Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19980928 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 98-21 Regional erg Spy MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 98-21 NOTICE OF SPECIAL.MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA* 6:30 P.M. 330 Distel Circle Monday Los Altos, California September 28, 1998 (6:30) PUBLIC MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ** ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -- Public ADOPTION OF AGENDA BOARD BUSINESS (6:45) 1. Presentation of the Final Draft Report of the Operations Program Review by the Warner Group. ADJOURNMENT *NOTE: Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed. Agenda is subject to change of order. ** BOARD: The Chair will invite public comment on agenda items at the time TO ADDRESS THE S each item is considered by the Board of Directors. You may address the Board concerning other matters duringoral communications. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to 3 minutes. pe ly Alternately, you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates. 330 Distel Circle - Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 * Phone: 650 691 1200 FAX: 650-691-0485 . E-mail: mrosd@opcnspace.org Web site.www.openspace.org Hoard oft)ire ctors.Pate Siemmns,Mary C.Davev,Jed C`vr, David I.Smernott, Nonette Hanko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth C.Nitc . General Manager:l.Craig Britton Rqgional Open Spi, 2 ......... MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-98-1 10 Meeting 98-21 September 28, 1998 AGENDA ITEM -1 AGENDA ITEM Presentation of the Final Draft Report of the Operations ram Review by the Warner Group P rog GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Receive a formal presentation of the final draft report on the Operations Program Review from the Warner Group, and discuss and make comments for the final report. 2. Direct the Operations Program Review Ad Hoc Committee to work with the General Manager and Operations administrative staff to develop a specific implementation plan based upon the Board's direction as a result of report discussion. BACKGROUND As part of last year's union negotiations, which culminated in the current Memorandum of Agreement, the Board confirmed the process for an Operations Program Review in a letter of intent dated March 10, 1997 to Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 715 (see report R-97-49). In that letter, the District agreed to commission a study by a qualified consultant to review the Operations Program, including, but not limited to, law enforcement issues. At the regular meeting of October 8, 1997, the Board accepted the Request for Proposals and authorized the General Manager to solicit bids for the project (see report R-97-1 11). In keeping with the provisions of the letter of intent, the request for proposals was reviewed by representatives from the bargaining unit, who were also involved in reviewing the submittals. At the regular meeting of January 14, 1998, the Board authorized the General Manager to execute a contract with the Warner Group, and an Ad Hoc Committee of the Board was appointed to oversee the process and to provide input (see report R-98-07). DISCUSSION The Warner Group began work on the Operations Program Review in January, 1998. Methodology for conducting the review included the following: 330 Distel Circle # Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 - Phone:650-691-1200 FAX: 650-691-0485 E-mail: nirosd@openspace.org * Web site:www.openspace.org 9, Hoartl of Directors:Fete Siemens,Mary C.Davey,led Cyr, David T.Sinernoff, Nonette Hari ko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth Nitz - General Manage L.Craig Britton R-98-110 Page 2 • Conducting individual interviews with Board members, District management, and staff to gather individual input on the District's performance and other issues. • Performing a comprehensive review of available documentation to develop an understanding of the District's organization, services, processes, and present conditions. • Facilitating employee focus groups to gather input from cross-functional groups of employees on the District's strengths and opportunities for improvement. • Conducting an external stakeholder assessment to understand the perspective of the District's key customers and associated agencies, including fire and law enforcement. • Researching and benchmarking comparable open space agencies to learn best practices in open space management and operation. • Completing an assessment of current Operations Program practices, methods, and processes. • Developing service delivery models to provide alternatives to current service methods. • Preparing an interim progress report and presenting it to management and staff. • Developing findings and recommendations. • Preparing gthe final Operations Program Review Report. Based upon the recommendations in this report, the following is the proposed course of action for the Ad Hoc Committee: 1) Work with management staff to develop a work plan based on the priorities identified by the Board at this workshop and to develop specific implementation plans. implementation r f r staff to review the r sed work and 2 Provide a process for P � plans. 3) Return to the Board for approval of the work and implementation plans, and for consideration of budget issues, as necessary. 4) Provide regular updates to the Board on the status of the plans. R-98-110 Page 3 Conclusion Extensive consultant and staff time has been devoted to the process of conducting the Operations Program Review. The Warner Group has independently developed their findings and recommendations based on their interviews, research, and knowledge. The findings and recommendations present possible directions for the Operations Program. Staff expects extensive discussion and deliberation about these issues and seeks the Board's direction for the next steps in this process. A copy of the Executive Summary has been distributed to all regular recipients of Board meeting packet materials. Copies of the complete final draft report are available for public review at the District's administrative office. Prepared by: Gordon C. Baillie, Operations Analyst Contact: John M. Escobar, Operations Manager Executive Summary Background Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (the District) is a multi-county special district that has preserved over 42,000 acres, and owns and manages over 38,000 acres of scenic open space and recreational land on the peninsula between San Francisco and San Jose. The District was created in 1972 with the expressed mission to acquire and preserve a regional greenbelt of open space land in perpetuity, protect and restore the integrity of the natural environment, and provide opportunities for public enjoyment and education which are consistent with ecological values. Guiding the District in achieving its mission is an elected seven-member Board of Directors. Each Board member represents a geographic ward for a four-year term of office. The District has a full-time staff of 56 employees and 6 seasonal staff. The District is divided into five programs: Acquisition, Administration, Operations, Planning and Public Affairs. By far the largest program is Operations, which provides resource management, public safety, construction and maintenance necessary for effective stewardship of District lands in accordance with Board policies. Given the increased emphasis on public safety, a steady increase in the level and intensity of visitor use, and rising trail maintenance costs, the Board decided that it was an appropriate time to review the Operation Program's organization and operations. The key objectives of the Operations Program Review include: 1. Evaluating the Operations Program organizational structure, staffing levels, workloads; utilization of employees and use of contractors. 2. Analyzing each functional area within the Program including the quality and levels of :s. services provided. 3. Evaluating the range of services provided by the Program. 4. Assessing ranger safety needs and concerns. 5. Developing alternative service delivery models, including one with an armed force,,a sYu employed by the District. _... 6. Identifying and prioritizing those areas which require further study. 7. Providing Program Managers,the General Manager, the Board of Directors and others as appropriate with an interim progress report and eliciting on-going input regarding key issues. 8. Preparing a comprehensive written report of the study, including specific recommendations, and presenting the review findings to all appropriate internal and :a external stakeholders. :t. \\LA\PUBLIC1Midpeninsula.ot.ca\DraftReport5.doc I i Operations Program Review Methodology In conducting the Operations Program Review, we undertook the following tasks: • Conducted individual confidential interviews with Board members, District management and staff to gather input on the District's performance and other issues • Performed a comprehensive review of available documentation to develop an understanding of the District's organization, services, processes and present conditions • Facilitated employee focus groups to gather input from cross-functional groups of employees on the District's strengths and opportunities for improvement w Conducted an external stakeholder assessment to understand the perspective of the District's key customers and associated agencies, including fire and law enforcement • Extensively researched and benchmarked comparable open space agencies to learn best practices in open space management and operation • Completed an assessment of current Operations Program practices, methods and processes • Developed service delivery models to provide alternatives to current service methods •: Prepared an interim progress report and presented it to management and staff • Developed findings and recommendations • Prepared this final Operations Program Review Report Summary of Findings and Recommendations A. Organizational Structure 1. The current organizational structure of the Operations Program is adequate. The Operations Program should maintain its current organizational structure, establishing additional work stations when enough new land is acquired, facilities are built and public use increases to warrant it. The District should actively work to foster ongoing communication and teamwork between the Foothill and Skyline Field Offices. B. Customer Service 1. Customers are generally satisfied with District services. Customers believe that the District is doing very well in achieving its mission of land acquisition and preservation. Customers appreciate the opportunity to provide input to the Board through public meetings. The District does not, however, sufficiently track visitor use levels, patterns or trends. The District should continue gathering customer input through surveys, polls,public forums and other methods. The District should also develop a visitor use reporting process to consistently track use levels and patterns. \\LA\PUBLIC\Midpeninsula.ot.ca\DraftReport5.doc it , C. Leadership and Management 1. Delegation of decision-making authority to the Area Superintendents, and Area Superintendents' consistent use of decision-making authority could be improved. The Operations Manager and Area Superintendents should decide where decision- making authority should reside, and then should keep to those choices. To the greatest extent possible, Area Superintendents should have the freedom to manage as efficiently as possible. Written Delegation of Authority Guidelines, summarized in a matrix form, would identify the specific areas of authority of the Operations Manager, the Area Superintendents and, if appropriate, the Supervising Rangers. Performance in the area of decision-making should be monitored by the Operations Manager and, when necessary,the General Manager. 2. Cooperation among District management and field staff in the decision- making process should be improved. District management has a responsibility to provide alternatives, analysis, relevant input and recommendations to the Board by weighing staff input along with input provided by many others, including other District programs, customers, and external stakeholders. While staff input may not always be evident in decisions rendered by the Board, staff input is considered. The District should first clarify staff s role in'the decision-making process. Secondly, District staff from all programs, 'including- Operations, should work within a coordinated process established for providing input, on issues. Lastly, the Board and management should continue to base decisions on sound analysis of key business factors. D. Resource Management 1. Because resource management is a key part of effective resource protection and sound land stewardship, the District should place greater emphasis on its resource management efforts. While recent resource management efforts are important, the level of financial resources expended on resource management is small relative to the extent of District land holdings and the District's 25-year history. Recognizing that the Board must balance resource management with other District functions, including acquisition,'the District should place a greater emphasis on resource management to develop a viable, proactive resource management program and fulfill the District's critical land, stewardship mission. E. District-wide Planning 1. The District lacks a comprehensive management plan. i The District's plan for land use is not clear, especially in the areas of visitor levels;11 visitor experiences desired in the preserves, capability of resources to accommodate use, land use classifications for managing natural resources (e.g,, intensive use, wilderness), and the need for trail construction and maintenance.. The District should MATUBLIOMidpeninsuIa.ot.ca\DraftReport5.doc iii V V i I I undertake a comprehensive District-wide planning process to identify its goals and ��yy objectives in the areas of resource management, maintenance and visitor use. �Ji F. Law Enforcement }; :Li,Responsibility for and jurisdiction over some law enforcement functions are Vl, ,' ,,- not clear. F = The District should develop clear, written agreements with the appropriate agencies to define law enforcement jurisdictions and responsibilities, and to establish service expectations. The District should establish regular executive level meetings between " District management and management in all of the law enforcement agencies with which the District works. The District should also participate in local/regional meetings of law enforcement agencies to further clarify responsibilities and foster µ'F - good communication. 2. District lands have a low incidence of crime due primarily to changes in use r. patterns and diligent regulation enforcement. The District should continue utilizing Rangers to ensure that District regulations are enforced on District lands. The enforcement of District regulations is best done by Ranger staff, as they are on-site, more familiar with District land use regulations than the Sheriff, and can also educate users about appropriate uses of the preserves during enforcement contacts. The limited set of State and County laws currently enforced by the Rangers facilitate the protection of natural resources. The current set of State and County laws should continue to be enforced by the Rangers. Rangers should also continue to rely on the Sheriff to respond to any situation in which Ranger safety may be at risk. 3. While the Rangers should retain their current enforcement responsibilities, additional measures are required to ensure Ranger safety. Given the desired level of regulation enforcement responsibilities, the best way to ensure Ranger safety is three-fold. First,the District should maintain its strict rules of engagement. Second, the District should rely on the Sheriff to respond to law enforcement situations and any other situations in which Rangers feel their safety is at risk. Third,the District should set more accurate expectations on the part of the public and other agencies regarding the Rangers' enforcement role by moving away from an armed law enforcement officer image, and toward an image of a Ranger that is focused on the public's safe enjoyment of natural resources. More specifically, the District should take the all of the steps listed below to help ensure Ranger safety. These steps should be taken together, as a comprehensive effort to help ensure Ranger safety and effectiveness. \\LA\PU$LIC\Midpeninsula.ot.ca\DraftReport5.doc iv • Reinforce the existing policy of defensive posture under all circumstances, and with Rang er duties and equipment. come corresponds 'n which g provide training F • Use equipment that enhances Ranger safety while helping to set accurate expectations about the Rangers' ers enforcement role including the following: - Rangers should not carry firearms; - Make carrying OC spray and radios mandatory; Make wearing body armor mandatory during patrol functions. Body armor - Y g may be worn at will at other times; - Remove handcuffs from the duty belt, as they contribute to increased expectations about the Rangers' enforcement role; handcuffs should, however, be available in patrol vehicles for use as a defensive tool when needed in situations in which adequate back-up is available; and - Eliminate expandable batons, as they can be construed as offensive weapons, require extensive and potentially dangerous physical contact with subjects; and also contribute to increased expectations about the Ranger's enforcement role. • Modify the uniform so as not to emulate armed law enforcement officers and to establish more accurate expectations about the Rangers regulation enforcement and visitor assistance role. The image projected by the Ranger is created, in part, by the uniform, badge, equipment and vehicle utilized by the Ranger. These should be modified in the following ways in order to project an image that reflects the Rangers' focus on helping visitors safely enjoy the District's natural resources, instead of a focus on law enforcement: - Change the badge from the 7-paint badge to one that is less similar to law enforcement agencies; - Use a slimmer duty belt(if possible and available}; and o - Assess Ranger uniforms to determine if there are other opportunitiesfr projecting an image that focuses more on helping visitors safely enjoy.;the preserves and on protecting natural resources, such as enforcing the District's policy regarding wearing the traditional Ranger hat while on patrol. • Ranger performance evaluations should emphasize the District's clear expectations for staff performance in the area of regulation enforcement, including the following: - Strict adherence to a defensive enforcement posture; - Strict adherence to the District's policies relative to the scope of staffs enforcement responsibilities; - Staff s willingness and ability to remove themselves from potentially dangerous situations; - The importance of using Sheriff deputies when needed; and - Projection of an image that communicates the Rangers' role in helping users safely enjoy the District's natural resources. \1LA\ptJ$LIC�Midpeninsulaot.ca\DmftRepOrt5•doc V ' • Immediately establish service level agreements and/or contracts, if necessary, with appropriate Sheriff agencies for greater law enforcement presence in selected portions of District lands. • Schedule Ranger staff to allow joint/coordinated patrols during summer late shift and other specific times. Future decisions made by the Board regarding public use and resulting enforcement needs should be made within the context of a lower-profile Ranger force focused on maintaining a defensive posture. Also, consideration of amending Ranger position descriptions to provide for visitor contact and interpretive and educational duties would contribute to a more comprehensive Ranger role. G. Trail Construction and Maintenance 1. The District needs better balance among the three main factors in trail construction and maintenance: the number of trail miles open to the public, the. level of quality used in trail construction and maintenance, and the staffing and financial resources required to maintain the trail system at the desired quality level. The current quality standard used in trail construction and maintenance is extremely high, as evidenced by awards presented to the District for outstanding trail quality. ,. The District should continue using high quality standards for trail construction, since well-constructed trails tend to have lower ongoing maintenance costs. To ensure adequate trail maintenance, the District should resist opening new lands and trails to the public when there is no adequate funding source for ongoing maintenance costs. The District-wide plan should be used to guide land use, the number of trail miles needed, the quality standards required on those trails, and the extent to which trails should be opened to the public. Costs for maintaining trails to the desired quality level should be included as an integral part of the capital improvement program. 2. Customers have expressed an interest in a wider variety of trail experiences, providing varied levels of difficulty. The District should consider providing a wider variety of trail experiences for users, while ensuring the prevention of resource damage and considering potential cost impacts. This could be accomplished by changing various aspects of construction and maintenance on some trails, including surface quality and materials, grade and width. Analysis of the impact of a wider variety of trail experiences should be conducted as part of the District-wide planning process. 1\LA\PUBLICiMidpeninsulaot.ca\DraftReportS.doc vl ,, H. Wildland Fir e Protection 1. On-going communication with fire agencies should be improved and responsibilities should be clarified. The District should ensure that fire jurisdiction and emergency response responsibilities are clear. The District should establish regular executive level meetings between District management and management in all of the fire agencies with which the District works. The District should also participate in local/regional meetings of fire agencies to further clarify responsibilities and foster good communication. 2. Field staffs role in wildland fire protection services is appropriate, and .the District should work with fire agencies to identify equipment and training that will help staff fulfill that role. The District should work with the county fire departments and with the California Department of Forestry (CDF) to establish clear responsibilities `'and service expectations. Through this process, the type of equipment and training provided to field staff for use in their assistance role should also be reviewed. The District should also establish regular executive level meetings between District managemefii and management in all of the fire agencies with which the District works. n, I. Planning Program 1. Communication and cooperation between the Planning Program and Operations Program could be improved. The District should continue to monitor the self-directed work team`organization in the Planning Program, identify projects that could be accomplished by field staff Ind should identify opportunities for teaming Operations and Planning Program 'staff together to complete projects. I Other Services , 1. The District's services and staff roles/responsibilities are appropriate 'in' the areas of visitor information/interpretation, emergency medical services and search and rescue. Benefits to be Achieved AM We believe that significant benefits should be derived by 'the*,District as a result�,of implementing the recommendations contained in this Operations Program Review report. Some of these are as follows: \\LA\PUBLIC\Midpeninsula.ot.caUkaMporti.doc Vii • The District should be better able to identify the need for public access and other improvements through consistent tracking of visitor use levels and patterns. • The Operations Program should have more effective decision-making processes by clearly delegating authority among the Operations Manager and Area Superintendents, and by monitoring performance in this area to ensure that decisions 1 are made appropriately. • A stronger sense of teamwork among management and staff, and a better understanding of roles and responsibilities, should result from clarifying staff s role in the decision-making process, continuing to gather staff input that is combined and provided through an established process, and communicating the rationale behind decisions whenever possible. • Understanding of the District's natural resources, the capability of those resources, acid the types of improvements that are needed and feasible should result from developing a comprehensive,District-wide management plan. • The District should be better able to fulfill its critical land steward role by placing greater emphasis on its resource management function, while balancing it with other Districtf responsibilities. • The District should receive better service from law enforcement agencies by w developing service level agreements and/or contracts and improving communications. • The District should be better able to assist fire agencies in emergency situations by working with fire agencies to identify any needed equipment and training, and by improving communications. >,r • Ranger safety should improve through continuing to provide code and minimal additional law enforcement services, relying upon county Sheriffs to provide primary law enforcement services, and modifying the Ranger's equipment, uniforms and vehicles so as to not emulate law enforcement while providing appropriate safety equipment. • The District should be able to provide the appropriate level of trail maintenance on the trail system through balancing quality standards, the budget for maintenance, and the number of miles of trail maintained. • The working relationship between the Operations Program and the Planning Program should improve through increased delegation to field staff, improved communication mechanisms and joint participation and responsibility for project completion. In summary, as the recommendations of the Operations Review are implemented,the District should improve its operational effectiveness, land stewardship capabilities, its work environment, 'and its ability to ensure the long-term delivery 'of quality- services to its customers in a highly professional and responsive manner. \U.A\PUBLIC1Midpeninsutaot.ca\DraftReport5.doc vlil- , Regional pen Sp"-2 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: C. Britton, General Manag r DATE: September 28, 1998 SUBJECT: FYI 330 Distel Circle Los Altos,CA 94022-1404 « Phone: 650-691-1200 FAX: 650-691-0485 - E-mail: mrosd@openspace.org Web site:www.openspace.org Board of Directors:Pete Siemens,Mary C.Davey,led Cyr, David T.Smernoff, Nonette Hanko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth C. Nitz m General Manager;t.Craig Britton September 27 1998 S EP 2 8 199a P�'_'%,NSULA REDIONAL Board of Directors �-L_:'d,SPACE DISTRICT Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos CA 94022-1404 To the Directors: I am writing to express my support of the Rangers being armed to assure the safety of the Rangers as well as the visiting public. I am a 48-year resident of Kings Mountain, living adjacent to PurisimO Creek Open Space, and I am well acquainted with the area. The Rangers work alone in isolated remote locations far removed from back-up or assistance. They need and deserve to be able to protect themselves against the possibility of harm from man or beast. I favor and recommend that the Rangers be permitted to be armed in the commission of their duty. rodside nman k Road j 94062-4507 8 i I i i i I September 28, 1998 Pages- 1 To-, Betsy Crowder Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Fax.- 691-0485 Re: MROSD Rangers I understand that the Board of Directors is seeking public input this evening on a report on the function of the Operations Group. I understand this report recommends that the District's rangers not carry firearms. I would prefer to support the findings of this report. However, in this day and age I cannot. By having public open space so close and so easily accessible to so many people, the users and their motives have changed greatly over the years. No longer are users only those willing to go the extra mile to experience nature. No longer are they only people who enjoy and respect nature and each other, Personally, I do not feel comfortable hiking on MROSD lands alone. When 'Wilderness"was less accessible, everyone who took the trouble to get there pretty much had the same attitude of respect and responsibility. Judging by the people I have seen on the District's trails, this assumption seems to no longer be true. State park rangers have been armed since the 1970s and, unfortunately, have had no reason to regret the decision. If I understand correctly, MROSD rangers are required to be trained peace officers. If they are already receiving the training, why not use it? If there are financial concerns, it seems to me that it is part of the commitment and responsibility of maintaining and protecting the District's lands. We are in a special situation up here in Kings Mountain of being rural and remote yet close and accessible. I realize that arming the rangers is not going to insure everyone's safety. I pray that they will never need to use their guns. However, if it gives the rangers more confidence and security in the performance of their duties, I am in favor of them being armed. Sincerely Came German 13080 Skyline Blvd. Woodside, CA 94062 650-851-4198 FROM BETSY CROWDEP OHONE NO. : 65089-10410 28 1998 12:52PN P3 09-28-1999 07,260" FROM ;:L#, HILLS TCl PS10410 P.01 The members Qf the Midpeninsula,Rangers Peace Officer Association would like to thank the Board of Directors for there commitment fur fun&ng and carrying through with the operations program review. However we feel you should mot accept this report as it is not a comprehensive study. This Review does not appear to be based on sound businew reasons,but to be based more an personal opinions that am not supported by facts or statistics. This review skims lightly over the bases of the Operations Program but fails to give specific steps to enhance each program. While there are many things we a" as problems with this review, I would like to sham a number that we have found. &MMAry of Find Up and Be MM g, ftiow fr. lAmEntocwttent I. agree that the District should develop clear expectations with other law enforcement agencies. 2- agree that the"enforcement of District regulations is best dQue by P=Wr staff* however,with the fIndinige of this review we would be doing the same job with less equipment. 8. regulation enforcement=law enforcement "Third"the espects*ns on the part of the public Is that the rangers are there to help In any problem that happens in the preserve. a so called move away from a "armed law enforcement officer Image* is not valid because our current uniform emulates traditional ranger uniforms found around the country. *"Reiz6orce the existing policy* - Rangers know this policy and it has not been a problem Use equipment that enbames Ranger safety" This is not mVported by the body of the report,contrary to training experts -Rangers should not carry ftewmr, 749.7?7 is this personal opinion or is there some made's showing it,19 edor In OUR job -body armor, What about during bicycle patrol,estenaed foot patrols,or do we went our ranger"VW to there trucks? - Handcuft. ilovr do we retrieve those hand cuffs when needed when away from our trucks; i.e., bicycle patrol,foot patrols?During defensive tactics training We are taught to handcuff a sweet that has attacked us so they would not be able to do so spin. -Batons. They are defensive weapons,do not'require' extensive and potentially dangerous physical contact.How does It increase Mecta6ione about the RangWs enforcement role., We have not had am problems yet The only time so far just deploying the baton stopped the aggression from the suspect. "'Please refer to board report -R-95-95,Meeting 96-19,July 26, im FROM BETSY CROWDER OHONE NO. 6508510410 28 1998 12:53PM P4 09-28-!99e 07:27E"I FROM PCWHILLS TO Eff'10410 P.02 Mod* uniform Our uniform amulatos,that of traditional ranger uniforms. dangers requested to have patches on both x1mulders of there uniform so they could bi7identified by both sides. Rangers also asked that wben the patch was redesigned t1w word "RANGER"could be on It.The field staff has worked for years with the Management on tho UrVorm Committee to create a positive uniform. We have not had public complaint about any aspect of our uniform. -Change the badge. To change the badp would only confuse the public when a rauW was attempting to make law enforcement contact. The badge allows the public to know the,ranger has authority to perform the functions of there job. - Duty bolt.This duty belt was picked by management because there were no buckle or keepers,and Wd all the equipment for better back health. - Wearing Ranger Hats. Sound#good,District got rid of the winter felt hat due to costs. U the review suggesting there to a correlation between a Rangers uniform as a vehicle to encourage different use patterns? Ranger performance evaluations Strict adherence to the Districts policies. We already do this! Remove ftm dangerous situations. We are very willing but what happens when we can not remove ourselves? Service agreements In"selected portions"of District lands. Can we now forecast crime? Schedule Ranger staft W by just surnzaer late shifts, we will need to hire more til rangers. TOTAL P,02