To:   HONORABLE MAYOR AND                   From:   William M. Lansdowne

                        CITY COUNCIL

 

COUNCIL DISTRICT: City-Wide

 

 

SUBJECT:  APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO CALIFORNIA IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM (CAL-ID)

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The approval of the amended Memorandum of Understanding with local law enforcement agencies to provide access to the California Identification (CAL-ID) System is recommended.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Senate Bill 190, which became law effective January of 1986, established the CAL-ID System to automate the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) manual fingerprint files and to establish an automated state-wide system for identifying latent fingerprints.  In 1988, Santa Clara County and the Incorporated Cities, including San Jose, entered into a Joint Powers Agreement entitled
“Agreement to Provide Local Law Enforcement Agency Access to the California Identification System”, referred to as the CAL-ID program.  San Jose administers the program through the Police Department’s Central Identification Unit.  Costs for the program are shared by the County and participating Cities, including overhead, maintenance, and operation costs.  A local CAL-ID Remote Access Network (RAN) Board was established to represent the various jurisdictions within Santa Clara County for the CAL-ID Program.

 

On May 31, 1998, a new Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) was acquired under an MOU between the City of Jose and the County of Santa Clara.  The equipment for the AFIS System replaced most of the equipment originally purchased for the CAL-ID System.

 

 

ANALYSIS

 

In previous years, the Police Department administered and operated both the CAL-ID and AFIS programs.  The City entered into separate Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) for each program.  However, last year the County and Incorporated Cities desired that these programs be consolidated and under one MOU, with the CAL-ID RAN board overseeing the full operation. The City Council approved the new MOU for the consolidated program at the April 30, 2002 Council Meeting.

 

The County requested certain changes to the MOU.  A draft containing the County’s proposed changes has now been negotiated among the parties to the MOU.

 

The proposed changes are as follows:

 

·        Section 2: Term and Termination.  This section has been amended to provide that if any of the parties opts out of the MOU they will not have a payback commitment to contribute towards multiyear costs extending beyond the year of termination unless they have specifically entered into an agreement to make such a payback.

 

·        Section 7: Mutual Indemnification.  This section has been amended to clarify that for purposes of indemnification obligations the parties to the MOU are not agents of each other.

 

·        Section 8: Dispute Resolution.  This section has been added to require the Local Policy Board to use its best efforts to resolve disputes.  If the Board is unable to resolve the dispute, the resolution is left with the governing bodies of the individual parties to the MOU.

 

The following standard contract provisions were also added at the request of the County:

 

·        Section 9:   Notice.

·        Section 10: Amendments.

·        Section 11: Counterparts.

·        Section 12:  Severability.

·        Section 13: Waiver

·        Section 14: Governing Law

·        Section 15: Entire Agreement

 

There are several minor changes to Exhibits A, B and D, which are clarifications to administrative procedures for the Board.  In addition, under the MOU, the City provides fiscal and administrative management of the System and can include its costs as part of the annual operating costs.  Section A.3 is being modified to clarify that City overhead is included in these costs.

 

A copy of the proposed MOU containing these provisions is attached for your reference.  At its meeting on October 8, 2002, the County Board of Supervisors approved the delegation of authority to the District Attorney and the Sheriff, or their designees, to execute any amendments to the MOU with the City of San Jose, having no budgetary implications, following approval by County Counsel as to form and legality.  On April 30, 2003, the Amendment to the MOU was signed by all of the parties representing the County of Santa Clara.  After approval by the City, each of the Incorporated Cities in the County will be requested to approve this Amendment. 

 

 

PUBLIC OUTREACH

 

Meetings were held with the local law enforcement agencies involved with the processing of this agreement and the formulation of the required budget.

 

 

COST IMPLICATIONS

 

For fiscal year 2003-04, direct non-personal expenses as well as eighteen latent fingerprint examiners and two latent fingerprint supervisors are funded by the CAL-ID participant contributions totaling $2,360,958.  The City’s contribution to the program is $922,559.

 

 

COORDINATION

 

This agreement has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and the City Manager’s Budget Office.

 

 

CEQA

 

Not a Project

 

 

WILLIAM M. LANSDOWNE

Chief of Police

 

Attachment