HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 ShareFireDeptResources
k
.
.:
...
- -
CITY CLERK
FILE # Dl3J[i)[Q]-[l]LQ]
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 27, 1996
SUBJECT:
Request for authorization and support to proceed with
evaluating consolidation and the potential opportunities for the
sharing ofJ?ire Department resources within the Valley.
EXHIBITS:
Tri- Valley Fire Protection Cooperative, Management
Consolidation Proposal .
RECOMMENDATION' :
Approve the formation or a committee consistin2 or the Mayor and City
Manager rrom the.~~ties or Dublin; Livermore and Pleasanton and the
Fire Chierrrom the-Cities or Livermore, Pleasanton and DRFA to
research, design and propose a governance and cost allocation structure
ror the consolidated delivery or Fire Service options.
~.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no cost associated with the formation of the
committee.
BACKGROUND: At the City Council meeting of February 13, 1996, the City
Council directed staff to study the various fire/emergency response delivery options available to
the City of Dublin in the event that the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement is terminated in the future.
One of the possible fire service delivery options involves the consolidation of fire services
provided by the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority, the City of Livermore and the City of
Pleasanton. This option was evaluated as part of a study authorized by the three fire service
providers in 1994. .
By way of background, the Twin Valley Fire Agencies have a history of close
cooperation, especially in the areas of training and mutual aid. This strong commonalty of
interest that has existed between the Fire Agencies and the Cities in the Valley predates, and is
more successful than many others in Alameda County.
The idea of sharing or consolidating Valley Fire Reso~es has been studied several times. The
first was in 1973 when the Booz, Allen and Hamilton Study recommended to the Alameda
County Board of Supervisors the consolidation of two Fire Districts, the County Fire Patrol and
the O.E.S. Volunteers. In addition, the study recommended that County areas near Pleasanton
and Livermore contract with those cities respectively for the sub-regional consolidation of
services. As a result, the Board of Supervisors created the Alameda County Fire Department,
which continues to provide services in the Twin Valley area, rather than use expanded contracts
ITEM No.M
~
with the Cities. At this time, the County appears to be working toward a goal of creating one
county wide Fire Department in place of increased sub-regional consolidations.
.-":.
" -
Based upon their common interest and the impact of the recession on government finances, the
Valley Fire Agencies studied possible functional consolidation opportunities from February 1993
until December 1994.
Early discussions were productive, however, the City of Livermore replaced their Fire Chief
during this period and discussions were stalled. After Livermore's Fire Chiefwas hired, the
Davis Company was commissioned by the Cities, and the County, to formally study Valley Fire
consolidation opportunities in February of 1994. During this same period of time the cities
proceeded with staffmg reductions, primarily at the management level, to take advantage of the
opportunities related to the consolidation or sharing of resources.
In early 1995 the Davis Study was completed, showing that subregional efforts in the Valley
would not only result in an equal or improved provision of fire protection services, but a more
cost effective and efficient provision of services in general. The Davis Study recommended that
the following four areas were the best suited for initial service consolidation: Fire Prevention,
Training, Shift Supervision and Dispatch.
After several meetings, the four cities (without the County) agreed to perform detailed studies
conducted by staff in the four areas, as recommended by the Davis Study. The analysis,
perfOrmed by the fire department, was expanded to include all current mid-managers and the
following functional areas: .
e"":-
.:::
· Fire Prevention
· Training - Operational Mandates
· Training- Officer Professional Development
· Shift Operations
· Facilities and Equipment
· Emergency Preparedness - for the Fire Agencies
· Community Education
· Communications
In December of 1995 the Fire Chiefs ofDRFA, Livermore, and Pleasanton completed the
attached Tri-Valley Fire Protection Cooperative Management Consolidation Proposal. The
proposal recommends that the three cities pursue full, pennanent consolidation of all fire
management services. The Chiefs felt that' this recommendation would provide the cities with
the most efficient and effective delivery of emergency services dedicated to, and controlled by,
Valley based elected officials and their constituents.
The other options discussed in the proposal provides for increased regionalization to some
support services, but would not take advantage of retirements or attrition at the mid-management
2
.'.~-:
-,
.;
.
:,.
level, the ftre chief level, or other support positions. The Chief s came to the conclusion that
functional consolidation cannot be partially completed. Either we continue close cooperation,
but operate independent departments, or we proceed with meaningful consolidation to achieve
real economies of scale.
Implementation Discussion
The City Managers and Fire Chiefs have met twice to review this latest study and discuss how to
go forward with further analysis of the issues. While the concept as studied by the Fire
Departments is technically feasible, the next steps would be to identify an acceptable governance
structure and cost allocation formula. If these two areas can be mutually agreed to, then a full
proposal can be brought forward for the appropriate City Councils to consider in the future.
Many of the opportunities identified in these studies, and proposals, have been implemented to
some degree in the Valley over the last three years. The areas where increased cooperation and
the sharing of resources has occurred include:
Radio Systems M DRF A, Livermore and P1easanton have compatible 800 MHZ and VHF
radio systems.
Paramedic Training - All departments are participating in the same paramedic training
program. Dougherty and Pleasanton share the same candidate selection process.
Joint Testing - In addition to the current Twin Valley recruitment process all three
agencies are working together in varying degrees on promotional testing.
Vehicle Maintenance - Livermore and DRF A share one vehicle maintenance program
located at the Livermore Fleet Maintenance Center.
Apparatus Specifications - It is expected that the three departments will have common
specifications for Type I Fire Engines by mid 1996.
Joint Response Agreements - Livermore and Pleasanton have a formal Joint Response
Agreement for Ruby Hills.
Joint Response Plans - DRF A and Pleasanton have Joint Response Plans for freeway
incidents, wildland fire incidents, truck company responses and light and air unit
responses.
Dispatch Services - Effective early 1996 DRF A and Pleasanton will be dispatched by the
same dispatch center.
3
EMS Coordination - DRF A and Pleasanton share one EMS Coordination Program.
.'
Training. The three department will share one master training calendar in 1996. For
years all three department have shared the Pleasanton Training Center.
EMT Recertification - DRF A and Pleasanton share recertification programs for
Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT's). In 1996 all three department expect to be in
the same recertification cycle/program.
Shift Alignment - All line employees are currently on the same work schedule. Chief
Officers currently work similar schedules.
Regular Staff Meetings - The Valley Fire Chiefs and their staff personnel have
established regular, twice monthly staff meetings. The purpose of these meetings is to
work with appropriate staff members and reach consensus on issues.
Team Problem Solving - Mid-Management Level Chief Officers from all agencies also
meet regularly to discuss problems and resolve issues.
Duty Chief Coverage. DRF A and Pleasanton have occasionally shared Duty Chief
coverage.
Fire Chiefs' Recommendations:
.-:."
.... .
The Fire Chiefs outlined the following five options for the City Managers to consider:
1. Do nothing further, probably for the balance of this decade. See what growth patterns,
economic and political changes occur in the Valley. Perhaps in the future a more
compelling economic argument will surface for functional consolidation.
2. Do not pursue formal consolidation in 1996, but insist on close joint operations between
the agencies. This would include a continuation of the monthly staff meetings and driving
for the standardization of operations wherever possible. Small economies of scale through
contracting would be encouraged in areas such as facilities, equipment, data systems and
training programs.
3.
Formally approve the goal of full, permanent, consolidation at the mid-management
level. In early 1996 obtain the City Council's support and input on a management
structure. One suggestion would be to appoint a steering committee to design the
permanent structure. This committee could be composed of one elected official from each
agency, the Fire Chiefs and the City Managers. During this negotiation phase in early
1996 relevant items from option #2 would continue to be pursued. The transition and
final structure could be ready for implementation by the third quarter of 1996. This would
.---,:,
, ,
4
.'
.:~
.'
'.
allow the joint team to make the best use of whatever retirements occur from that point
forward.
4.
Formally approve the goal of full, permanent, consolidation of all fIre management
services as discussed in option #3. In this particular instance the plan would move more
quickly to a single Fire Chief allowing the cooperative effort to stabilize more quickly
than in option #3.
5.
Formally approve a complete consolidation of all fIre service activity areas. This option
would receive all of the benefIts of Options #3 and #4 but may be more complicated by
labor group interests.
Both Options #3 and #4 offer savings and increased efficiency to the agencies and the Chiefs feel
that it is better to start with functional consolidation of the management service areas. In this
way, procedures, equipment and policies could be merged into one. Once the consolidation of
management service areas is complete, total consolidation can be considered if political
willingness, workforce support and economic efficiencies support such an endeavor.
Some possible advantages of consolidation are:
1.
Reduced costs, while maintaining Valley political control. Any consolidation provides
cost savings, however, those savings must be balanced against the loss oflocal control.
A large agency can be expensive due to overhead costs and itcan undermine local
control. The trend in government is to right-size sub regional agencies close to the
people. A Valley Fire Agency could provide cost reductions while maintaining a close,
responsive relationship to the needs of the Valley cities.
2. A leaner managment staff over time (12 ~ 24 mos), paying appropriate personnel the
appropriate amount for the appropriate work product.
3. Reduction to one Fire Chief and one command staff. In addition to budget savings there
would be one set of Valley wide frre policies and departmental operating procedures.
This would maintain expenditure levels and create greater efficiency when working
together at emergencies.
4. Provide full time specialists in support functions. Today in separate agencies the mid.
managers must be generalists and do several important functions on a part~time basis.
With one agency, areas such as training, fIre prevention, medical services, equipment and
facilities management, master planning, disaster preparedness and fIre operations
management would have dedicated personnel working full time to make each area the
more effective and efficient.
5
5.
One Fire Prevention Bureau. While individual cities could still administer unique
policies, a business friendly development climate could be spread uniformly among all
the participating agencies.
.-'
6. One emergency incident management team. The number of Duty Chiefs onMcall each day
would be reduced for participating agencies, however, when an emergency occurs, the
joint incident management team would respond quicker and work more effectively due to
standardized policies and training.
7. Joint Fire Station Siting. As growth occurs in the Valley, stations would be sited to serve
everyone in the most cost..efficient manner possible.
8. Shared infrastructtire costs. For support programs like training and fleet maintenance.
There are a few negatives to the functional, or full, consolidation of fIre services on the scale
being proposed. The usual issue is "loss of control," which can mean different things to each
City Council. However, staffbelieves that both the Valley, politically, and the departments,
technically, are very much alike and present the right size package for consolidation. Given an
appropriate governance structure (discussed next), the consolidated Fire Department would be
able to maintain a close relationship with each City, offering not only uniform emergency
services, but unique services in areas like Fire Prevention, Hazardous Materials Enforcement,
and Disaster preparedness as necessary. The size of the proposed Valley agency would be able
to provide custom, yet responsive, services whereas a larger regional agency may not.
.,. .
. *. 0'
The other negative, to some form of consolidation, is the cost sharing formula. Hopefully in the
next phase of the study, a mechanism can be found to fairly divide and account for costs, while
achieving economies of scale. Other agencies in California have been able to do this, however,
no one perfect formula seems to exist. Each set of partners must find a mechanism that
functions, and is politically acceptable for them.
Governance Stmcture:
The City Managers and Fire Chiefs, in researching the issue, have found the following models in
use throughout California for the sharing of government services while providing appropriate
levels of oversight for both elected officials and management. Several variations of each model
are possible, and depending upon local structural needs and political acceptance, all have been
successful.
1. One Lead Agency - others contract with it for service and oversight. .
2.
One Lead Agency ~ other contract with it .. and use a Fire Commission of elected officials
to jointly set policy.
e..
6
..,
,:",
'.\
"
" -
:.-
-.
3.
Form a Joint Powers Authority that owns all the personnel and assets.
4.
Form a Joint Powers Authority that contracts back to one lead agency for personnel and
support.
5. Cities can contract with the Alameda County Fire Department, operated by the Board of
Supervisors.
The next step in the consolidation of Fire Services for the Twin Valley is to find the best model
and cost sharing formula that meets our needs, while allowing the technical recommendations to
proceed. The advantages and disadvantages of each of the governance models must be identified
to fmd the best fit for the Twin~ Valley Cities. Along with this structural research and
negotiation, a cost allocation formula can be developed for the participating agencies to consider.
A steering committee consisting of the affected Mayors, City Managers and Fire Chiefs can be
formed to research and recommend a governance structure and cost allocation formula for
functional fire department consolidation. This group can proyide a good discussion, and litmus
test forum, for these issues before they are brought back to the individual City Councils.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the City of Dublin's participation in a
committee consisting of the Mayor, the City Manager, and the Fire Chief from the Cities of
Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon to research, design and propose a governance
and cost allocation structure for the joint delivery of Fire Services in the Valley. This committee
would make its [mdings available to each City Council.
The committee should be encouraged to report back with a recommendation in 60 days or less.
This would provide for appropriate research and consideration and allow sufficient time for the
City Manager and Fire Chief to formulate a complete set of recommendations, including the
consolidation option, to the City Council for consideration should San Ramon indicate its
separation from the Joint Powers Authority by June 30, 1996.
7
.:,
.;,'"
.'
TRI-VALLEY
FIRE PROTECTION
COOPERATIVE
MANAGEMENT CONSOLIDATION PROPOSAL
SERVING
DUBLIN & SAN RAMON
Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority
Prepared
December 18,1995 by:
Revised
Karl D. Diekman
City of Livermore
Fire Department
Stewart Gary
City of Pleasanton
Fire Department
George Withers
e
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
History of Fire Service Studies in the Valley 5
Current Situation 6
Organizational Charts - Current 10
Organizational Charts - Proposed 11
Financial In1pact 17
Accomplishments to Date 18
Issues to Resolve 19
.":
e:
.'
.'
.
Executive Summary
As directed by the City Managers last spring, the staff officers of the Dougherty Regional Fire
Authority, the City of Livermore Fire Department, and the City of Pleasant on Fire Department have
been studying functional consolidation. This executive summary outlines the efforts that have been
made to date. Based upon this summary, three years and four study efforts, the Fire Chiefs endorse
formal consolidation of management services as opposed to continued close cooperation. Utilizing
a two to four year period to achieve this goal, the consolidation of all management areas will lead
to one command team and one Fire Chief.
The consolidated Valley based management team will be the right size to achieve economies of
scale, while being the most responsive to the needs of the Valley communities. Areas currently
experiencing growth in the Valley (North Livermore, San Francisco water project, East Dublin and
the Dougherty Valley) can be best served by a consolidated Valley Fire Agency. Cooperation with
other fire agencies in the Valley will continue and fragmented County areas can be served by the
County or by contracts with the consolidated agency.
BACKGROUND:
In 1992 the Burns Study recommended to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors the
consolidation of two Fire Districts, the County Fire Patrol and the O.E.S. Volunteers. In addition,
the study recommended that County areas near Pleasanton and Livermore contract with those cities
respectively for the sub-regional consolidation of services. As a result, the Board of Supervisors
created the Alameda County Fire Department which continues to provide service in the Valley
rather than utilize expanded contracts with the cities. At this time the County has established a goal
to create one county wide Fire Department in place of increased sub-regional consolidation.
The Valley Fire Agencies have a history of close cooperation, especially in the areas of training and
mutual aid. This strong commonalty of interest which has existed between the Fire Agencies and the
Cities in the Valley pre-dates, and is more successful than many others in the region.
Based on their common interests, the Valley Fire Agencies studied possible functional consolidation
opportunities from February 1993 until December 1994. Early discussions were productive,
however, the City of Livermore replaced their Fire Chief during this period and discussions were
stalled. After Livermore's Fire Chiefwas hired, the Davis Company was commissioned to formally
study Valley Fire consolidation opportunities in February of 1994. The subjects of the Davis
Company's Study included the three municipal Valley Fire Agencies and the new Alameda County
Fire Department.
In early 1995 the Davis Study was completed, indicating that sub-regional efforts in the Valley
would not only result in the equal or improved provision of fire protection services, but a more cost
effective and efficient provision of services in general. The Davis Study recommended the following
1
four areas to be the best suited for initial service consolidation: Fire Prevention, Training, Shift .' ,
Supervision and Dispatching.
After several meetings, the four Cities agreed to perform detailed studies in the four areas, described
by the Davis Study. The analysis, performed by the municipal agencies, was expanded to include
all current mid-managers and the following functional areas:
· Fire Prevention
· Training - Operational Mandates
· Training. Officer Professional Development
· Shift Operations
· Facilities and Equipment
· Emergency Preparedness - for the Fire Agencies
· Community Education
· Communications
Individual mid-managers expressed interest in the different functional areas and were assigned to
develop a plan for a specific area. These plans were to include an operational design, a possible
implementation schedule and a budget. Bi-monthly staff meetings were held with the mid managers
and the Fire Chiefs. In addition, the Chiefs worked on an as needed basis with each specialty area
to facilitate plan development.
This effort produced the single best impact to date --the mid-managers by their own accord began
to see themselves as a ''team'' and work towards common goals. While for the mid-managers issues
remain resistance on professional issues no longer exists. Based on the progress made to date, it has
become obvious that by sharing resources and personal talents the services offered to both the line
personnel and the citizens will only improve.
."
The plans developed by the mid-managers illustrate that it is possible to functionally consolidate
each study area. As consolidations occur, right-sizing and economies of scale would develop
resulting in the same or similar programs being offered in each jurisdiction. The three cities would
continue to customize the programs or philosophies to meet their local needs within the broader
scope of the Valley.
POLICY DISCUSSION:
The principal factor driving consolidation is fiscal savings which often leads to the right-sizing of
the organization. Right-sizing often equates to reduced staffing, closed or re-Iocated fire companies,
dispatch mergers with resultant lay-offs and purchasing economies of scale. In the Valley some or
all of these opportunities are possible, however, due to the following three reasons these
opportunities are minimized for the Valley agencies.
2
.
.
."
, "
.'
· During the recession the three agencies, through attrition, no longer maintain some mid-
management positions. While one or two other mid-management savings are possible in two
to four years, the savings are not huge compared to what has already occurred. Savings in
this area would increase with a move over time to one Fire Chief.
· The three agencies today do not share closely joined or intertwined fire company service
areas. There are natural buffers that will continue to separate the cities for some time, such
as the gravel mining areas on the south and narrow Collier Canyon on the North. As a result,
savings through fire company staffing will not occur in this decade. Each jurisdiction will
be forced to serve new fringe growth areas with current initial due units. During this period
any savings due to staffing would come from assembling a multi-unit force on major
emergencies utilizing the strength of the consolidated agencies.
. The third less tangible issue is local control, especially in program areas outside fire
company services, such as prevention, disaster preparedness, community education,
purchasing and dispatching. Local policy control is especially important in determining
prevention and community development policies, response and staffing levels, and persormel
practices.
The question that needs to be answered by the Valley Agencies is why even begin formal
consolidation at any level? The Fire Chiefs propose that by begirming the consolidation process
today, the three agencies can best achieve economies of scale over the long term. As the agencies
continue to grow and develop independent programs and personalities, the harder it will be to
consolidate at any service area in the future. The opportunity exists now, and is even more
advantageous, as several mid-managers will retire in the near future. The Chiefs believe that a
Valley Fire Agency, at least managed by a common team, can best deliver services with local Valley
control, at a right-sized price. The reason to start now is long term economics and being able to
utilize shared fire companies across jurisdictional lines as the cities grow together.
Any consolidation effort takes time. If the agencies start with functional issues for management
services, the time necessary to negotiate differences and implement common policies will be
available and well utilized. The alternative, a forced consolidation at a later time, would result in a
haphazard management approach as issues must be satisfied when operational needs must be met.
Two critical issues must be addressed: 1) how do we get there from here; and 2) how do we obtain
consistent direction given that many objectives would remain, in some cases unfulfilled, within the
terms of office of the Fire Chiefs, City Managers, and Elected Officials. The Chiefs recommend
commitment to a process that will put a joint management structure into place as attrition and other
opportunities occur. In this way, the agencies can work to achieve their goal while simultaneously
achieving near-term goals, such as consolidated training programs, or equipment standardization.
3
Commitment to the final structure is important. Every level of staffing should be able to identify .'
when goals, both short and long term, are completed in order to ease the transitional development
pains. Initially, as the consolidated organization develops, management by committee will be
necessary, however, it is not efficient, nor in the best interest of the organization, to have more than
one set of philosophies at the top for an extended period of time.
It will also be necessary to decide how to supervise the joint management team. Traditional
approaches include Joint Powers Authorities or contracts for service to one lead agency. Both
methods have their pro's and con's and the final method will have to come from political
negotiations between the agencies. In either event, all members should insist on performance based
agreements that clearly spell out the joint agency's mission, service levels, political accountability
and options for local differences.
OPTIONS:
1. Do nothing further, probably for the balance of this decade. See what growth patterns,
economic and political changes occur in the Valley. Perhaps in the future a more compelling
economic argument will surface for functional consolidation.
2.
Do not pursue formal consolidation in 1996, but insist on close joint operations between the
agencies. This would include a continuation of the monthly staff meetings and driving for
the standardization of operations wherever possible. Small economies of scale through
contracting would be encouraged in areas such as facilities, equipment, data systems and
training programs.
.'
3. Formally approve the goal of full, permanent, consolidation at the mid-management level.
In early 1996 obtain the City Council's support and input on a management structure. One
suggestion would be to appoint a steering conunittee to design the permanent structure. This
committee could be composed of one elected official from each agency, the Fire Chiefs and
the City Managers. During this negotiation phase in early 1996 relevant items fro'm option
#2 would continue to be pursued. The transition and final structure could be ready for
implementation by the third quarter of 1996. This would allow the joint team to make the
best use of whatever retirements occur from that point forward.
4. Formally approve the goal of full, permanent, consolidation of all fire management
services as discussed in option #3. In this particular instance the plan would move more
quickly to a single Fire Chief allowing the cooperative effort to stabilize more quickly than
in option #3.
5. Formally approve a complete consolidation of all fire service activity areas. This option
would receive all of the benefits of Options #3 and #4 but may be more complicated by labor
group interests.
4
.:
..,"
--
e--'-",
.'
.'
COST/SOURCE OF FUNDS:
To date working together has been beneficial and has not posed a financial burden on any of the
three agencies. As consolidation efforts increase and programs become more integrated, a funding
formula must be developed and all accounts must be reconciled at the conclusion of each budget
year. Both options #3 and #4 offer savings to the group. Each agency will benefit in varying
amounts based upon thier current and future situations. For details, please see page 17.
RECOMMENDA nON:
The Fire Chiefs recommend that the three cities pursue option #4 (utilizing option #3 as an interim
step) full, permanent, consolidation of all fire management services. It is our intent that no employee
be forced from existing positions which is the reason phasing is recommended. This will provide
the agencies with the most efficient and effective delivery of emergency services dedicated to, and
controlled by, Valley based elected officials and their constituents.
The other options will give increased regionalization to some support services, but would not take
advantage of retirements or attrition at the mid-management level, the fire chief level or other
support positions. We have come to the conclusion that functional consolidation cannot be partially
completed. Either we continue close cooperation, but operate independent departments, or bite the
bullet and take on meaningful functional consolidation.
History of Fire Service Studies in the Valley
Fire Service in the Valley is rich in history and tradition dating back to the 1800's. Historically,
discussion of the consolidation of the fire departments in the Valley date back to 1972. The City of
Livermore Fire Department, City of Pleasanton Fire Department and the Valley Community
Services District (VCSD-now the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority) discussed the possibility of
consolidating the three agencies. Consolidation at that time appeared to be a more economical and
efficient means of providing service to the residents of the Valley. The City Managers of Livermore
and Pleasanton as well as the General Manager of VCSD met with the three fire chiefs and
determined that a feasibility study on consolidation should be done.
In 1972, the administrative staffs of the three agencies applied to the State Advisory Commission
of Personnel Administration for a grant to hire a consultant to study fire department manpower
utilization and possible consolidation. And in February of 1973 the City Manager of the City of
Livermore discussed the matter of consolidation with the City Council.
In March or April of 1973, a consolidation feasibility study was conducted by Booz, Allen and
Associates. The scope of the study included the possible consolidation of communications, training,
and administration. In addition, Booz, Allen, and Associates were to investigate alternative staffing
methods including 14 hours on and 10 hours off and an 8 hour work shift for firefighters. The study
5
provided information which served as the basis for answering critical questions about the manpower .
needs and utilization, work productivity and work schedules of a consolidated Valley department. . .
In February 1993 the City Managers of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon met with
their Fire Chiefs to discuss the issues surrounding consolidation. After more than a year of
discussion, the four cities, along with Alameda County, retained the Davis Company to evaluate
Joint Fire Service delivery options. Since the completion and acceptance of the Davis report in early
1995, the Fire Chiefs along with their staffs have been meeting to consider possible methods by
which to work more closely together.
In 1995/96 the three agencies, the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority, City of Livermore Fire
Department, and the City of Pleasanton Fire Department, find themselves dealing with the same
issues that were being dealt with in 1973 when the Booz, Allen and Associates report was
completed.
In order to conduct this current review, the Fire Chiefs and their staffs organized themselves in the
manner illustrated below:
r CHIEFS I
COMMIITEE
I
I I I I I I I 1
FIr. P",ven/lan Tl'r1lning Tl'r1ln, Officer Opel'r1lllms Faclllry& Emergency ClHnmllnity CtJmmllnlc.:uliIJll.tt
Officer Officer Proles..ionol Officer E'{lIlpmenl P"'p<1m1neu EJllcoli,m Officer
Carl"m Operoll'lIIIll Develllpmen/ Laun:nce Officer Officer Officer Halvo",en
Welch Bronr:h Miller Will Owent
I I
AShijl BShifi
Officer Officer
McKaskey /JanJerud
CShifi
Officer
FIII...1O<i
..~
Current Situation
DOUGHERTY:
The Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRF A) provides services in all study areas via Authority
staff and contracts for service. Three Battalion Chiefs working a modified 40 hour work week
manage Authority programs for training, operations and Fire Prevention. In addition to staff
assignments, the Chief Officers provide Duty Chief coverage on an assigned shift. DRF A has also
assigned a 40 hour per week Fire Captain as the Emergency Medical Services Coordinator. Vehicle
.
6
..'
.'
.:
maintenance and dispatch services are provided via contracts with the City of Livermore and
Alameda County respectively.
In recent years, DRF A has eliminated one Assistant Fire Chief position and has future plans to add
one Division Chief and one Fire Captain/Training Officer. In addition to the safety staff, DRF A
currently has a non-sworn staff consisting of one Administrative Secretary, one part-time Clerical
Assistant, and one Administrative Assistant to the Fire Chief.
DRF A provides fire suppression, emergency medical responses and other emergency services to a
suburban population of approximately 45,000 residents in the Cities of Dublin and San Ramon. The
Cities are located in Alameda (Dublin) and Contra Costa (San Ramon) Counties. Due to their close
proximity to the east side of the San Francisco Bay, the Cities are currently experiencing a rapid
growth rate and an influx of highly mobile residents. The geography of the area has resulted in the
residential development of the surrounding hillside. This creates a wildland/urban interface area
with the potential for major fire problems. Both cities have a mix of office commercial, light
industrial and multi-family occupancies. In addition, two major freeways are within the Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority's response area. The volume of traffic on Interstate 580 and Interstate 680
has drastically increased the potential for hazardous materials incidents and major traffic accidents.
In 1994 Dougherty responded to 1,754 incidents and expects to respond to approximately 2,000
incidents in 1995. The classification of incidents is typical for this area and is distributed as follows:
51 % of the incidents are medicals; 11 % of the incidents are fires; and 38% of the incidents can be
classified as other.
DRFA expects to see growth in its service conunitments in Eastern Dublin, Western Dublin and the
Dougherty Valley.
LIVERMORE:
The Livermore Fire Department provides services in all study areas. Livermore reduced one Deputy
Chief position during the recession and currently maintains three Division Chiefs in operations
working a modified 40 hour week while being responsible for one or more management assignments.
These assignments include: Training, Emergency Medical Services, Citywide Disaster Preparedness,
Facilities and Equipment, and Conununity Education Programs.
One Deputy Chief supervises the Division Chiefs, maintains continuity across the three line
Divisions, is the department budget officer, assists in labor relations, and is the de-facto second-in-
conunand.
The Fire Marshal is a non-sworn, safety position that reports to the Fire Chief. He supervises three
Fire Inspectors, one Hazardous Materials Coordinator and two clerical staff. He is treated and
compensated as a Division Chief.
7
The Fire Department is also responsible for the Building Department as a general safety function. .
The Building Official is a non-sworn, non-safety position that reports to the Fire Chief. He is treated
and compensated as a Division Chief. He supervises a staff of 4 Inspectors, one Senior
Inspector/Plan Checker, one Plan Check Engineer and four clerical staff.
Livermore Fire also staffs a non-sworn Computer and Records System Manager. Her responsibilities
include the City Computer-Aided-Dispatch System at the Police Department and the Fire
Department micro-computer wide-area network. She also prepares departmental statistical reports
and assists on special study projects.
The Building Official and CAD-Records Supervisor were not included in this round of Functional
Consolidation Studies.
Significant program differences would include: additional prevention programs including residential
sprinklers and becoming a Hazardous Materials Certified Uniform Permit agency; tight integration
with the Building Department; use of Fire Companies in commercial occupancy inspections and
frequent public education programs to school and community groups; staffing a first responder
Paramedic Program to include one Paramedic per fire crew; being dispatched by a combined
PolicelFire PSAP.
The Department currently protects 24 square miles containing a residential population of 65,000.
Total Incidents for 1994 were 3,269. Of that, 1,874, or 57%, were medical responses and 364, or
II %, were fires. To date, calls for service in 1995 are up 11 % over 1994. A fifth Fire Company
will become operational in February 1996. Initially located in the Northwest quadrant at Fire Station
Two, the City hopes to place it in a temporary facility near Ahway Boulevard and 1-580 by early
1997.
."'"
....
Residential and commercial buildings are experiencing strong starts after a recession slow-down.
Over 400 new residential units will be completed in 1995. At any given time approximately 250 are
under way, with 2,500 approved units waiting to start. Retail is also expanding and includes a
regional office addition to the Costco store, a new downtown Orchard Supply store and a new eight
screen movie theater. Industrial expansion has restarted, especially in the area of tenant
improvement projects and semi-conductor manufacturing. Livermore is becoming increasingly
attractive to this industry given it's Fire Prevention and Hazardous Materials programs. One
company will be restarting the dormant Intel Plant and two others are significant manufacturing
start-ups.
Long term growth will occur in the North Livermore Valley, which through agreement with the
County, will ultimately annex to Livermore for services after a joint planning effort. Given the
current agreement, housing units south of May School Road could reach 12,000 with a population
of 30,000 people. This area also could hold 690 acres of commercial/industrial development with
a daytime workforce of up to 12,500. The South Valley plan includes vineyard preservation with
seven areas for light residential development. These areas combined could add another 1,500
8
.
.":'
."
.. '
.::
residential units and a population of 4,200 people to the South Valley. With these additions the build
out population of Livermore could reach 109,000 people.
PLEASANTON:
The Pleasanton Fire Department provides services in all study areas. In the past few years,
Pleasanton has experienced a considerable amount of organizational change, such as the elimination
of two Chief Officer positions through retirements. The remaining Chief Officers are currently
working a modified 40 hour work week which includes specific management assignments, for
example, Administration and Fire Prevention, Operations, and Support Services and Training. In
1996, our current Battalion Chiefs will be reclassified to Division Chiefs. Based upon their assigned
duties and the structure of the organization, the classification of Division Chief is more appropriate.
Pleasanton provides fire suppression, emergency medical response and other emergency responses
to a residential population of approximately 58,000 in an area which encompasses approximately
23 square miles. Pleasanton currently averages 2,700 calls per year of which 65% are medical in
nature. All fire protection and prevention services are provided from three fire stations. Two located
east ofInterstate 680 on Railroad Avenue and Santa Rita Road. The third station is located adjacent
to Stoneridge Mall west ofInterstate 680. The department is staffed by 45 fire fighters (an additional
ten Firefighter/Paramedics will be hired in 1996), 4 managers, 2 Fire Inspectors and 1.5 support staff.
The total operating expense for all fire services during 1993/94 was 5.66 million dollars.
The Hazardous Materials Program for Pleasanton is currently administered by one Battalion Chief
and a Contract hazardous Materials Specialist. The City Council recently authorized the department
to submit a Certified Unified Program Application (CUP A) to the State. Pleasanton would like to
encourage a cooperative approach to the coordination of Hazardous Materials Programs in the
Valley.
Pleasanton is fortunate to own and operate one of the fmest training facilities in the state. It is a full
scale training facility with class rooms and a six story training tower. This is an important asset to
the Valley as it is the only training facility capable of supporting most day-to-day fire company
training requirements. The facility provides training capacity in such areas as fire attack, driver
training, engine testing, flammable liquid, live fire training, aerial operations and vehicle extrication
to all fire agencies in the Valley.
During the 1995/96 Fiscal Year Pleasanton will begin the installation of an "Opticom" traffic light
control system along its primary traffic routes similar to the systems currently utilized in both Dublin
and Livermore. In 1996, Pleasanton will also be implementing a non-transport Firefighter
Paramedic Program. In conjunction with the introduction of Paramedics the two person squad
companies will be phased out and four person engine companies will be implemented. As a result,
the classification of Lieutenant, previously utilized with the two person squads, will be eliminated
9
and personnel currently holding that classification will be reclassed to Captain. During the first half .
of 1996 Pleasanton will also begin utilizing Alameda County Dispatch services.
Two new fire stations are being planned to open within the next two to three years. Construction
is expected to begin in 1996 on an Emergency Response Facility at the new Ruby Hills
Development. An additional station has been funded, both the purchase of property and
construction, however, a date has not been set for construction or opening.
Organizational Charts - Current
The following Organizational Charts only illustrate currently funded positions which are
considered in this study
EMS Coordinllion
Fir. Captain
.'
In each organization, the Battalion or Division Chiefs, support both line supervision and specialty
area management activities. The Deputy Chief and Fire Marshal in Livermore, as well as the EMS
Coordinator in DRF A, are only responsible for one service/specialty areas. As an example, each
agency has a Battalion Chief assigned to the duty of Training Officer in addition to their shift
supervision responsibilities. However, the Fire Marshal in Livermore is only responsible for Fire
Prevention duties.
10
.
..~
'\
.~'
.'
Proposed Organizational Chart Option #3
Legend:
Cooperative
Local Agency
Tri- Valley Fire Protection Cooperative
Proposed Option #3
Fire Chiefs
Dougherty
Livermore
Pleasanton
r pi~~~i~Ii' :
I Manager:
J
I
L........._ .~...~A~...J_...........
tion Division Operations Division Training Division Admin. Services Division: Support Svcs. Division
arshalll Division Chief Division Chief Division Chief Division Chief
n Chief ,
.
,
.
rmore A Shirt EMS Training f i>~ti .8;.;;'1;;;;.: f S';ppii;;. :
ion Staff Battal ion Fire I MIS Coordinator: Svc, Worker;
Chief Captain J J
anton " B Shirt Fire Operations Training
ion Staff Battalion Fire
Chief Captain
FA II C Shirt Specialist Training
ion Staff Battalion Fire
Chief Captain
. Fire preveii
FireM
Divisio
Live
Prevent
Pleas
Prevent
DR
Prevent
p..........
Civilian Positions ~ --... n.. ;
Safety Positions I I
Discretionary Positions I' 'I
11
Proposed Organization
.
PROPOSED ORGANIZATION OPTION #3
In future years, the Tri- Valley Fire Protection Cooperative will change from its current configuration
to a model which has six service areas. The six service areas will be:
Fire Chiefs
Fire Prevention
Operations
Training
Administrative Services
Support Services
The six service areas will have separate responsibilities all of which, when combined, will provide
complete management services to the fire agenc:ies.
FIRE CHIEFS SERVICE AREA
This service area coordinates all service areas and consists of the Fire Chiefs and Planning Manager.
Fire Chiefs -
..,.,
','
"
The Fire Chiefs of Dougherty Regional Fire Authority, Livermore Fire Department
and Pleasanton Fire Department provide general supervision and oversite to the
cooperative. In addition to the role within the cooperative, the Fire Chiefs serve as
the primary liaison between the cooperative and their governing bodies and fire
departments. In order to support their activities, the Fire Chiefs conduct regular staff
meetings and manage the cooperative under guidelines developed and agreed upon.
Planning Manager ~
This is a civilian manager who provides detailed analysis and prepares planning and
operational documents for the Fire Chiefs.
FIRE PREVENTION SERVICE AREA
This service area consists of a Fire Marshal who coordinates the three Fire Prevention Programs.
The individual Fire Prevention Programs will be supported by a Fire Prevention Supervisor in each
city/authority to coordinate the local staff.
12
.
..
..
.':
Fire MarshallDivision Chief -
This Officer is a civilian employee who serves at the Division Chief level. This
position provides Fire Marshal services and general oversite to each agencies
program.
NOTE: The Fire Prevention Programs offered by Dougherty, Livennore and Pleasanton can be as identical
or unique as the community desires.
Supervisors w
These positions are the responsibility of each agency and serve as the primary entry
point for the Fire Marshal into the local organization. It is recommended that these
are civilian positions.
OPERA nONS SERVICE AREA
This service area provides Incident Management Services and consists of a Division Chief and three
Battalion Chiefs (one affiliated with each shift). This division also serves to coordinate between the
operating crews and the other divisions.
Operations OfficerIDivision Chief w
1bis Officer is a safety employee at the Division Chief level who directly supervises
the Battalion Chiefs and offers general oversite to the Operations Division. This
Officer is responsible for developing and implementing operating plans.
Battalion Chiefs w
These Officers are safety employees who serve at the Division Chief level. Each of
these Officers are affiliated with a shift. These Officers coordinate the daily
activities of their shift and provide the first level of Incident Management. In
addition, these Chief Officers will be assigned staff duties in special program areas.
TRAINING SERVICE AREA
This service area coordinates all professional development and in-service training services.
Training Officer/Division Chief -
This Officer is a safety employee who serves at the Division Chief level. The
Training Officer coordinates the training staff and develops training staff and
develops training programs and curriculum.
13
Training Captains -
Each of these Fire Captains is a Line Captain assigned to a training slot. The three .
specialty areas are Emergency Medical Services, Fire Operations, and Specialist
(such as Hazmat, Confined Space, and Heavy Rescue). In addition to serving in the
training capacity, these Officers provide the necessary program coordination services
within their specialty area.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SERVICE AREA
This service area provides all records management and financial support services. The primary task
will be the satisfaction of each local agency's policies and procedures.
Admin. Services Division Chief -
This Officer is a civilian employee who serves at the Division Chief level. The
Admin. Services Chief provides for all records management services, coordinates
personnel and purchasing services.
MIS Coordinator -
This position is a civilian employee who insures that the independent systems
necessary for each agency is coordinated for use by the cooperative.
.'
SUPPORT SERVICES SERVICE AREA
Support Services Division coordinates all facility, fleet and supply activities. This coordination
insures a constant level of service throughout the cooperative.
Support Services Division Chief -
This Officer is a safety employee who serves at the Division Chief level. This
Officer coordinates all contracts with fleet and facility service providers.
Additionally, this Officer is responsible for developing master specification for all
major equipment.
Service Worker-
This position is a civilian employee who is responsible for the delivery of materials
and minor maintenance services throughout the system.
.'
14
e:.
.':
.
Proposed Organizational Chart Option #4
Legend;
Cooperative
Local Agency
Fire Prevention Division
Fire MarnhalV
Division Chief
Civilian Positions
Safety Positions
Discretionary Positions
Tri- Valley Fire Protection Cooperative
Proposed Organization Option #4
Operations Division
Division Chief
A Shift
Battalion
Chief
B Shift
Ballalion
Chief
C Shift
Battalion
Chief
.............
, .
1o_________oiI
I- -,
. Ad".;i~:s;.;.i;;; iii;isi~~":
Division Chief :
.
,
.
EMS Training
Fire
Captain
..................... ""_
Data Services :
MIS Coordinator :
J
Fire Operations Traininll
Fire
Captain
Specialist Training
Fire
Captain
15
Support Svcs. Division
Division Chief
. s';ppli;;. :
Svc. Worker :
J
PROPOSED ORGANIZATION OPTION #4
.
Option #4 varies from option #3 in that the following noted changes occur:
FIRE CHIEF SERVICE AREA
This service area coordinates all service areas and consists of the Fire Chief, Assistant Chief and
Planning Manager.
Fire Chief -
The Fire Chief provides general supervision and oversight to the cooperative. In
addition to the role within the cooperative, the Fire Chief serves as the primary
liaison between the cooperative and their governing bodies and fire departments.
Assistant Chief -
This person serves as the reorganized second in command and as the point of contact
between the various divisions and the Fire protection Cooperative Senior
Management.
Planning Manager -
.'
This position is not utilized in this option.
FIRE PREVENTION SERVICE AREA
This service area is the same as option #3.
OPERATIONS SERVICE AREA
This service area is the same as option #3.
TRAINING SERVICE AREA
This service area is the same as option #3.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SERVICE AREA
This service area is the same as option #3.
.
16
SUPPORT SERVICES SERVICE AREA
.'
This service area is the same as option #3.
Financial Imoact
-
In order to assess the financial impact of this project, it is necessary to consider those positions
which can be attributed to the proposal, Administrative and Clerical staff are not considered since
it is anticipated that this support staffwill remain relatively constant.
The evaluation was conducted by assigning each position to tier based upon its relative total
compensation.
.
Tier Position Cost Current Current Option #3 Option #3 Option #4 Option #4
(000'5) Position ,Cost Positions Cost Positions Cost
(000'5) (000'5) (ODD's)
I Fire Chief $135 3 $405 3 $405 I $135
II Deputy Chief! 126 I 126 0 0 I 126
Assistant Chief
III Division Chief 117 9 1,053 4 468 4 468
Battalion Chief(40hr)
Fire Marshal 117 1 117 I 117 I 117
CADIRMS Manager 117 1 117 0 0 0 0
IV Battalion Chief (56 hr) 98 0 0 3 294 3 294
PlanningManager 98 0 0 1 98 0 0
MIS Coordinator 98 0 0 I 98 1 98
V Fire Captain (40 hr) 87 1 87 3 261 3 261
VI Service Worker 50 0 0 1 50 1 50
Total 16 $1,905 17 $1,791 15 $1,549
Difference from <$114> <$356>
Current
Note: This chart utili:zes typical total compensation In thousands.
.'
17
AccomDlishments to Date
-
Since this effort began in early 1993. There have been a nwnber of accomplishments. Included are .
the following:
Regular Staff Meetings - The Fire Chiefs have established regular, twice monthly staff
meetings. The purpose of the meetings is to work with staff members and reach consensus
on issues.
Shift Alignment - All line employees are currently on the same work schedule. Chief
officers work similar schedules.
Team Problem Solving - Mid-level Chief Officers meet regularly to discuss problems and
resolve issues.
Radio Systems - Dougherty, Livermore and Pleasanton have compatible 800 MHz and VHF
radio systems
Paramedic Training. All departments ate participating in the same paramedic training
program. Dougherty and Pleasanton share the same candidate selection process.
Joint Testing - In addition to the current Twin Valley recruit all three agencies are working
together in varying degrees on promotional testing.
.
"
Vehicle Maintenance - Livennore and Dougherty share one vehicle maintenance program.
Apparatus Specifications - It is expected that the three departments will have common
specifications for Type I Fire Engines by January, 1996.
Joint Response Agreements - Livermore and Pleasanton have a Formal Joint Response
Agreement for Ruby Hills. '
Joint Response Plans - Dougherty and Pleasanton have Joint Response Plans for freeway
incidents, truck company responses and light and air unit responses.
Dispatch Services - Effective early 1996 Dougherty and Pleasanton will be dispatched by
the same dispatch center.
Duty Chief Coverage - Dougherty and Pleasanton have occasionally shared Duty Chief
coverage.
EMS Coordination - Dougherty and Pleasanton share one EMS Coordination program.
Training - The three departments will share one master training calendar in 1996.
.
18
.,:
.
.'
EMT Recertification - Dougherty and Pleasanton share a recertification program. In 1996
all three departments expect to be in the same recertification cycle/program.
Issues to Resolve
Assuming the Managers elect to precede with the functional consolidation as proposed, the following
issues need to be considered:
· Select preferred option.
· Obtain support and participation at the political level.
· Determine how the compact is formed.
· Det~rmine how expenses are divided.
· Determine Transition Schedule.
· Resolve Employee Relations Issues
..
How employees transition.
Identify new career paths.
How are wages and work hours stabilized.
..
..
19