonemergency Calls for Service - Selected Event Type and Event Subtypes Event Type Event Subtype Number of Calls Municipal Code Violation Construction Noise Solicitors Other Disturbance Noise SOURCE: Police Computer-Aided Dispatch System Data Fire contracts with Santa Clara County to identify and abate fire hazards from weeds The Fire Department contracts Santa Clara County to focus addresses The County has the expertise and a -established to identify potential fire hazards from The City Council adopts a resolution each fall to declare those properties a public nuisance and holds a public hearing each spring to hear any objections to Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 15 To ensure continued compliance must meet the Minimum Fire Safety Standards for three e property fails plus an are Public Works forwards some code violations to Planning for enforcement but also has its own enforcement programs Public Works’ arded to Planning for incidents incidents the permitting and plan check processes It also responds to property complaints but does not keep a record of them because they are not considered a code enforcement case until al enforcement program for each of its functions Watershed Protection staff Attachment A 16 Code Enforcement Audit Park rangers enforce park and open space regulations and issue citations on the spot for public protecting the natural resources of the City’s parks and open a -the-spot citations in FY An effective resolution should be cost-effective, which may sometimes be more important than timeliness The Cit rather than to impose sanctions such as tations on gaining compliance by guiding the responsible party to obtain a rather than immediately issuing a citation code enforcement officers assess each case and its responsible party lty does not create an immediate danger to health or safety s ind -faith effort to abate the This strategy may frustrate complainants may urge the City to to immediately issue a citation unless certain criteria are met n could also result in costly and time- A repeat offense may not be sanctioned depending on the severity and circumstances The City’s strategy also influences City staff’s approach to a creates an immediate danger to health or safety a repeat offense Although states that the schedule of See Joint Report from City Attorney and City Manager to Confirm City Code Enforcement and City Attorney’s Office Code Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 17 accordingly - month period Planning staff typically s that do not pose an immediate danger s if the osed generally apply the only to s Timeliness and effectiveness of code enforcement have been hampered by unclear roles and responsibilities and fragmented Municipal Code requirements some code enforcement roles and responsibilities for certain functions became unclear the ability for staff to respond to code enforcement Municipal Code do not or are interpreted and applied code enforcement responsibilities puts an additional burden on enforce the Municipal Code and is enforced A series of organizational and staffing changes resulted in higher expectations for Planning code enforcement efforts under the Police Department in FY ensure compatibility and consistency in code enforcement po through cross- training and coordinat ue to budget constraints in FY the City three full-time positions for code enforcement in Police and Public W code enforcement o reduced the Police code enforcement officer position FTE en Attachment A 18 Code Enforcement Audit With establishment of the in FY code enforcement o a planning manager but continued to support Building for Planning reorganized its code enforcement function under the chief planning official in FY The City’s code enforcement structure remains decentralized today lead code enforcement officer position in FY specifically to Municipal Code taking from Police Although Planning it no longer does and staff cited increased case as the reason Municipal Code sections not always aligned with current practices cedures in compliance orders The organizational and regulatory changes since then and departments enforcement practices that best suit The City has not amended the procedures since Municipal Code do not reflect the organizational and regulatory changes thus do not For example Municipal Code code enforcement officers to for the responsible party to correct a if the structural or zoning matters that do not create an immediate When to the lead code enforcement officer Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 19 the City is restricted from issuing a citation a prior Police can issue a criminal citation the - Some Municipal Code chapters define enforcement procedures or designate specific positions to enforce a chapter’s While it makes sense to maintain separate procedures Use ome Fo PAMC Noncompliance a Public Nuisance Enforcement – Citation Authority to address zoning d administr procedures at the time on the City Attorney’s legal proceedings and the designated employees’ ’s code enforcement officers address most using the and the City Attorney’s Office and the designated employees mainly play a supporting role in hearing and lien are difficult to understand facts California Penal Code Section Attachment A 20 Code Enforcement Audit S es appear in front of the enforcement officer at a stated time and place for a hearing are no longer because of the more courteous in – Streamlining and updating these enforcement City staff These chapters also designate nonexistent positions for enforcement such as plan check engineer and ordinance compliance inspector A better practice update the position titles in the Municipal Code if they change or the responsibilities are reassigned to another position may be to designate the department responsible for enforcement but not Advanced coordination clarifies roles and responsibility and prevents redundancy Planning has arrangements functions in other departments staff to process based on preestablished enforcement roles and responsibilities Planning’s Construction and D oordinator gain c lead code enforcement officer Without such an Various other efforts are Planning’s code e their maintenance responsibilities in these areas to regularly In expand the Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 21 inconsistencies and modernizing the ordinance to prepare for an automated tracking and penalty collection program City staff must prove a violation by a preponderance of the evidence before issuing a citation Some complainants expressed their frustration that City staff do not issue citations code -ained he Municipal Code Because the City has on a preponderance of the City staff cannot rely solely on a photo submitted and generally do not issue a citation unless they Some regulations are difficult to enforce and consume a disproportionate share of staff time D e a technical understanding of multiple Municipal Code other City staff consume a significant amount of staff time by adopting practices - complaints in FY most not substantiated primarily because Police officers often cannot respond immediately to due to other priorities s unconfirmed cases to Planning Planning also complaints by opening a code enforcement case in Accela sending a courtesy letter to notify of the complaint conducting one inspection on a later date before closing the case the it is difficult to catch a often and change their schedules operators a hired gardener Based on that ordinance Police issue a citation only to operators and upon Attachment A 22 Code Enforcement Audit es courtesy another Municipal Code section that applies to aiding and Some cities strengthened both operators and accountable for leaf the City of Santa Monica amended its ordinance to assign f When they issue they also attach informational door hangers to the front door of the property to alert the resident of the Santa Monica also These complaints om - The number of citations also increased The Placing responsibility more effecti insufficient to deter professional gardeners from committing Construction noise – officers often cannot get to the construction Building staff respon and make the s construction sites a future occurrences ilding does not record the Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 23 complaints or obtain Police call data to track and identify Some jurisdictions contractor’s contact departments the City only ires the Police nonemergency number to be posted isting the City to address the problem sooner and Complex property maintenance cases – Complex property properties or h multiple departments and interpretation of multiple Municipal Code sections f there are any health or safety hazards the City abate the conditions to protect the public the City Attorney’s Office to ensure other To streamline San Jose and San Francisco adopted anti-blight ordinance Municipal Code to address properties under Zoning cases – enforcement officers rely on the planners’ expertise to inter reach an unbiased conclusion due to Planning’s role in the Attachment A 24 Code Enforcement Audit s to identify any jurisdictions that offer an appeal process to a s Some regulations lack an enforcement process or resources a defined process or Council made a conscientious decision to implement regulations based on their contributes to frustrations among residents regarding the City’s code Public benefits – The City has adopted istricts Municipal Code for not specifically Although Planning staff stated that many PC districts lack he Municipal Code inspections of each PC district at least regulations and the conditions of the ordinance under s that the City dedicated sufficient resources for reasses -specific PC enforcement officer position in FY Planning monitors certain projects closely but has not established a process to meet the three-year inspection cycle and takes enforcement action primarily on a complaint basis Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 25 Multi-family smoking ban – City did not budget resources to perform outreach or to c of tracking i – The City routinely attaches numerous typic enforcement officer positio projects to self-monitor certain conditions and report annually - Improving the enforceability of regulations can free up resources for other enforcement priorities s and from the City The City can support staff by setting code enforcement priorities and making resource and policy decisions to ensure that the Resources could also be freed up f other enforcement priorities if code enforcement officers stopped - up for continued Attachment A 26 Code Enforcement Audit Recommendations We recommend that the City Manager Attorney’s Office and functions to Clarify and confirm the City’s code enforcement strategy and priorities an updated enforcement procedure strategy for each area of the City’s code enforcement priorities This includes assessment of the regulations that lack an enforcement process or sufficient PC district regulations leaf conditions the applicant to self-Post the updated strate Update the Municipal Code enforcement including Combining into a single chapter larifying and streamlining in PAMC practices and Council’s intent for code enforcement a A a as needed and streamlining for consistency across City departments Clarifying code enforcement roles and responsibilities to that permit information and contact information for contractors and responsible City annual Municipal Code clean up Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 27 old regular meetings code enforcement responsibilities to share allocation and consistent enforcement action plan responsibility Attachment A 28 Code Enforcement Audit Finding 2 The City does not have complete and reliable code enforcement data to provide useful information for management decisions Summary record code enforcement complaints and cases using different its Computer-CAD Some functions do not record all or system produces incomplete or inconsistent data that is difficult to aggregate into a c M performance measures and use the information for their annual reliable data by identifying and designing code enforcement data tracking and reporting processes to meet the identified needs The City does not have a centralized tracking system for complaints and code enforcement cases through multiple channels and each code enforcement function may classify and record the complaints and cases using different systems This decentralized recordkeeping makes it difficult to aggregate data in a manner City’s code enforcement acti some functions do not record all complaints they re informally address some issues considering the issue as a graffiti on public property may be treated as a maintenance task rather than a code code enforcement functions Inconsistent and incomplete data limit the City’s ability to identify trends for strategic policy discussion and resource allocation Planning re an enforcement action Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 29 to create and track cases do not enter any information in the code enforcement cases and instead track inspections they conduct in support of code enforcement in the Building module of Accela complaints related to construction sites in the City but does not record them as code enforcement issues Planning’s P construction and Systems’ debris tracking oncompliance in FY The C&D coordinator reports noncompliance to the lead code enforcement officer for citation but no code ach citation to the corresponding building permit record in Accela’s Building module We could there is not a field in Accela dedicated to tracking citations All calls are recorded in the CAD system classify the complaints based on the type of issue A police days on its the permitting and inspection processes Fire does not record complaints or track abatement cases that it reports to Santa Clara County to address phone or email and a Watershed Protection staff use Microsoft spread Attachment A 30 Code Enforcement Audit City’s refuse contractor y monitor the log to identify issues The City reports only a limited number of performance measures, which does not reflect the timeliness and effectivenessof citywide code enforcement efforts Planning reports the days in the annual Performance Report and rated code enforcement as good or excellent in the annual Operating Budget Other City departments do not regularly report understand the extent Center for Performance Measurement es a list of core measures for code enforcement umber of calendar days from case inspection to oluntary or forced compliance compliance Accela code enforcement case data is not reliable for analysis P To determine if the City’s code enforcement data is complete and Planning’s code enforcement case data in Accela dataset specific to code enforcement cases only ing the second half of FY opportunities Although the code enforcement officers documented detailed informati data and the system configured to capture and produce reliable and useful data for management Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 31 EXHIBIT 7 Code Enforcement Cases Opened Between 1/1/17 and 6/30/17 and Status as of 12/31/17 Case Type Total Void1 Forwarded to Other City Dept2 No Violation Violation # Citations Abated Open --- Property Maintenance - Encroachment - - Zoning -- Building -- - - Fences -- - - Short-Term Rental - Long Term CM - - - - - - - - - Vehicles -- - - - Grand Total 331 18 2 160 140 14 9 1 Includes duplicate cases 2 Source:Auditor’s analysis of the code enforcement cases in Accela Useful information cannot be extracted in a reliable manner is entered in the Description or Comments fields and cannot be extracted to produce accurate For example Accela does code enforcement officers enter a Cases for a specific type of olation because the options are not standardized and data is entered for the same type of and case type are the same and just say Building or The case types are code enforcement officers create one case and choose a case changed once entered an inspection finds that it is incorrect or that there is are no data fields specifically for the source or date of the Attachment A 32 Code Enforcement Audit complaint or its resolution compliance Code enforcement officers describe these in the Comment field but not in a Workflow status is not entered consistently and completely Code enforcement officers update case status by choosing a the date and comments for the status Exhibit EXHIBIT 8 Example of Changes in Code Enforcement Case Workflow Status SOURCE:Auditor’s analysis of Accela Code Enforcement data W data to assess the code enforcement officers’ or performance because the data not entered consistently and completely Each inspection should be recorded by choosing the We counted the Comments field had an Our dataset had or triggering the automatic generation of a Code Enforcement distinguishes a courtesy notice from a oth notices are recorded in Acce be distinguished for reporting purposes Some of these issues may staff not fully understanding the code enforcement officers use an iPad to document their cases in the field but the Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 33 fully explained to staff to ensure consistent and complete data entries in Accela through an iPad Case description and status are sometimes incomplete or not detailed enough for the public to understand the issue or resolution in BuildingEye As explained in Finding the c status are BuildingEye displays selected Accela code enforcement case data through an complete or detailed enough it limits the public’s ability to understand the issue code enforcement cases and may contribute to residents reporting additional complaints for an issue that has already been or is Accela case data also tend to be incomplete or not updated timely function other than Planning or high-profile zoning issues that are primarily handled by a planner complex property maintenance issues that e the City to perform the Exhibit the descriptions Exhibit information regarding the status of a code enforcement and displayed on BuildingEye could reduce the number of -s transparency to the public regarding the cases Attachment A 34 Code Enforcement Audit EXHIBIT 9 Extract of City of San Diego Code Enforcement Records SOURCE:City of San Diego Citizen Portal at EXHIBIT 10 Example – City of Pittsburgh BuildingEye/Enforcement SOURCE:City of Pittsburgh BuildingEye at Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 35 Code enforcement documents are not labeled consistently and can be difficult to identify Code enforcement officers upload related case documents in Accela s of s find a specific attachment because they are all under the same tab not labeled clearly and consistently For to Planning has a project in place to integrate Accela and PaloAlto311 but has not been able to move forward Planning’s three--per- year contract to implement Accela enhancements in June The contract includes integrating code enforcement such as changes to gramming and Transportation Demand Management I ill City competing priorities Planning has only one business analyst to support its including PaloAlto Geographic Information System Accela data e a thoughtful design process to define data points The lead code enforcement officer made various improvements, but more is needed Planning code enforcement cases since the lead code enforcement officer joined the City code enforcement officers did not consistently use Accela to record their cases in Accela all cases action cases in Accela e increase partly due to enhanced an increase in political sign an Created -term rental cases to separately ously included in Zoning Attachment A 36 Code Enforcement Audit ed ed and standardized the process for notifying the party responsible for an Automated and standardized the recording and notification processes s Standardized iz The lead code enforcement officer stated that Code Enforcement did not ha due to Recommendations Upon confirming the City’s code enforcement strategy and that the City’s code internally and internally and D s to use and enforcement data for each function including design reporting processes capable of aggregating the data into a measures for the annual If it is determined under that Planning continue to use Accela Planning should reconfigure Accela Code Enforcement to enhance data collection and reporting p e ay adopt Accela by Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 37 Defining each type of and identifying additional status or other data points to be captured the Accela consultant to ensure needed data and documents are captured accurately consistently in a manner that can be extracted for reporting additional data fields Adding or modifying drop-s after initial data entry templates in Accela for periodic reporting of code enforcement performance measures in Establishing data entry procedures to Establishing s Ensuring that information displayed on BuildingEye s sufficient detail for the public to understand and resolution of each case Attachment A 38 Code Enforcement Audit Finding 3 The City actively engages with individuals responsible for code violations to gain compliance but should improve its public communication on code requirements and enforcement efforts Summary Municipal Code ce Although City staff typically bringing s into may find it difficult to get information use Pa but BuildingEye for code enforcement linked to and looking for code enforcement case information may not easily find it additional information compliance such as their code enforcement strategy and a neighborhood resources l Citywide information on code enforcement is not easily accessible from a central location Most and makes it difficult for residents or City staff to find the responsible City staff or the For many planning and zoning handouts such as guidelines and pr Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 39 ge GreenWaste of Palo Alto an PaloAlto311 capabilities not fully leveraged The Public Works- Exhibit the City expanded the use of the platform to other public-facing departments EXHIBIT 11 Number of PaloAlto311 Service Requests by Department Department FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Public Works - Planning - - Utilities - - Other Total Maintenance issues such as open space and parks s s SOURCE: Planning Department – coordinated interdepartmental efforts or monitored Attachment A 40 Code Enforcement Audit S issue types are not clearly defined or causes certain complaints to be routed to the then the right person to the issue has been so it may remain in an open status Some users stated that they did ed making communication difficult among departments The City Open Data Portal but the data is incomplete and the dashboard does not current not been addressed because each PaloAlto311 application is not as user friendly as it could be The City’s code enforcement The application lists primary issue types subcategories and brief descriptions that may not be sufficient for residents to type to choose reporting a code Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 41 description for the Enforcement Issue option and does not list other types of code enforcement issues until the option and a location is selected subcategories V Weed and no clear description of the difference option The also includes subcategories other options for reporting other types of obstructions restaurant tables and chairs or or direct their more clearer descriptions of represents could S submit a complaint or sp their issue of interest and find information Attachment A 42 Code Enforcement Audit EXHIBIT 12 Extract of SF311 List of Online Services SOURCE: Communicating the City’s Code enforcement strategy and priorities can improve expectations It also may be helpful to communicate clearly the City’s code types of complaints and address Exhibit jurisdictions clearly communicate their code Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 43 EXHIBIT 13 Redwood City Code Enforcement Principles SOURCE: -- -inspection-code--enforcement The City can leverage its community partners and provide online resources for achieving compliance ir code that can help address code enforcement issues or neighborhood -going and persistent disputes Palo Alto has a number of community partners and City programs that residents can reach out to neighborhood issues resources are not linked to the code enforcement information on compliance Example The City’s Safe Routes to School staff can assist in clearing a bike path Attachment A 44 Code Enforcement Audit -market rates to abate property maintenance issues City staff actively engage with individuals responsible for code violations to gain compliance responsible parties to gain differ depending on the code enforcement function and nature and issue a citation if not corrected Planning’s code enforcement officers issue a courtesy notice or respons Multiple methods used to communicate complaint and case status, but information available to the public is not always complete or easily accessible Planning uses three methods to collect and communicate – Residents can report code enforcement report back to the complainant through but Planning uses this primarily as a Accela - through email or Planning’s lead code enforcement enforcement officer only if the complaint is determined to an enforcement action igned Planning does not create a case Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 45 around the for cases in of in BuildingEye – e res Accela building permit data Planning adopted BuildingEye for planning applications soon after and began using it for code enforcement in July Other departments use methods other than Accela and their cases Planning’s Code Enforcement uses PaloAlto311 as a reporting tool and Accela to manage cases When a complainant uses notification S R y When Planning simultaneously notifies the complainant that it has opened a case file and that the complaint is C in includes a link to BuildingEye so the complainant can U C cause complainants to think that Planning kept the PaloAlto for a four-month trial period to maintain communication the complainants it discontinued the practice because Accela are not interfaced and for Planning an d multiple complainants or one complainant filed multiple complaints on the same T the Accela case record nor is the Accela case number recorded in Attachment A 46 Code Enforcement Audit to track the ongoing status of cases that they reported through BuildingEye data not always complete or detailed enough to understand the issue or resolution Complainants must either BuildingEye’s Enforcement exists to search for the status of a case because there is not a direct link from Planning’s Code BuildingEye A search for result in a documents that announced the launch of BuildingEye and access BuildingEye through links in those documents case information ’s Enforcement is not complete or detailed enough for planning application data through BuildingEye’s and building permit data through the Building T link to the more detailed information accessible through City of Palo Alto Citizen Portal it is not apparent in BuildingEye’s E an permit code enforcement officers typically note the permit or application number in the Comments field of Accela for a related ould onfigure and display the number in BuildingEye could also enhance dissemination of data that are already The City of Palo Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 47 Recommendations responsibility for ensuring that the information is kept up to Examples of information that the should include are The City’s code e function code enforcement case status and resolution including links to BuildingEye City of Palo or the complainant can expect and examples of information that the complainant is not ne Redefining PaloAlto reconfiguring s to minimize incorrect routing of Managing user access and making training materials Updating and maintaining the and Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 48 APPENDIX 1 – Code Enforcement Functions Across the City Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 49 APPENDIX 2 – Code Enforcement Functions and Primary Enforcement Responsibility Primary Enforcement Functions Primary Enforcement Responsibilities Department Function Palo Alto Municipal Code Primary Focus City Attorney Legal Support All Legal advice and support on code enforcement matters referred to the City Attorney’s Office. Community Services Open Space, Parks & Golf 6.16.100, 6.20.010, 6.20.045 Unleashed dogs, animals at large, dog defecation to be removed by owner. Title 22 Parks Unleashed dogs, unauthorized activities, alcohol in City parks. Development Services Building Services Title 16 Building Regulations1 See Code Enforcement. 9.10.060(b)(c)(d) Construction noise related to activities permitted by Building Services. Fire Fire Prevention 8.08 Weed Abatement Abatement of weeds posing a fire hazard (outsourced to the Santa Clara County). 9.56 Abatement of Nuisances Public nuisance involving a fire or life safety hazard (including impairment of access by emergency personnel). Title 15 Fire Prevention Fire hazard. Title 17 Hazardous Materials and Storage Hazardous materials, toxic gases, underground storage tanks. Planning Code Enforcement 8.08 Weed Abatement Abatement of weeds as a nuisance. 9.56 Abatement of Nuisances Public nuisance involving property maintenance (including weed, junk, debris, or solid waste) or encroachment. Parking of a Recreational Vehicle or inoperable vehicle on private property. 16.14 California Green Building Standards Code Diversion of construction and demolition (C&D) debris, conditions of approval for private development projects. Takes enforcement actions on behalf of Planning/Development Services. 16.20 Signs Permanent or temporary signs. 16.24 Fences Fence height. Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 50 Primary Enforcement Functions Primary Enforcement Responsibilities Department Function Palo Alto Municipal Code Primary Focus Title 16 Building Regulations1 Illegal construction and demolition, substandard building condition, expired building permit and temporary certificate of occupancy. Takes enforcement actions on behalf of Development Services Department’s Building Services. Title 18 Zoning Zoning regulations, land uses, long-term monitoring of conditions, short-term rental. Takes enforcement actions on behalf of Current Planning. Current Planning Title 18 Zoning See Code Enforcement. Planning/Development Services 16.14 California Green Building Standards Code See Code Enforcement. Police Technical Services – Code Enforcement Title 4 Business Licenses and Regulations Solicitations, intrusion alarms, taxicabs, bingo games, massage establishments and therapists, push cart vendors, helicopter landing. Field Services –Police Officers & Community Services Officers Title 9 Public Peace, Morals, and Safety Public nuisance impacting peace and safety, noise (including gas- powered leaf blowers), alcoholic beverages, guns and explosives. Title 10 Vehicles and Traffic On street parking, abandoned vehicles. Animal Services Title 6 Animals Care and keeping of animals, dangerous and wild animals, diseased and crippled animals. Public Works Public Services – Urban Forestry 8.04 Street Trees, Shrubs and Plants Unpermitted tree work. 8.10 Tree Preservation and Management Regulations Protected trees. Public Services – Traffic Control/Street Sweeping 9.48 Obstructing Streets and Sidewalks Illegal dumping (furniture or other items obstructing roadway), dirt, debris, or litter on sidewalks, public parking lots or garages. 9.50 Graffiti Graffiti on public buildings. Public Services – Storm Drain/Street Maintenance 16.36.050 Curb painting without a permit. Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 51 Primary Enforcement Functions Primary Enforcement Responsibilities Department Function Palo Alto Municipal Code Primary Focus Engineering Services 9.10.060(b)(c)(d) Construction noise related to activities permitted by Engineering Services. 9.79 Newsracks Newsracks on public property. 12.08 Maintenance and Construction of Streets, Sidewalks, Driveways, and Driveway Approaches Unpermitted work in the public right-of-way. 12.12 Encroachments Accessary structure in public utility easement, tables and chairs on sidewalk, fences without setback. 16.28 Grading and Erosion and Sediment Control Unpermitted excavation or grading, dewatering. 16.52 Flood Hazard Regulations Construction flood hazards. Environment Services – Watershed Protection 16.09 Sewer Use Ordinance Discharge of pollutant or industrial, commercial, or domestic waste into the sanitary sewer system, storm drain system, local creeks, or the San Francisco Bay. 16.10 Private Sewage Disposal Systems Discharge from private sewage systems. Environment Services – Zero Waste/Refuse 5.20 Collection, removal, and disposal of refuse Refuse carts, bins, or debris boxes, excess refuse materials, garbage area not being maintained or smells. 1 Except for the sections that belong to other code enforcement functions (16.09, 16.10, 16.14, 16.20, 16.24, 16.28, 16.36.050, 16.45, 16.46, 16.47, 16.49, 16.52, 16.59, 16.60). SOURCE: Auditor’s compilation based on the Palo Alto Municipal Code, FY 2018 Adopted Operating Budget, and interviews of City staff. Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 52 APPENDIX 3 – Code Enforcement Staffing Timeline Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 53 APPENDIX 4 – City Manager’s Response The City Manager has agreed to take the following actions in response to the audit recommendations in this report. The City Manager will report progress on implementation six months after the Council accepts the audit report, and every six months thereafter until all recommendations have been implemented. Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date Finding 1: The City resolves many code enforcement cases effectively; but unclear roles and responsibilities, fragmented Municipal Code requirements, and staffing limitations have hampered timely response and resolution We recommend that the City Manager coordinate with the City Attorney’s Office and other departments with code enforcement functions to: 1.1. Clarify and confirm the City’s code enforcement strategy and priorities with the City Council. Develop an updated enforcement procedure that is aligned with the confirmed strategy for each area of the City’s code enforcement priorities, including case intake, tracking, and reporting. This includes assessment of the regulations that lack an enforcement process or sufficient resources, such as PC district regulations, leaf blower regulations, and conditions of approval requiring the applicant to self-report. Post the updated strategy on the City’s code enforcement web page. CMO Agree Corrective Action Plan: The CMO will work through Planning and other responsible departments to update and align enforcement strategies as described. Target Date: 12 months from Council acceptance of audit report. 1.2 Update the Municipal Code sections governing code enforcement, including: CMO Agree Corrective Action Plan: The CMO will first coordinate the work of Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 54 Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date a. Combining into a single chapter, clarifying, and streamlining the administrative procedures in PAMC Chapters 1.12 and 1.16 to ensure they support current practices and Council’s intent for code enforcement activities. b. Aligning administrative procedures in other PAMC chapters with the revised administrative procedures developed in 1.2.a above as needed and streamlining enforcement activities for consistency across City departments, to the extent possible. c. Clarifying code enforcement roles and responsibilities to ensure they are aligned with the current organizational structure. d. Requiring that permit information and contact information for contractors and responsible City departments be posted at each construction site. e. Removing ambiguities or inconsistencies as part of the annual Municipal Code clean up, responsible departments on item 1.1 above, and on item 1.2.c to clarify roles and responsibilities in alignment with a revised structure. Once improved practices are clarified, the CMO will work through the CAO and other responsible departments on items 1.2.a, 1.2.b, 1.2.d, and 1.2.e to amend the municipal code as appropriate to improve the administration of code enforcement activities and to align enforcement strategies with organizational responsibilities. Target Date: 12 months after item 1.1 and related process redesign is completed. Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 55 Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date including specific position titles, which can change over time. 1.3. Hold regular meetings (e.g., quarterly) with staff citywide who have code enforcement responsibilities to share information, discuss resource allocation, and develop collective and consistent enforcement action plans, particularly for where there is overlapping or unclear responsibility. CMO Agree Corrective Action Plan: The CMO will convene regular meetings of responsible departments throughout the duration of this corrective action and thereafter routinely convene an interdepartmental working group to monitor and manage the success of the ongoing program. Target Date: Starting 3 months following Council acceptance of audit report. Finding 2: The City does not have complete and reliable code enforcement data to provide useful information for management decisions We recommend: 2.1. Upon confirming the City’s code enforcement strategy and priorities with the City Council in Recommendation 1.1, that the City Manager coordinate with the City’s code enforcement functions to: a. Identify what complaint data to capture, track, and share internally and externally. b. Define what constitutes a code enforcement case and identify CMO Agree Corrective Action Plan: The CMO will coordinate the work of responsible departments to strengthen citywide data management, including the protection of private and confidential information, related to code enforcement. While performance measures related to code enforcement already exist, considerably improved metrics will be developed (per item 2.1.d) concurrent Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 56 Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date what case data to capture, track, and share internally and externally. c. Determine which system(s) to use and how to track code enforcement data for each function, including standardizing code enforcement terminology citywide, and design reporting processes capable of aggregating the data into a citywide view. d. Develop performance measures for code enforcement as part of the citywide initiative to improve measures for the annual Performance Report. with the improvement of code enforcement practices throughout this corrective action. Items 2.1.b and 2.1.a are consistent with the priorities of the city’s IT Strategic Plan and may be refined iteratively in coordination with item 2.1.c. Estimates may be required for anticipated resource commitments to support new tasks and/or software investments. Target Date: 12-24 months following Council’s acceptance of Recommendation 1.1 2.2 If it is determined under Recommendation 2.1 that Planning will continue to use Accela, Planning should reconfigure Accela Code Enforcement to enhance data collection and reporting, to pave the way for other functions that may adopt Accela, by:10 a. Defining each type of code enforcement workflow status and identifying additional status CMO Agree Corrective Action Plan: The CMO will coordinate the work of Planning and other responsible departments to integrate data collection and reporting functions into the appropriate data management system. Target Date: 10 This recommendation will not apply if the City adopts a different code enforcement software under the new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. However, some of the concepts would need to be considered if different code enforcement software is adopted. Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 57 Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date or other data points to be captured. b. Working with the Accela consultant to ensure needed data and documents are captured accurately, consistently, and in a manner that can be extracted for reporting. This may include: • Adding new workflow status and creating additional data fields to capture new data points. • Adding or modifying drop- down lists. • Allowing certain data fields to be modified after initial data entry. c. Developing report templates in Accela for periodic reporting of code enforcement performance measures developed in Recommendation 2.1.d. d. Establishing data entry procedures to prevent errors and improve consistency. This may include: • Establishing naming conventions for attachments. Concurrent with item 2.1; 12-24 months following Council’s acceptance of Recommendation 1.1 Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 58 Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date • Ensuring that information displayed on BuildingEye provides sufficient detail for the public to understand the issue, status, and resolution of each case. Finding 3: The City actively engages with individuals responsible for code violations to gain compliance but should improve its public communication on code requirements and enforcement efforts We recommend that the City Manager: 3.1 Provide general, citywide information on code enforcement in a central location on the City’s website and assign responsibility for ensuring that the information is kept up to date. Examples of information that the website should include are: a. The City’s code enforcement strategy and priorities (see Recommendation 1.1). b. Enforcement process, administrative procedures, and penalties (see Recommendations 1.2.a and 1.2.b). c. A list of common code enforcement issue types with a brief description of code requirements, how to report a violation, and contact information CMO Agree Corrective Action Plan: The CMO will coordinate the work of responsible departments to implement code enforcement strategies and priorities. Target Date: 3 months following implementation of Recommendation 2.2 Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 59 Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date for the responsible City function and/or link to additional information on the function’s website (see Recommendation 1.2.c). d. How to track code enforcement case status and resolution, including links to BuildingEye, the City of Palo Alto Citizen Portal, or PaloAlto311. e. General information on how a complaint is managed, including what level of communications and information the complainant can expect and examples of information that the complainant is not entitled to receive, if any. f. City programs, community partners, and other neighborhood resources available to provide assistance. 3.2. Assign staff to be responsible for citywide administration of PaloAlto311 to provide ongoing maintenance and support in coordination with code enforcement functions across the City, including: • Redefining PaloAlto311 issue types and reconfiguring CMO Agree Corrective Action Plan: The CMO will coordinate the work of responsible departments on administration of citywide code enforcement efforts. Target Date: Attachment A Code Enforcement Audit 60 Recommendation Responsible Department(s) Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree and Target Date and Corrective Action Plan To be completed 6 months after Council acceptance and every 6 months thereafter until all recommendations are implemented Current Status Implementation Update and Expected Completion Date workflows to provide clearer options for complainants who are reporting issues and to minimize incorrect routing of service requests. • Managing user access and making training materials available for new users. • Updating and maintaining the PaloAlto311 data and dashboard on the City’s Open Data Portal. Concurrent with recommendation 2.2 (12- 24 months following Council’s acceptance of Recommendation 1.1)