Laserfiche WebLink
REQUEST FOR <br />COUNCIL ACTION <br />CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: <br />APRIL 7, 2015 <br />TITLE; <br />PARK SECURITY UPDATE AND STAFF <br />RECOMMENDATION TO <br />ENSURE CONTINUED SECURITY <br />{STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 1, 1; 2} <br />////', Z, 4 L7ct.v,, zo <br />CITY MANAGER <br />RECOMMENDED ACTION <br />1. Receive and file park security update. <br />CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: <br />r_12:21061714 , <br />❑ As Recommended <br />❑ As Amended <br />❑ Ordinance on 161 Reading <br />❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading <br />❑ Implementing Resolution <br />❑ Set Public Hearing For <br />CONTINUED TO <br />FILE NUMBER <br />2. Approve staff's recommendation to ensure continued park security. <br />DISCUSSION <br />The purpose of this staff report is to provide an update on City park security and staff's <br />recommendation to ensure continued public safety in City parks. The 60 -day cap transition <br />period approved by the Mayor and City Council ends in April and as such staff seeks approval of <br />the recommendation to ensure park security. <br />At the City Council meeting on February 3, 2015, the Mayor and City Council provided the <br />following direction: <br />• Continue the existing Park Ranger Program (pending letter from CaIPERS) <br />• Seek an opinion from CaIPERS on retired annuitants <br />• 60 -day cap transition period <br />• Start new Park Ranger Program recruitment <br />• Police Department to oversee the new Park Ranger Program <br />As directed by the Mayor and City Council, City staff wrote a letter to the California Public <br />Employee Retirement System (CaIPERS) on February 3, 2015 (Exhibit 1). The letter as written <br />seeks an opinion from CaIPERS as to the ability of long term Park Ranger retired annuitants to <br />legally continue employment with the City. Currently, four Park Rangers are the sole remaining <br />CaIPERS retired annuitants in the City. The City did not receive a response from CaIPERS and <br />as such sent a subsequent letter on March 16, 2015 (Exhibit 2). Unfortunately, the City has not <br />received a response from CaIPERS as of the date of this item. <br />6513-1 <br />