HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.2 Fire&EmergRespSvs
,
.'
. ,.
"
~~
CITY CLERK
File # D~[f]~-[1]~
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 4, 1996
SUBJECT:
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
RECOMMENDATION:
.1 W/
:..-
-,.-
" '. ..
J
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Fire and Emergency Response Services for the City of Dublin
Report Prepared by: Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager
/ Exhibit 1:
/ Exhibit 2:
City Council Agenda Statement October 1, 1996
Letter from San Ramon Valley Fire Protection
District Dated October 8, 1996 Regarding the
A vail~bility of FirefighterlParamedic Employment
Opportunities
Letter from Twin Valley Proposers
/ Exhibit 3:
I) Select preferred Fire Service Provider;
2) Authorize City Manager to negotiate an agreement with
Alameda County for use of the Santa Rita Fire Station;
3) Direct Dublin's DRFA Board Members and City Manager to
discuss the following issues with the full DRF A Board and
to bring forward a recommendation to resolve these
outstanding items:
a. Options for transitioning DRF A employees who will not
be employed, either by the San Ramon Valley Fire
Protection District or Dublin's new fire service provider,
and a recommended allocation of the associated costs to
the cities of Dublin and San Ramon;
b. Method for administering and allocating costs associated
with outstanding and ongoing liabilities ofDRFA; and
c. Allocation ofDRFA assets between the two agencies and
any associated liability which may exist between the two
agencies.
Effective July 1, 1997, the cost of providing Fire and Emergency
Services will increase. The original budgeted 1996-97 fiscal year .
General Fund contribution for Fire and Emergency Services through
the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRF A) was approximately
$3.2 million. Depending on the option selected by the City Council,
the cost of a similar level of Fire and Emergency Services in the
1997-98 fiscal year is estimated to range from approximately
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hlcc.formsJagdastmt.doc
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO.7" 2
$3,292,000 to $4,030,000. In addition, it is anticipated that the Cjty
will incur one time costs associated with the dissolution of DRF A
and the transition of DRF A employees to a new service provider.
These one-time costs are currently unknown.
DESCRIPTION: On September 23, 1996, the Dublin City Council received
informational presentations from the Alameda County Fire Department and Twin Valley Fire (Cities of
Livermore and Pleasanton) regarding proposals to provide Fire Service to the City of Dublin commencing
July I, 1997.
e.-
On October 1, 1996, the City Manager presented to the City Council a comprehensive analysis (See
Exhibit A) evaluating the four options available to the City for Fiscal Year 1997-98 with a
recommendation that the City contract with Alameda County. At that meeting, the Council continued the
item for consideration at its meeting of November 4, 1996. Several Councilmembers expressed a desire to
defer the issue in order to provide the Dublin community with more time to provide the City Council with
input on the issue; and to provide more time for Twin Valley to firm up its proposal with respect to labor
agreements, cost allocation and impact on Dougherty Regional Fire Authority personnel.
Since the October 1, 1996, City Council meeting, the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority received a letter
from the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District (SRVFPD), inviting Dougherty Regional Fire
Authority employees to apply for entty level Firefighter/Paramedic positions with the District, contingent
upon their successful completion of the Paramedic program. These positions are in addition to the DRFA
positions being absorbed by SRVFPD.
In addition to the letter from SRVFPD, Staff also anticipates receiving a letter from Twin Valley Fire
discussing its progress toward Fire Consolidation during the last 30 days. A copy of this letter was .:::
received after the Staff report was prepared.
During the last several weeks, Staffhas also identified some of the major "provider sensitive" tasks that
lie ahead to be accomplished once the City Council selects a fire service provider. The tasks identified
below either cannot be started, or cannot be completed, until the Council selects a provider.
TASK
New Fire Capital Fee Study
Fire Service Fee Study
Fire Prevention ordinance
Employee Transition Issues
Retiree Issues
Asset Distribution
Contract Negotiation
As indicated above, there is a sigilificant amount of work that will be affected by the City selection of its
fIre service provider. It is becoming more critical for the City to select a provider in the near future in
order to ensure a smooth transition from DRF A to the new fIre service provider.
.:,
~ . . ..
CITY CLE::KK
File # D[iJEJ[Q]-~[Q]
.
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 1,1996
SUBJECT:
Fire and Emergency Response Services for the City of Dublin
Exhibit C:
Comparison of Alternatives for Provision of Fire Services. ,
Estimated Annual Operating Costs by Major Category for the
Four Options.
Options for Retaining Additional DRF A Employees and
Associated Costs for the Alameda County and Twin Valley
Options.
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.
Authorize the City Manager to negotiate a contract for Fire and
Emergency Response Services with the Alameda County Fire
Department with the general terms as described in this staff report;
1/::
Authorize the City Manager to negotiate an agreement with Alameda
County for use of the Santa Rita Fire Station;
I.:
i - _..'
Direct Dublin's DRF A Board Members and City Manager to discuss
the following issues with the full DRF A Board and to bring forward
a recommendation to resolve these outstanding items:
a. Options for transitioning DRF A employees who will not be
employed, either by the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection
District or Dublin's new fire service provider, and a
recommended allocation of the associated costs to the cities
of Dublin and San Ramon;
b. Method for administering and allocating costs associated
with outstanding and ongoing liabilities of DRF A; and
c. Allocation ofDRF A assets between the two agencies and any
associated liability which may exist between the two
agenCIes.
FINANCLU- STATEMENT: Effective July 1,1997, the cost of providing Fire and Emergency Services
will increase. The original budgeted 1996-97 fiscal year General Fund
contribution for Fire and Emergency Services through the Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority (DRF A) was approximately $3.2 million.
. Depending on the option selected by the City Council, the cost of a similar
.---------------- -- -
- . - --- -C()PTIis~c)~--------------------------------
- . Deborah Acosta, Pleasanton
Stewart Gary, Livermore
Bill McCammon, Alameda County
Karl Diekman, DRFA
Dan Benfield, DRFA
ITEM No.7, 1 011 ,,#
HJcc-forms/agdastmt. doc
EXHIBIT 1
Fire Service Analysis
2
Ocober I, 1996
level of Fire and Emergency Services in the 1997-98 fiscal year is estimated
to range from approximately $3,292,000 to $4,030,000. In addition, it is .. '_'
anticipated that the City will incur one time costs associated with the
dissolution of DRF A and the transition of DRF A employees to a new
service provider. These one-time costs are currently unknown.
DESCRJJ>TION: On June 30, 1996, the City of San Ramon provided notice to the City of
Dublin that it intends to terminate the Joint Powers Agreement for the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority
effective June 30, 1997. Staff has analyzed a range of options for the provision of Fire and Emergency
Response Services to the City of Dublin effective July 1, 1997. Ibis report reviews the results of this
analysis, both in terms of service level and cost, and reconunends that the City contract for Fire and
Emergency Services \\ith the Alameda County Fire Department.
Background
On February 4, 1988, the cities of Dublin and San Ramon entered into a Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement (JP A) forming the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRF A). DRF A began providing fire
service to the area formerly served by the Dublin-San Ramon Services District on July I, 1988. This
service area includes all of the City of Dublin and the southern portion of the City of San Ramon. The
northern area of San Ramon has historically received fire services from the San Ramon Valley Fire
Protection District.
Since 1988, the cities of Dublin and San Ramon have been well served by DRF A. By jointly funding a
fire department to serve a larger area and population than eithex: city had separately, the two cities have
been able to provide sufficient incident response coverage and share overhead costs, thereby reducing the
financial requirement on both cities. Additionally, since the early 1990's, DRF A has participated with the
cities of Livermore and Pleasanton in exploring strategies for consolidated service delivery which would
result in improved service and reduced costs for all agencies involved. Many joint programs have been
implemented, and the related cost savings have been realized. More recently, the three agencies had been
discussing options for partial (management) or full consolidation.
.
On June 30, 1996, the City of San Ramon provided notice to the City of Dublin that it intends to terminate
the JPA effective June 30, 1997 under the termination provisions of the JPA. Beginning July 1, 1997, the
southern portion of San Ramon will receive fire services from the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection
lli~~ .
Impact ofDRFA Dissolution on the City of Dublin
The exit" of San Ramon from DRF A presents significant challenges for the City of Dublin. First and
foremost, the City of Dublin must provide uninterrupted fire service to its residents and business
community in a manner that is cost-effective. This is a difficult challenge, because, at a minimum,
Dublin must be able to provide a structural fire response of three suppression companies. Under the
DRF A arrangement, Dublin has achieved this service level while funding approximately 55% of four fire
companies, or 2.2 fire companies, rather than fully funding three fire companies. .
A second challenge presented by the dissolution of DRF A relates to its impact on existing DRF A staff.
DRF A currently employs a total of 51 people: 6 managementJadministrative staff members, 2 fire
prevention inspectors, and 43 line staff members (captains, engineers and firefighters). The San Ramon
Yalley Fire Protection District has indicated that it will hire 11 of the line staff members, leaving 40
Fire Service Analysis
"
oJ
Ocober I, 1996
existing DRF A employees to be absorbed. Dublin currently funds approximately 55% of the DRF A
.. organization, which is equivalent to 28.5 staff members. A long-term solution for Dublin which employs
_.' the balance of DRF A employees would present a significant cost which may not be justified or feasible.
However, given that San Ramon has historically funded approximately 23 DRF A positions, but will only
be absorbing II sworn firefighter positions through the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District, there
may be opportunities for San Ramon to share in the costs of transitioning some of the existing DRF A
workforce to alternative employment.
A third impact ofDRFA dissolution on the City of Dublin relates to the valley-wide consolidation option.
As originally conceived, the consolidation would have absorbed all existing fire staff members of DRF A
and the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton. Costs would be shared Wlder a yet to be agreed upon cost
allocation formula, and the organization would be "rightsized" over time by attrition. Since the City of
San Ramon is no longer a participant in the consolidation discussion, Dublin is left with a larger
management workforce (the DRFA management staff) than ,it .can afford to sustain through a rightsizing
effort, and the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton should not be expected to bear the costs associated with
the rightsizing of DRF A management staff. This means that the approach to consolidation is changing
and that the costs for Dublin may be greater than originally anticipated.
Finally, the cities of Dublin and San Ramon must go through the process of actually dismantling DRF A.
This process will require resolution of many issues, include transition of the existing DRF A workforce,
responsibility for outstanding and ongoing liabilities of DRF A and allocation of DRF A assets. These
: issues need to be addressed by the DRF A Board and recommendations prepared for consideration by the
.-: Dublin and San Ramon City Councils.
. -
Process for Identifying Options for Fire and Emergency Services
On February 13, 1996, the City Manager provided a report to the City COWlcil which anticipated the
possibility that San Ramon would choose to terminate the DRF A JP A. The City Manager's report
outlined several possible options, including the following:
1. Providing the City's own fire protection service with a traditional fire department;
2. Contracting with another public agency to provide fire services; and
3. Forming a new JPA with one or more valley cities (i.e. Pleasanton and Livermore), Alameda
County, or the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District.
At that time, the Dublin City Council authorized the City Manager to Wldertake an analysis of Fire and
Emergency Response Service alternatives available to the City of Dublin and to prepare a Request for
Proposals (RFP) for the purpose of evaluating contract Fire and Emergency Response Services. This
RFP requested that interested panies propose comprehensive services at a level comparable to that
provided through DRF A.
On July 3,1996, this RFP for contract fire services was circulated. On August 15,1996, the City received
:' twO responses to the RFP: one from the Alameda COWlt)' Fire Department (ACFD) and one from the Tv.rll
:: .: Valley Fire Dep~ent. (TVFD), which ~s a consolidated Livermore~leasanton ~ire ~epartment. ?n
::.':' August 27, 1996, mtervIews were held WIth each proposer. The IntervIew COlTIIDlttee mcluded the CIty
. Manager, Mr. Mike Harwood, a former fire chief hired by the City to assist in the review of fire service
alternatives, and Ms. Ellen Whittom, who recently served as Interim Finance Manager and has assisted
the Cit)' Manager throughout this process. In addition, the interviews were attended by the President of
the Dublin Professional Firefighters, Local 1855 of the International Association of Firefighters, and by
f1
Fire Service Analysis
4
Ocober 1, 1996
the Administrative Assistant of DRF A, who represented the unrepresented employees. Following the
initial interviews, both proposers were given the opportunity to adjust their proposals to address issues
raised by the Interview Committee. On September 23, 1996, both proposers presented their proposals to.
the City Council. '
On a parallel track, the City of Dublin has continued to discuss fIre service consolidation with the cities of
Pleasanton and Livermore. On July 23, 1996, the City Manager transmitted the Mayor's Committee
Report on Valley Fire Department Consolidation to the City Council. Recognizing that the City of Dublin
is currently evaluating a range of fire service delivery options, the City Council endorsed the
recommendation to actively continue with consolidation efforts so that this option would continue to be
available to the City of Dublin. On August 13, 1996, the Dublin City Council approved the Interim JPA
between the cities of Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton, which provides the framework for negotiating the
details of a consolidated valley fire department.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
To provide continued fire service to the City of Dublin on July I, 1997, there are four possible options
which should be considered by the City Council:
1.
2.
City of Dublin Fire Department;
Contract for Service with the Alameda County Fire Department;
Contract for Service with the Twin Valley Fire Department (cities of Livermore and Pleasanton);
~ .
Consolidated Twin Valley Fire JP A, including the cities of Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton. -.,.. .'
....
.).
4.
Staff has analyzed these options in terms of service level and cost. The following discussion sununarizes
the current service level provided by DRF A and then reviews each option based upon this standard.
Information regarding cost, implementation, utilization of existing DRF A staff, local control and other
issues is also provided.
It should be noted that none of the options fully employ all of the existing DRF A workforce. Depending
on the selected option, there are different opportunities for DRF A to assist employees in transition to
alternative employment. The DRF A Board should evaluate these options, the associated costs and
appropriate allocation between the cities of Dublin and San Ramon, and prepare a recommendation for
consideration by the two City Councils. It is important to note that anv of the Dublin options will emplov
more than Dublin's funded share ofDRFA employees (28.5 positions), while the City of San Ramon move
to the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District will only utilize 11 DRF A employees. which is
sijplific':Tltlv less that its their funded share of the DRF A workforce (23 positions).
Dougherty Regional Fire Authority
Current Service Level
The major areas of service provided by DRFA are Fire Suppression and Rescue, which includes response
to fires, emergency medical incidents, hazardous materials incidents and major disasters, as well as rescue
capabilities; Fire Prevention, which includes development review and inspection; and Community
Education. Other important areas include department management/supervision, dispatch, training and
liaison v.ith the City of Dublin.
Lf
.
. - ~.-
Fire Service Analysis
5
Ocober 1, 1 '1'1b
Fire Suppression and Rescue: DRF A provides fire suppression and rescue services to a service area of
, . approximately 14.4 square miles and a population of 45,000 using three engine companies and one truck
. .. company. Each company is staffed with three people, for a minimum daily fITefighting staff of twelve and
: .. a total suppression line staff of forty-two. One engine company and the truck company are located at
DRFA Station #1 at 7191 Donohue Drive in Dublin. Two engine companies are located at DRFA Station
#2 at 9399 Fircrest Lane in San Ramon. The standard response to a structure fITe is two engines, one
truck and a chief officer. Response time for the fITst due unit is five minutes or less in the populated and
business centers of the City, and ten minutes or less in the lesser developed areas. Additional resources
are provided through an automatic aid agreement with the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District and
through mutual aid agreements with the Twin Valley cities and Alameda County. Incident command is
covered through an on-duty chief officer during regular work hours and an on-call chief officer outside of
regular work hours.
The DRFA Adopted Budget for the 1996-97 fiscal year anticipated the opening of DRF A Fire Station #3,
located at the Santa Rita Jail. This station was considered to be an interim station to serve East Dublin
until the optimal location for a permanent station is identified. DRF A secured the use of this station
through an agreement with Alameda County, under which DRF A provides fire protection to the
unincorporated area in Dublin's eastern sphere of influence.
With regard to emergency medical response, DRF A currently staffs engine companies with personnel
trained at the EMT-D level and is in the process of implementing the first responder paramedic program.
Under this program, it was anticipated that all engine companies would be staffed with paramedic
personnel by July or August, 1997.
~.c
:1 .
:1
Fire Prevention: DRF A employs two fITe inspectors and a half time clerical position to staff the fire
prevention function. One of the three battalion chiefs serves as fire marshal. The fITe prevention function
includes plan checking, technical inspections, permit issuance, development consultation and code
interpretation. For existing commercial occupancies that do not require fITe permits, DRFA administers a
self-inspection program, with the department conducting site inspections once e\'ery three years and the
property owner conducting self-inspections during the alternate two years. The fire prevention function
also includes administration of the weed abatement program.
Community Education: DRF A offers a comprehensive community education program, which includes
such activities as fire safety training in the schools, CPR classes, fire extinguisher demonstrations, station
tours and public displays. These programs are provided by both the fire prevention and the line staff.
.-
Other Issues: DRF A is currently dispatched through a contractual agreement with the Alameda County
Communjcations Department (ALCO). The Department is managed v.ith a staff of seven, including a fire
chief, three battalion chiefs, a paramedic captain, an administrative assistant and a secretary. The three
battalion chiefs work modified shifts to allow for supervision of line companies while also accomplishing
departmental management functions. One battalion chief serves in each of the functional areas of fITe
marshal, operations, and training. The DRF A Fire Chief serves as the liaison between DRF A and the
City of Dublin and, as such, participates in staff and City Council meetings. Overhead services (personnel
and finance) are provided as in-kind services from the cities of Dublin and San Ramon. Property and
liability insurance are purchased through a fire district pool, and DRF A is self-insured for workers'
compensation.
Total Staffing: The total authorized staffing of DRF A is 51.5 positions, including 6.5 management and
support staff, 2 fire prevention inspectors, and 43 union-represented personnel (one of these union-
Fire Service Analysis
6
Ocober 1, 1996
represented positions, the paramedic captain, serves m an administrative capacity).
approximately 55%, or 28.5 of these positions.
Dublin funds
Cost
.
The original 1996-97 net operating budget for the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority totalled
approximately $5.8 million. The allocated contribution for the City of Dublin was 55% of this total, or
approximately $3.2 million. The DRF A budget included approximately $650,000 for equipment
replacement and equipment reserves. Due to the pending dissolution of DRF A, the budget was amended
to remove these capital requirements, resulting in an adjusted net operating budget of $5.2 million.
Dublin's contribution for the 1996-97 fiscal year is $2.87 million.
Option I: City of Dublin Fire Department
Service Level
Fire Suppression and Rescue: The City of Dublin is currently 11.42 square miles in land area with a
population of 26,581. At a minimum, a stand-alone City of Dublin Fire Department would need to staff
three companies: two engine companies and one truck company. This basic minimum is necessary to
provide an adequate initial response to a structure fITe. Each company would be staffed with 3 people, for
a minimum daily frrefighting staff of 9 and a total line suppression staff of 30. This option requires 3
relief positions to backfill for vacation, sick leave and training time. One engine company and the truck
company would be located at Station # I at 7191 Donohue Drive, and one engine company would be
located at the Santa Rita station, assuming that.. the City could successfully negotiate an agreement with
Alameda County for the use of this station that is similar to the existing agreement between DRF A and
Alameda County. The standard response to a structure fire would be two engines, one truck and one chief
officer. Response time for the first due unit would match the DRF A standard of five minutes or less in the
populated and business centers of City and ten minutes or less in the lesser developed areas. Additional
resources would be provided through an automatic aid agreement with the San Ramon Valley Fire
Protection District for northern Dublin (one engine) and by neighboring cities and Alameda County
through mutual aid agreements. Incident command would mirror that provided by DRF A, with an on-duty
cruef officer responding during regular work hours and an on-call chief officer responding outside of
regular work hours.
.
A City of Dublin Fire Department would be able to implement the first responder paramedic program
early in the 1997-98 fiscal year utilizing the DRF A staff members that are currently being trained as
paramedics.
Fire Prevention: Fire prevention would be provided with a proposed staff of 2 fire prevention inspectors
and one half-time clerical position, with one of the department battalion chiefs serving as fire marshal.
The operation would function very much like DRF A does today and would provide a similar service level.
The proposed staff level has not been reduced from the existing DRF A staffing for a number of reasons.
First, the majority of DRF A's fITe prevention workload has been in the City of Dublin. Second, given the
nature of occupancies in the City of Dublin and the projected growth patterns, fire prevention is a critical
function which must be adequately staffed. Finally, the fire prevention staff is responsible for providing
many of the community education programs.
o
:".
Fir~ Service Analysis
7
Ocober 1,1996
Comrnu.'1irv Education Programs. A Dublin Fire Department would continue to provide community
. education programs in a manner similar to DRF A, utilizing fire prevention and line staff to provide a
. range of programs.
Other Issues: Dispatch services would continue to be provided through contract with ALCO. The
proposed department would require a basic management and support staff of 6 positions, including a fire
chief, three battalion chiefs, a captain to coordinate training and the paramedic program and a clerical
position. As with DRF A, the battalion chiefs would work a modified shift, enabling them to oversee line
companies while fulfilling the department functions of fire marshal, operations and training. Overhead
services would be provided through the City's Administrative Services Department, which might require
additional staffing to handle the increased payroll, benefits and finance requirements. Liability and
property insurance could be purchased through the City's existing ABAG insurance pool. With regard to
workers' compensation, the City would need to evaluate if it made sense to purchase insurance or to self-
insure all City employees.
Total Staffing: The total staffing for a Dublin Fire Department would be proposed at 38.5 positions,
including 6 management and support positions (includes one union-represented paramedic captain who
serves in an administrative capacity), 2.5 fire prevention positions, and 30 union-represented line
personnel. Tbree line positions would be relief positions to cover vacation and sick leave.
Cost
-..
o . -
; j :
;
The projected net cost of a Dublin Fire Department is approximately $4.03 million, which is $835,000
greater than Dublin's originally adopted contribution to DRFA for the 1996-97 fiscal year. This
incremental cost represents approximately 5.2% of total General Fund revenue for the fiscal year. It is a
significant increase which cannot be funded from current revenue sources without making similar
reductions in other City services. Based on current development projections, staff estimates that the City
would still not have sufficient funds to fund its own fire department, along with other municipal services,
in the ne:>.."! five years.
Utilization ofDRFA Staff
The proposed City of Dublin Fire Department would employ 38 of the 40 remaining DRFA employees
(while there are 38.5 positions available, DRF A's half-time clerical position in fire prevention is currently
vacant.) The two positions which would not transition to the new organization are the administrative
assistant and one line firefighter position.
Local Gontrol
The Dublin Fire Department provides the greatest level of local control. All budget and labor decisions
related to fire service would be made by the City. All fue employees would be City of Dublin employees.
As 'with all of the options, the City would retain control over local planning and development through the
existing planning process.i
.....
--
.--'.
Implementation Issues
Implementation of a Dublin Fire Department would require a series of actions. Following is a SU11UTIary of
the major steps required:
?
Fire Service Analysis
8
Ocober 1, 1996
1.
2.
Creation of a City Fire Department and adoption of the related budget by the City Council;
Establislunent of an employer-employee relations policy and negotiation of all required labor ._.
agreements; . ._
Amendment of the City's PERS contract to include safety employees;
Amendment of the Personnel system to include Fire Department employees;
Review of insurance programs to identify the optimal means for providing liability, property and
workers' compensation insurance;
Amendment of all benefit contracts to include Fire Department employees;
Expansion of payroll and finance functions to accommodate the additional workload, which may
require authorization to hire additional staff; and
Location of office space for Fire Department management/administrative and fire prevention staff.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Option II: Contract for Service With Alameda County Fire Department
Service Level
Fire Suppression and Rescue: The Alameda County Fire Department (ACFD) currently serves an area of
485 square miles with a population in excess of 195,000. ACFD directly operates 14 fire stations and
staffs 14 engine companies and 3 truck companies with a minimum of 3 persons per company, all of
which \\111 include a paramedic by 1998. Addition of the City of Dublin would result in a service area of
more than 496 square miles with a population in excess of 221,500.
To serve this area, ACFD proposes staffing three 3 person companies in the City of Dublin, two engine.
companies and one truck company, with a total of 27 suppression staff. Relief for vacation and sick leave
would be provided ",ith a combination of ACFD relief positions and overtime. One of the engine
companies and the truck company would be located at Dublin Station #1 at 7191 Donohue Drive, and the
other engine company would be located at the Santa Rita station. The response configuration would
include response to West Dublin from ACFD Station #7 located at 6901 Villareal Drive in Castro Valley.
The standard response for a structure fire would be two engines, one truck and one chief officer.
Response time for the first due unit would match the existing DRF A standard of five minutes or less in the
populated and business centers of the City and ten minutes or less in the lesser developed areas.
Additional resources would be provided through an automatic aid agreement with the San Ramon Valley
Fire Protection District for northern Dublin (one engine), through 13 additional ACFD fire stations
located in Castro Valley, Eden, San Leandro and Livermore, and through mutual aid agreements with
neighboring cities. Incident command would be provided by shift battalion chiefs who are on duty 24
hours per day, 365 days per year, with one located in Castro Valley and one located in San Leandro.
ACFD would implement the first responder paramedic program for all Dublin companies. At start-up,
Dublin companies could be staffed with existing ACFD paramedics, and the DRF A employees who are
currently being trained as paramedics would be utilized once their training is complete.
Fire Prevention: All fire prevention functions would be accomplished with 1.5 fire prevention inspectors
located at Dublin City Hall. ACFD would employ the two existing DRF A fire inspector positions and
allocate 0.5 of one position to County functions. This unit would be managed by an ACFD Fire Marshal,
who would be assigned as needed to Dublin and supported by ACFD clerical staff. The fire prevention
service level would approximate that provided through DRF A. Plan check turnarolIDd time would be 5
days to 2 weeks. Weed abatement inspections would be accomplished by a dedicated ACFD weed
inspector, rather than by the fire prevention inspectors.
~
.
Fire,Service Analysis
9
Ocober 1, 1996
Community Education: ACFD provides comprehensive corrununity education programs that are similar
" .in sc~pe t~ those provided by DRF~. These programs are accomplished 'With a combination of on-duty or
.overtune line staff and fIre prevention staff.
Other Issues: ACFD is dispatched through the Alameda County Communications Department (ALCO).
Dublin would be charged on a per call basis for calls originating in Dublin. ACFD is managed by the Fire
Chief and command staff located in San Leandro. Alameda County Fire Chief Bill McCammon would
serve as liaison to the City of Dublin and would attend staff and City Council meetings as necessary.
Administrative costs, which include upper management, operational battalion chiefs, training division,
EMS and clerical staffing, would be allocated to Dublin based on its proportionate share of line staffing,
which is 13%. The existing DRFA paramedic captain and secretary would be employed by ACFD as a
part of this management/administrative staff. General operating costs would also be allocated on this
formula. Jurisdiction specific costs, such as apparatus maintenance or building repairs, would be charged
based on actual costs. Finance and personnel overhead functions are included in these cost allocations.
Liability and workers' compensation insurance would be provided through Alameda County. The
proposal did not include property insurance or equipment replacement funds.
i
I
I Total Staffin!l: The total staff allocated directly to Dublin under this proposal is 28.5 positions, including
J 27 union-represented line persormel and 1.5 fire prevention personneL All other staff costs would be
.j indirectly allocated through Dublin's proportional share of administration and overhead costs. 2.5 DRF A
i.POSitions would be employed as a part of the management/administrative and ACFD fire prevention staff.
: ... Cost
The proposed cost of the ACFD contract is $3,355,582. However, this cost does not include property
insurance or equipment replacement funds, nor does it recognize fire and EMS revenue that- will be
received by the City of Dublin. Adjusting for these factors results in an estimated annual cost of
approximately $3,406,000. Under the ACFD proposal, Dublin would pay for services based on actual
costs and/or allocations of actual costs.
The proposal raises cost issues related to open workers' compensation claims and the outstanding liability
for accrued leave balances which will transfer with employees. These issues would need to be resolved.
Utilization ofDRFA Staff
The proposed ACFD contract would employ 35 of the 40 remaining DRFA employees. As described
above, 2,8.5 positions will directly support the Dublin contract, 2 positions will be required for
management/administrative functions and 0.5 position will be utilized for County fire prevention. The
remaining 4 positions will be utilized to fill existing ACFD vacancies. Excess positions include the fIre
chief, the administrative assistant, and 3 battalion chiefs.
__. .. As a part of its proposal, ACFD has offered to employ one DRF A battalion chief until an appropriate
:!_::position opens for this individual. Dublin would pay for the full cost of this battalion chief, but would
:. : . -_ -. - receive a credit against this cost equal to the City's allocated share of battalion chief coverage. Including
one battalion chief in the package would increase the annual cost of the ACFD option by approximately
$25,000 until the battalion chief is moved into a permanent ACFD position.
cr
Fire Service Analysis
10
Ocober 1, 1996
Local Control
Under the contract for service option, the City controls the level of service and cost allocation .
methodology through the contract provisions. The City has no control over ACFD labor and budget
policy or day-to-day department administration. As with all of the options, the City retains control over
local planning and development through the existing planning process.
Implementation Issues
Implementation of a Contract for Service with the Alameda County Fire Department would require a
number of actions. Following is a summary of the major steps:
1. Negotiation of specific contract terms with ACFD;
2. Resolution of labor issues related to the transition ofDRF A employees into ACFD;
3. Review of property insurance issues, which were not included in the proposal, and resolution of
equipment replacement issues; and
4. Location of office space in Dublin City Hall for fire prevention staff.
Option ill: Contract for Service with Twin Valley Fire Department
Service Level
Fire Suppression and Rescue: The Twin Valley Fire Department (TVFD) is a proposed Joint Powers .
Authority Fire Department between the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton. TVFD covers a service area -. '
of 46 square miles with a resident population of 124,000. With the opening of the Ruby Hills Fire Station
in Pleasanton in September, 1996, the TVFD will operate 9 fire stations and staff 10 fire companies.
Addition of the City of Dublin will result in a service area of more than 57 square miles with a population
in excess of 150,000.
Under the proposed contract, TVFD would serve Dublin with four engine companies and one truck
company located at two Dublin fire stations and two Pleasanton fire stations. Dublin Station #1 at 7191
Donohue Drive would house a 4 person engine company and the light and air unit. The Dublin Santa Rita
station would house a 3 person engine company, assuming that an agreement can be negotiated between
Dublinffv.ID Valley and Alameda County for use of this station. Pleasanton Station #2 at 6300
Stoneridge Mall Road, would house a 3 person engine company and a 3 person truck company.
Pleasanton Station #3 at 3200 Santa Rita Road would house 3 person engine company. This configuration
would require 24 line personnel to be funded by Dublin. The standard response to a structure fire would
be three. engines, one truck and one chief officer. Response time for the first due unit would match the
existing DRF A standard o~ five minutes or less in the populated and business centers of the City and ten
minutes or less in the lesser developed areas of the City. Certain areas of the City may experience
improved response times due to the location of the two Pleasanton fire stations. Additional resources
would be provided from 5 Livermore fire stations and 2 additional Pleasanton fire stations, as well as
through an automatic aid agreement with the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District for northern
Dublin (one engine) and mutual aid agreements with neighboring cities and Alameda County. Incident ..
command would be covered by an on-duty chief officer during regular work hours and an on-call chief
officer outside of regular work hours. Ten chief officers reside within the cities of Livermore and
Pleasanton, which is a reasonable distance to provide adequate response capability.
!D
Fir~ Service Analysis
11
Ocober I, 1996
TVFD would implement the first responder paramedic program for all Dublin companies. At start-up,
.' Dublin companies could be staffed with existing TVFD paramedics, and the DRF A employees who are
,. currently being trained as paramedics would be utilized once their training is complete.
Fire Prevention: All fire prevention functions would be accomplished with 2 fire prevention inspectors
and one clerical staff located at Dublin City Hall. This unit would be managed by the Twin Valley Fire
Marshal (currently City of Livermore Fire Marshal), who has been allocated 20% to the Dublin contract.
The fire prevention service level would approximate that provided through DRF A. Plan check turnaround
time would be 5-10 days.
Community Education: The TVFD proposal would continue to operate the range of community education
programs currently offered by DRF A utilizing line staff and fire prevention staff. There are also
opportunities to expand these efforts with marginal cost increases.
Other Issues: Dispatch services would initially be provided through ALCO; however, the proposal
recognizes that in the long-term, alternate options need to be considered. TVFD will be managed through
a consolidation of Livermore and Pleasanton fire management staff reporting to the Twin Valley JP A
governing body and management structure. Under the proposed contract, Dublin would be charged a
6.5% overhead factor on the total contract costs as its allocated share of management and overhead,
including personnel and finance. Pleasanton City Manager Deborah Acosta and Livermore Fire Chief
Stewart Gary are designated as the primary contacts. Workers' compensation insurance would be
. provided through the TVFD, and the proposal includes the cost for liability insurance above a self-insured
":. retention of $500,000 per claim. Property insurance is not included in the proposal.
-. .
Total Staffing: The total staff allocated directly to Dublin under this proposal is 27 positions, including 24
union-represented line persormel and 3 fire prevention personnel. In addition, Dublin has been allocated
20% of the fire marshal and 5% of the hazardous materials coordinator. All other staff costs would be
indirectly allocated through the overhead factor.
Cost
The proposed cost of the TVFD contract is $3,223,542. However, this cost does not include property
insurance or sufficient liability insurance and equipment replacement funds, nor does it recognize fire and
EMS revenue that will be received by the City of Dublin. Adjusting for these factors results in an
estimated annual cost of approximately $3,292,000. This cost does not include any cost associated with
the use of the Santa Rita Fire Station, which is unknO\\-l1 at this time. Under the TVFD proposal, Dublin
would pay for services based on actual costs and/or allocations of actual costs.
In addition, the proposal calls for the City of Pleasanton to buy in to the DRF A ladder truck and for the
City of Dublin to buy in to the Pleasanton air and light unit. Because the ladder truck is significantly more
expensive than the air and light unit, the net outcome ',;\-1.11 be a one-time payment from Pleasanton to
Dublin. If these two pieces of apparatus were shared on an equal basis between the jurisdictions, staff
: ." est~ates that the net one-time payment to Dublin from Pleasanton would be approximately $140,000 -
, ,.' $bO,OOO.
Similar to the contract 'Vvith ACFD, the responsibility for costs related to open workers' compensation
claims and the outstanding liability for accrued leave balances for existing DRF A employees would need
to be discussed and resolved.
11
Fire Service Analysis
12
Ocober I, 1996
Utilization ofDRFA Staff
..
The proposed TVFD would employ 33 of the 40 remaining DRF A employees. As described above, 27
positions would be required for the Dublin contract. An additional 6 positions would fill existing
vacancies in TVFD. The excess positions include the fire chief, the administrative assistant, 3 battalion
chiefs, and two firefighters.
_~ a part of its proposal, TVFD has offered to employ the remaining two firefighters at Dublin's expense
until openings are available for them. Dublin would receive a credit for overtime savings realized by
using these positions in a relief capacity. While there are no guarantees, TVFD anticipates that the "carry
time" for these positions would range from none (vacancies may be available by July I, 1997) to one year.
The estimated incremental annual cost to Dublin for carrying these positions until they are absorbed by
TVFD is $82,000, which assumes that the two positions will be used in a relief capacity 50% of the time.
Local Control
Under the contract for service option, the City controls the level of service and cost allocation
methodology through the contract provisions. The City has no control over TVFD labor and budget
policy or day-to-day department administration. As with all of the options, the City retains control over
local planning and development through the existing planning process.
Implementation Issues
.:'
Implementation of a Contract for Service with the Twin Valley Fire Department would require a number
of actions. Following is a summary of the major steps:
I. Creation of the Twin-Valley JP A by the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton, negotiation of all
required labor agreements with the represented employees in the two cities, and establishment of
the administrative structure necessary to operate as a joint fire department (including all necessary
benefit contracts and insurance coverage);
2. Negotiation of specific contract terms between the City of Dublin and TVFD;
3. Resolution oflabor issues related to the transition ofDRF A employees into TVFD;
4. Review of property and liability insurance and equipment replacement issues, which were not
adequately addressed in the proposal;
5. Negotiation of an agreement between the City of Dublin or TVFD and Alameda County allowing
the use of the Santa Rita Station under the same terms as the existing agreement between DRF A
and Alameda County; and
6. Location of office space in Dublin City Hall for fire prevention staff.
Option IV: Twin-Valley .JP A: Full Consolidation with Dublin, Livermore and
Pleasanton
Service Level
.
The service level for fire suppression and rescue, fire prevention and community education under the fully
consolidated JP A option would be identical to that described in the Twin-Valley contract option. Day-to-
day management of fire functions, training programs and dispatch services would also be similar in the
m'o options. Differences between the two options would relate to Dublin's involvement in the overall
Fir,e Service Analysis
13
Ocober 1, 1996
j JP A Management
j
1.' Under a fully consolidated JP A model, Dublin would participate as a partner with the cities of Livermore
1 and Pleasanton in managing and making decisions about the JP A. . Similar to the DRF A model, Dublin
j elected officials and management staff would most likely participate in budget and labor issues. This is in
I contrast to the contract for service model, in which Dublin specifies its level of service through the
j contract document, and the other agencies are responsible for managing the operation,
~
As originally conceived prior to the departure of the City of San Ramon from DRF A, the proposed JP A
would have employed all existing fire staff of DRF A and the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton. Over
time, the management staff would be "rightsized" through attrition. During the transition period, the
agencies would have shared in the costs of management rightsizing by some agreed upon cost allocation
formula. However, as described earlier in this staff report, the departure of San Ramon from the JP A
discussion leaves Dublin, as the remaining DRF A partner, with a larger management rightsizing expense
than it can bear. Accordingly, the JP A discussion has shifted to an assumption that Dublin would join
without DRF A management staff and that the rightsizing of management would occur between the cities
of Livermore and Pleasanton.
Cost
.: At the current time, there are no fIrm estimates of the cost of a full Twin Valley JP A. As the City Council
,'j is aware, the Interim JP A between the cities of Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton was only recently
~J.<. adopted. Discussions regarding potent~al cost allocation alternatives .have not yet be~. However, staff
! .' _. has attempted to develop a rough estrmate of the costs that Dublm could expect m the JP A model,
J assuming that the level of staffing would be similar to the Twin Valley contract option and that the
, management staffing would look similar to Phase N of the Mayor's Committee Report. This estimate
ranges from $3.32 million to $3.57 million.
Utilization ofDRFA Staff
The Tv.in Valley JP A, as currently conceived, would utilize the same number of DRF A staff as would the
Twin Valley contract option, which is 33 of the remaining 40 DRFA employees, The excess positiqns
include the fire chief, the administrative assistant, 3 battalion chiefs, and 2 firefighters. Similar to the
TVFD contract option, it is possible that options could be identified to retain some of these positions as
long as the City of Dublin were willing to pay the additional cost.
Implementation Issues
Implementation of a fully consolidated JP A fire department between the cities of Dublin, Pleasanton and
Livermore would require a number of actions. Following is a summary of the major steps:
1.
Agreement between the three cities on the structure of the consolidated department and the cost
allocation methodology;
Creation ofilie Twin-Valley JPA by the cities of Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton, negotiation of
all required labor agreements with the represented employees in the two cities and DRF A, and
establishment of the administrative structure necessary to operate as a joint fire department
(including all necessary benefit contracts and insurance coverage);
.'>_2.
11>
Fire Service Analysis
14
Ocober 1, 1996
...
.).
1\egotiation of an agreement between the CitY of Dublin or TVFD and Alameda County allowing
the use of the Santa Rita Station under the same terms as the existing agreement between DRF A
and Alameda County; and
Location of office space in Dublin City Hall for fire prevention staff.
.
4.
COMJ>ARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
Exhibit A provides a matrix comparing the major aspects of the four alternatives, including service level,
cost, utilization of DRF A staff, implementation and local control.
Service Level. With regard to fire suppression and rescue service on a fust alarm (one incident), all of
the alternatives achieve the DRF A service level standard of a three company response with the first due
unit responding within five minutes or less to the populated and business centers of the City and within
ten minutes or less to the lesser developed areas of the City. . The two Twin Valley options would exceed
this level of service by providing a third engine company as a part of the standard response to a structure
fire.
On the second alarm response (significant incident requiring additional resources) or multiple responses
at the same time, the alternatives differ. In this situation, the Dublin Fire Department has utilized all of its
resources on the fust alarm and must rely completely on automatic aid and mutual aid for emergency
response. This is a lower level of service than currently exists with DRF A. In a second or multiple alarm
situation, both the ACFD and TVFD options provide a greater level of service than exists today with
DRF A, because both larger departments can draw on their own resources for second response, as well as .'
on automatic aid and mutual aid. The difference in service level between ACPD and TVFD is dependent
upon the location of their fire stations.' Two rvFD stations (pleasanton stations #2 and #3) are ideally
located to provide fust alarm and back-up response into Dublin, and seven other Twin Valley fire stations
are located in the valley relatively close to Dublin. These resources will be automatically dispatched to
Dublin incidents with no delay. The closest ACFD stations are in Castro Valley and Livermore, meaning
that ACFD will rely partially on automatic and mutual aid for a second response. Mutual aid is generally
dispatched with a delay, because it must be approved by the agency providing the mutual aid. However,
to the e:x.Lent that mutual aid is provided to Dublin by the City of Pleasanton, there would be no such delay
because of the current dispatching arrangement through ALCO.
Ibis comparison assumes that, in all four options, Dublin will be able to use the Alameda County fire
station at Santa Rita under similar terms as currently exist between Alameda County and DRF A.
Specifically, Alameda COlUlty allows DRF A to use the facility in exchange for fire coverage of the
unincorporated area in Dublin's eastern sphere of influence. Alameda County has indicated that use of
this facility would be assured in the Dublin Fire Department' or Alameda County contract options;
however, such use is not guaranteed in the Twin Valley options. In this situation, Alameda County could
require payment for use of the facility, which would result in additional costs for either of the Twin
Valley options.
In the areas of fust responder paramedic implementation, fue prevention and community education, all of .
the alternatives are essentially comparable to the level of service provided by DRF A. However, ACFD .'.
has indicated that it can provide a level of service equivalent to DRF A with 1.5 fire inspectors, while all
of the other options assume 2 fire inspectors.
\Vith regard to administration of the fire and emergency response function, the Dublin Fire Department is
the least efficient alternative. As a small organization, it is unable to achieve the economies of scale that
Fire Sef\ice Analysis
15
Ocober I, 1996
are available to the larger ACFD or TVFD options. Management staff, though a larger proportion of the
~budget, must handle a variety of disparate tasks. This generally reduces effectiveness. Consequently,
~hile the Dublin Fire Department is the most expensive alternative, it is the least desirable choice, both in
terms of service level and management efficiency.
Cost. Following is a summary of the estimated net annual operating cost for fIre and emergency response
services under DRF A and each of the possible alternatives. As described in this staff report, proposed
costs have been adjusted in an effort to include all costs and insure that the comparisons are equivalent.
More detail on these costs is shown in the attached Exhibit B.
DRFA
$3,195,294
Dublin FD Contract! ACFD ContractffVFD
$4,030,000 $3,406,000 $3,292,000*
JP AffVFD
$3,324,000 -
$3,568,000 *
. Assumes use of Santa Rita fire station for no additional cost
_ The costs associated with the two contract options are significantly lower than the Dublin Fire Department
option. There are two main reasons for the cost differentials. First, both contract options are larger
departments which can provide overhead and management services more efficiently than a small stand-
alone department. Secondly, both contract options are able to provide sufficient incident response
coverage with fewer line staff than are required in a small stand-alone department. The ACFD proposal
provides three fire companies in Dublin with 27 positions rather than 30 positions, as relief can be
provided through a combination of ACFD relief positions and overtime. The TVFD proposal provides
.incident response coverage with 24 positions due to the location of Pleasanton fire stations #2 and #3,
, ,. which allows for efficient sharing of fire companies. .
The costs associated with the JP A option are unknown, because the three agencies have not developed the
total budget or cost allocation strategies; however, the estimates prepared by staff reflect that the high end
or the range exceeds the cost of either contract option.
Utilization of DRF A Staff. The Dublin Fire Department employs the largest number of remaining
DRFA employees, or 38 out of 40; however, the costs are significantly greater than the other available
options. The ACFD option employs 35 out of 40 DRF A employees, leaving an excess of 5 staff without
employment. The Twin Valley options (either contract or JP A) employ 33 DRF A staff members, leaving
an excess of7 staffwithout employment.
As described earlier in this staff report, both proposers have provided options for employing additional
DRF A employees, v.-ith the City of Dublin paying the incremental carrying cost until the positions are
absorbed' by future vacancies in either ACFD or TVFD. These options and the estimated carrying costs
are summarized on Exhibit C. In summar)', ACFD would carry I battalion chief for an estimated
incremental annual cost of $25,000. There is currently no estimate as to when this battalion chief would
be absorbed by ACFD. TVFD would carry the 2 remaining union-represented firefighter positions for an
estimated annual incremental cost of $82,000. TVFD anticipates that these positions would be absorbed
. by the end of the fIrst year, and may be absorbed before the contract period begins. TVPD would also
..carry a battalion chief for an estimated incremental cost of $115,000 (full cost of position). There is
..,' currently no estimate as to when this battalion chiefwould be absorbed by TVFD. If Dublin selects one of
these contract alternatives as its desired fire service option, the associated options for employing
additional DRF A staff should be discussed at the DRF A Board level.
15
Fire Service Analysis
16
Ocober I, 1996
Implementation. Implementation is perhaps the most important factor to be considered. DRF A will not
exist on July I, 1996, and the City of Dublin must have fire service in place by that time. The City must .
have a high level of confidence that the selected option can be implemented quickly. '
From an implementation standpoint, the ACFD option is the most desirable. ACFD has successfully
accomplished two consolidations: the consolidation of disparate county fire districts into the ACFD and
the consolidation of the San Leandro Fire Department into ACFD. This experience is invaluable. The
ACFD administrative organization, including all benefit contracts, is in place. The labor agreement with
the Alameda County Firefighters is in place. A meet and confer process would be needed to resolve the
issues of how to transition DRF A employees into the ACFD workforce.
The Twin Valley contract option requires the creation of a new entity and completion of necessary
agreements between the two governing bodies and the two represented labor units. In addition, the
administrative structure for day-to-day operations, including all benefit contracts, needs to be established
and an agreement for use of the Santa Rita fire station needs to be negotiated with Alameda County.
Recognizing that these implementation obstacles raise significant concerns, the proposers have committed
to completing all necessary labor agreements and obtaining final City Council approvals of the JP A by
February 1, 1997. However, if they are unsuccessful, Dublin would only have five months to implement
an alternative option. In a the three-way JP A that includes the City of Dublin, the implementation
obstacles are greater, simply because there are more parties at the negotiating table.
The Dublin Fire Department also presents significant implementation challenges. The City would have to
establish the Fire Department, create a personnel system, negotiate labor agreements and expand the .
existing administrative structure to handle additional staff. ' ,"
Local Control. The Dublin Fire Department clearly provides the greatest level of local control, as the
City is responsible for all policy and administrative decisions related to its operation. However~ it is the
least desirable option in terms of service level and cost. Both of the contract options represent some loss
of local control over day-to-day operations; however, the City can specify its service level through
contract and avoid much of the administrative burden of operating fIre services. Both proposers have
expressed strong conunitment to providing services that meet local needs and are identifiable to Dublin
citizens. The JP A option would retain some level of local control at the management and policy level;
however, it would require coordination and cooperation with the other partners. In all options, the City of
Dublin would retain local control over local planning and development through its existing planning
process.
Long Term Service Issues. The most significant long-term service issue relates to the provision of fIre
service in East Dublin as development occurs. Both proposers have indicated that an additional fire
station may not be necessary. The Santa Rita Station, which has always been conceived of as a temporary
location, will be moved to a permanent location which better serves Eastern Dublin. In addition,
automatic and mutual aid agreements can supplement service to this area.
RECOMM~KNDATION
.
In conclusion. both of the contract for service proposals would provide high Qualitv fire service that meets
or exceeds the DRF A level of service at a cost that is reasonable and could be borne bv the City of Dublin.
These proposals are both more attractive than the Dublin Fire Department, which represents a reduction in
service level for a significant increase in cost, or the full JP A, which has too much uncertainty with regard
if::,
Fire Service Analysis
17
Ocober I, 1996
to implementation and cost for it to' be a realistic option at the current time. Under both proposals, the
. City retains local control over the level of fire service in Dublin.
The two contract options are close in cost, with the ACFD option exceeding the TVFD option by an
estimated $114,000 per year. However, this cost differential between the two contract options will shrink
if additional DRF A positions are absorbed and if there are costs associated with with securing the use of
the Santa Rita fire station for the Twin Valley option. The two proposals differ significantly with regard
to implementation. The ACFD option has far fewer obstacles to its implementation, while the TVFD
option requires establishment of a new entity and negotiation of new labor agreements, as well as
establishment of the administrative structure necessary for day-to-day operations of a consolidated fire
department and securing use of the Santa Rita fire station. Dublin is in a time sensitive situation, in which
fire service must be provided by July I, 1997. It is staff's opinion that the certainty in implementation
offered by the ACFD proposal is worth the small incremental cost of the ACFD proposal over the TVFD
proposal In addition, ACFD has considerable experience in working through fire department
consolidation/merger. This experience would benefit the City of Dublin by assuring a smooth transition
of fire services provided to the community by the required date of July I, 1997
For the reasons described above, it is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to
negotiate a specific contract for Fire and Emergency Response Services with the Alameda County Fire
Department. Staff would also recommend that the City Council insist that ACFD, as Dublin's provider,
work with the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton on cooperative approaches to improving service to all
: three cities where possible. Additionally, it is recommended that the City Manager negotiate an
:: .,: agreement with Alameda County for use of the Santa Rita Fire Station.
With regard to the many issues raised in this staff report regarding DRF A dissolution and transition of
existing DRF A employees to alternative employment, it is recommended that the City Council direct the
DRF A Board Members to consider these issues in the DRF A setting and prepare recommendations for
consideration by the City COWlcils of Dublin and San Ramon.
'..
.,
t7
'"
u
u
'" 'E
'Vj U
.?;>tI.l
eo ~
t: .-
<t
8 0
.- t:
i:: .S:
U '"
tI.l .;;
~ e
t: 0...
o ...
~...c:
u '"
X ~ ~
:.:.J ~.~
ii t:
~~
E <
UJ....
"0 0
t: t:
eo 0
v ..~
... ...
-- c::;
L:.. l::.
E
o
u
<
:::l
,
'c
,.
<
E::
'..
...
c
..
>. :;::
~c._~ u"
-;; .g c
......u.....
\I"""" .... s:: ;:; c
= ~.&.'oo~
a;~5EM
~~~~g
8.~~~
)3.g5~
~0v.:E:
>.
.!:!
0;
;>
'c
::>
'..
...
c
'"
..
<>
...-=
1:: ';:
.~
"
... tl
~ .5_
:;:
E
~
:;::
.~ ~ i g
c e :i g .~ .~
'i ::> .- .- U "
t-"~~~--
.c; ... ~ N ;,.;
8--""'"
~~~gE
r;: c &:2 '"i: i:
8.::c~:
~..g~~~
~ 0 v.: ~ _
>.
C
::J
o
~
c .5
ec .S -
'E 'S
== "
'" I:;
<: 6
U
:.::
~
"
..::
;;::
~
..
>-
g
--~
;~r--
.E 2 ~
:g-Eb
oJl<
~f g
"to ~&1
" I:
U U
c
...
S
ic]
u .2 _
o ;;; .... u
e :; .: .:
... ... ...
- t.:: c c
>. c t.) ~
_ 0 _ _
.- U
U ~ ~ ~
8. ~ ~
t1.g~
..:: Cl v.
~
..5
i:
'"
..
...
":>
... "
... ::J
V'J ~
~ ..,
.- I"::
~""
-;; ~
..
Q 0
c.. -v;
C ::I
~a
:= c:..
.. :=
.. CIl
0' e
li:
<
...
"
.5
ai
;;
E
~
.~ ~
5]
~]
". ..
c ~
1 ~
is: '"
,.:
U
.. E u
l i ~...;
u "
~ - u
e "',," :;
~ "
"2 .5 '5
en - W"'I
'E
'"
"0
c
'"
in
::: ~
I: '"
.~<
u to
'" -
~
~ 0
E: :;:
8.:g ..
.. '" c
~ ..... ,$
u E 3
E-.g~
~ rl ~
~ l:! ~
o ~ .~
~ ~ ~
,.:
u
"
i.i ~:.! OJ
8.:Y 8...~ & g
t:;;....c c:-=
!~~~~~
~f..w'$~f'
~ = 2 .E u E
"2-E:9-.g
~t;,j-~~~
,5 :::" E "" U
:E ] .s .!! ~ $
O]~<~~
~ ti) ~ ~ ~ a::
...
"
.5
U
c
'..
c
u
,.:
~
Ii E
.. C>
c ....
8. .!:!
t;:; ::: ...
~=:~
u
~ ~
1l "
.:; 2
.5 in
:c"E
,. '"
01l
~ ~
,.:
"
.g
t;:; i.i ';5
~ 8. ~
.. ..c
" u "
~a::_
... f!
u ,.
"g !)
.:; 2
.E in -:- ~
:E ~ :g m
8 -g .~ <:
~ ~ ~ '"
z;! ai
c c
8. i.i .,g
11I'I C :.a
f!8.~
E r; t"'l
...rgl'!-
2 '5 ~ ~
.: V\ .,g- c
"'5 l1
:E ~ ~
o ~ .~
~ u =..'"
.!:i~
::: ~
c '"
.~<
u ;;
M
:.!
"
~
f!
"
11- .~
.5 E
.,..,
....
c:>
o
i.i ~
~ 6
u c
~ .~
{]
~~~
~ u '"
....~c;
o E .2
"0 0 ::>
.!:i U E
..
c
.$
..
v.;
'"
~
"'iii
>-
c
~
o
L:..
U
<
c:>
"
u
c
'..
c
u
"'iii
c
c:> ..
..."0
c c
E E
~ E
.~ 8
"0 i:!
E ~
f! .u
t:..=
..
c:>
"
u
c
'..
<:
u
"'iii
.,
o ..
~-g
E ..
~ ~
.. c:>
.~ U
"0
u c
E ~
e 'C:;
~..5
..
8
o
L:..
U
<
OJ
c
c:> ..
..."0
c c
E E
~ E
.. 0
,~ U
~ t:
E ~
E 'u
~.s
..
u
'c
8..
E
8
'"
c
o ..
..."2
E ~
~ E
.. C>
,~ U
1l i:!
E ~
E 'C:;
l: .E
,.:
~ .
E l3 :a
o " ~
"ilE
:a ~ .~,,_
" u
~:E>-
,. " I-
'"
~
C>
-; .:
If ..
c ....
r! c> U
6 r! E
..c :;l c:>
.. c:> ....
-s -= .~
::>~ u
~ < =:
,.:
U
E ..; :3
c:> ~ ~
"ilE
~ ~.~
~:E>-
,. U I-
"0
~ ] .E
~ r.:
c:> ~
E
c:>
...
..
:E
"
o
i:!
is r!
"" ,.
.... 0
.. ""
:; ..
~~
I>:: < -
c:!: <:
~ tIS
.... <Il
6 .S
..c
~
"
c:>
<!l
"
:E
"
c
.9 0
~ ]
'" U ..
~ c U
NO"":
..;
~
E :i
~E
~~
~:c
:;l "
"%a;
c:> If
iti :s
g i1
..c "
.. c:>
.. ..c
:; ....
co U
U <::
a:: <
.,;
'"
.s
..
>
c:>
"0
~ i
U U
1l E
_ U
...
.. l!
o ..
- E
~O
~~
u
li
"0
:;
o
"
...
,i ~ ~ u"5 'g
itl2 <[:i~8
U'U-;;; c..QU",&_",
C~ >......"Ug(.)
:3 t\,'':: ,!:!..c ~ Eo e 0
.,..e &.g:;"'<::;U
er"lt:; ~"'C'=~-:S
~ 5"E c = c 2 5 ~
.;~'E lIS=obOcdbD='
c- _ -g uoi ~.s -E c...= 2
::...] c"'C~ ~";i:2-=
0: :-.g ~ E ~ g '5 '"
u;;.~~f""'c'c..-~u
~ ~ E E R'- .~ E ~ e 5
~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "E; ~ 2 g ~
.:i:i; g ~~t;..gu.:;u 0
.. ","
" U
Of ~
:.:: E
~ ~ ~
o 0 g
~;:E
:Ei :c 'u
f! ~ Io!!
8.. !....
E E ~
c:> c:> ..
uu~
"0
U :;
o ~ 8
~ ~ "i
,,",'E ~
;;. ~ e!
~ < <: g
S 2 :;;: ...
l! 0 0 g
~;;:E
:S:o:o'c:;
r,) e f! c!!
'" 8.. .. ....
E E E 0
:;J c:> C> :.::
..cuu~
""'
;;.
5C
"5 -;j
u~
- ..
;:.. E
_ f!
!i L:
8.0
.. ...
;:;~
'0 .... u
+E~~ ~c -g'g
. 2 8 E ~..' : 6
unv; ..c:c..4J.gu
U "g u ~ ~ g 8 ~
vi~.~ 8tc..~u
C 10 f! -:5 ~ e:D t;: ~
EN'U; -~c~-::5
'~~:E~ j:O.E;~
-$ u.=-[~e
~!]ll~.~c-::s..c
!;It: ~.Ei:~g~;
~..5.~5t;~~-..ct:
~l;;5EioE~~;
~ "2 ~ ~ 0 E c E ~ ~
.~~~ ~~88-58 0
....
c:> ..,
l: -u " " :::i
8.. .,g ~ Co.
;-] .r ~~u
..::.. . E ."x ':s ~ ~
c::. :2.5
OJ .!:! c:> ';: _0 Z '_'" l::
.~ U +,::: ~... -
uu~<<.!!~~&~~
~~i~~:~~ ~ r~
.. '"El.lEE "'.-;:'5 <sO
,g OUl.lc,.C"'~,-
ue,--:o:o~c!:!..!!~
8,I:;U E e-5 "'"'iiitl.g
~c< !.!."i t.g e-!a
~bggg~bO..~~g_~
<..: U U::> .<;"
U
C
o
f
~
~
..
U
,E
..
~
..
E
U
.:
..
OJ '"
.~ n
U t
u ~
.,.., "il
O:..c
.. "
E g
&~
.s]
'" -
<:
,5:
tl
U
Q..
'"
c
;:l
"
'"
c
.S:
C
..,
>
J:
~
~ bO
~ .~
tt +;<
'E U
Z;: S
<<..!!
:;;: :;;: :_..5
00
.E .E g
:E:EE
.. e ..c
!. It '~
E E U
00"
uu::>
2
<: ..
.g -=
;;; '"
<> rFJ
-6';
lJJ ...
.q ;:;
<:
::J
E
==
2;
u
"
~ -0 .0
C ~ ; s
:3 S IIfl '" C
~.E"~i~
2t~eu
..J:: "'C cab I.':: .,
-i"'.=-c,;
> i 2 ~ ~
~ till c e.D ~
e os c...: E
.~ c "'i ~ -::S
~~]] E
eElce g
c: c c c c
o C ... 0 =-t,....-
uU-=Uc:>
...
o
.g ~ c g
. e tii &... .~
~u;:,o~E
~~!?E&g
'= 8 ~ ~ u
~ E l:) !..~ "'iii
f!8.:l~.9
~'g.-ic-.co
'~f!EE'E~
- u "'C ~
ii B !.ro~~
5=~:..::~
!:: ~ =: E.E ~
:Ci3g~~D
..
U
"
..c c
co ..
" c
=ge:f3
c 0
l~~ ~"~
o I) '"'C .u f"""I t""I
ug8c~
~ ~ f! ~ ~
." ..,1:; U
-g .: -g .~
~ 5 ~ u
.s -a go ~
c _ :.c :I
i ~ .- E
c....E.E.;:
..
c
c:>
.;;;
'C:;
~l
.~ is
"8..'->
-0 oj
c "
~1
.. ..
.., ..
... U
:;l ..
.&; I:
"'i oS
.. ""
~ ~
E 11
s~
c
u~
:: ..
I:: ;;;
.g 5
.. ...
~"E.
~~
r.::
'0
...
;;;
C
U
..
...
"
..J
_I:::
.. ..
";cn
~~
"'c::
!::.o
"'....
C C
U c
.$
~ -;
~~
<;::>
.
~"
...,
.,..,
,..;
...",
, '"
~
....-
'"
""
,..;
...
~
",""
"" ""
M
,..;
...
..
~
...," .,..,
o '"
....
",,"
...
cj
;g
><
~
I::
C
<:
~
s:
;;;
~
'"
~
1S
"
""
~
'"
'C:;
c
~
~ "
<>-;5
'ii...
c c
.g ~
:g~
"'<
gl:,
..I"::
.EO
cO;
.$ c;
~~
.. :.s
..,""
~ :0
!!: <:
;:;:: 'S
=5
E ::::
.. ...
~a
o '"
~ .E
=c..
:30
E
~~
<5
. z
.
.
'..'
, ' '
.,
l'l
:::
c
o
.~ 00
~ Il)
;>.,~
"@u
=: s....
-< 0
11) .C?
.~ ~
(: ;>.,
Il) ..0
UJ ~
11) ......
~ ~
=: 0
o U
0..00
~ t:
~ '.g
;>., s....
o &
5 0
00_
s.... rn
11) ='
E ::::
~~
::: '"Cl
rn Il)
2 tti
.- E
r..:.. ._
......
~
~
,
.....
:::
.....
.....
,.;...
;:<
r..:..J
~ ...,. 0 0 0 ...,. 0 r<1 f"l 0 ("') f"l C -lC -lC
0 l'f'J l'f'J
0- ..... 0 0 0 0 <:> 0\ 0 ..... N C
>. 0\ 00 '" 00 0 0, 0 (;() t- t-, lfl "<t t-, ..... C Q N
~ 0\ ~' 0 ..; 0' 0 0 ..; - l"'i vi ..... r:O 0 1Il .-<
u
"<t ~ \0 t- <t) t- l("j 0\ 0\ (;() r<1 0\ N '0 l'f'J oe
('; ...: 00 t- ll'1 '<T - \I") r-- - - l""l '<T .- "" ~ N \::
> N c ..; ~ ~ \JS ~ ~ l"'i
Q. ..... 0 ..... r<1 l""l ("') f'fl 1Il
I ~ .- ..... ~ ..... ~ Vl ~ Vl
...., .= l'f'J
.- ~ Vl Vl l'f'J
~ ::c ~ ~
'"
Cl
00 00 "" N 0 0 l""l C -lC
.,., l'f'J
0\ 0\ 0\ 0 ~ 0 0 ...,. c
>. 00 00 t-~ 0 r- 0 0 ltJ.. c 'V
N ",,- '-t:)' \1")- c' l/'l
~ r- r<1 ..... ..... ...
ca '-t:) '<T ..... 0\ 0\ - r<1 l("j '0 .-<
...,. N t- N ..... .- ~ f"l <.';l 0\
> N- ~ N ~ ~ ~ f'i N
..... Vl Vl Vl M
'" ~ :0-
s:: co ~
.e .,
-€
C. .,
>
0 0
u - .=
'" .0 "'C 00 ("') ..... 00 r<1 0 0 N C M
~ ., r<1 00 N \0 0\ 0 0 00 c oe
"'C r- oo "" 00 0, 0, 0 l("j c
s::: ::;l l/'l
0 ::I U o- r--:- eO (",r '<T 0 0 .n- o vi
U 0 e.- o N N '<T 00 0 ..... "" '0
U .,., ..... \0 '<T N ..... (A ...,. ~ Q
r:l N Vl N Vl ~ ~ l"'i -.::t~
-c Vl Vl Vl l'f'J
III
E r..<':
cd
:;;:
r<1 '<T N 0\ 0 0 0 0\ C 0\
i: 0 r- ...,. ..... 0 0 0 ..... c -
III N, N '<T 0'1 o. \I") 0 ...,. C -.::t
s::: ..... 0:: 00 r:O .,., N' 0:: .n- .,..,.. 0
-E r<1 00 "" 00 t- \0 t- o l'-..
.- '-t:) \0 ..... ...,. r<1 Vl - ..... ~ l'f'J
- r:l ~ N- Vl l"'i ~ ~ ..; Q
..:;) 0-
:= III ~ Vl Vl 'V
0 0 t.I':
III
...
E:
,......,
,......, :::R
0
:::R - -
0 .,., "l
.,., 0 c
0
III 0\ C!- U :::
0 c
= - '" b!I .::
cd '-" .... III C 0
t::: ... l::: .g .2 III c .. -
::l s::: ;:: - c:
cd ...... '" ('; ('; c - ~ ~
Ci5 ..... s::: <:ii s:: 0.. ~ ~ ~
ii - U III ~
l::: t::: '" E u :> E :> ;>. ... .s:
s::: .:l III 1S III c:.l
'6 r:l cd t) .: III 0 III t::: - ';
'" u ... t) ... c.. ~
U5 Ci5 0 'E 0 i3 c.. Q. -
--0 U r:l .- >. >. ~ 0 l:: >.
...: '" c 0) is.. ..:;) u ..:;) III =
C .~ t::: -c ... ... - ~
:;:. .g ~ U III .. III E: ~ c:
"'" -c ... ... -
s:: c:: -c * - ...: ~ '" ~ "l c..
...... ..... -
III '" ii ~ s:: * ...... E
E ... > ('; -c ii -c lii :;3 <;; ~ ~ = c:.l
III - ..... =
Q) 0.. III .5 '" CI:l III ~E '" III < C
Ol) 0 ..... .~ III E (;;j - ::I ~E ::l '5 .- ~
'" c.. .;:; is.. ..:::: c.. .~ ~ Cl - 0 - .s
C III III ..... - :e .5 :e -c = - >. >-.
tIl ..... ..... ~ =- Q) S- o -c ...... c:.l ...... ......
~ t.:: t.:: > '" 5 -c 0 5 -c 0 .. z - -
Vi ti5 0 t..:..l tU e-- < f- < f- l"J
r<1
r<1
i:
u
E
III
Ol)
tIl ...;
::: c
r:l Q)
E E
-c 0)
c OIl
r:l r:l
~ @
o E
u -c
d) s:::
c cd
Cd)
o s:::
E C
III 0
c.. '"
-- ...
III III
t) 0.
c--
r:l III
s::: U
t;: @
..... s:::
o t;: .
Ill...U
te 0 ...,
E ...... ;e
...;::: u')
'" 8 ><
u-ctU
'" III s:::
8::: 0 0
is 0. C
'" 0 ~
.~ 0.. e
-c ~ lii
tel ";:; 0
~ .~ ~
.....
IU ""0 $
> CI:l '"
o U 0
.{--E~
Q. ~ 0)
...., 0 ;;;
_~ vi'u
c 0
"ia .e g:;
...... > .... cd
'" I 0. U
8 .~ ~ oS
ca !- E %
.g Q) i: ra
~-5 8]
-c '"
r:l
g
]0
cd~<
c>(..:..,
III !- ::::
E--gO
1a '" ca
~t :~
e<:g
~..,..,~ '"
~ -.~
:c 0 r--
::;l (..:.., .~
Cl >-. 'E
~ ~ ...
::~~
~ ~ g
'" ......
-c 0.
BO
'"
8 ~
.~ r-
o
:z
EXH!BIT 13
r<1
r<1
\I")
r<1
00
r<1
-c
.~
...
<E
=
.2
E
'"
u
...
t.:::
is
i:2
'"
i:
r:l
en
.....
o
u
'"
::1"'0
'" r:l
U ~
EI::
5; ~
"'0
< *
* *
....
~
l:::
'"
U5
<
t.:...
::::
o
EXHIBIT C
Fire and Emergency Response Service Analysis .
Options for Retaining Additional DRF A Employees and Associated Costs
Alameda County and Twin Valley Contract Options
Alameda County Twin Valley
Contract Contract'"
Net Estimated Annual Operating Cost $3,405,582 $3,291,543
DRF A Staff Utilized 35 33
Incremental cost to carry 2 fIrefighters until absorbed $82,000
-
Comparable Annual Cost until absorbed 53,405,582 53,373,543
DRFA Staff Utilized 35 35
Incremental cost to carry I battalion chief until absorbed $25,000 $115,000
Comparable Annual Cost until absorbed 53,430,582 53,488,543
DRFA StaffUtilized 36 36
Initial Year - Apply Estimated Buy-in for Truck ($145,000) :.
Total Comparable Initial Year Cost 53,430,582 53,343,543
DRF A Staff Utilized 36 -... .
36 -.. .
· Assumes use of Santa Rita fIre station for no additional cost.
.,
.
,'.
-. -.
., ,
).,6 [XfilBIT C
l)L I 11 ":;Ib ~1; \::J3I--'I'1 LJuU';HEh:TY F lRE
P.2/3
.
AOmlnlslrotlon
Phone: 510-838-6600
Fax: 510-838-6629
SAN RAMON VALLEY
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
1500 Bollinger Conyon Road
Son Ramon, California 94583
Fire Prevention
Phono~ 510-838-6680
Fox: 510-838-6696
October 8. 1996
Chief Karl D. Diekman
Dougherty Regional Fire Authority
9399 Firc,rest Lane
San Ramon, CA 94583
DOUGI-./t- .
(:'.... 'l~f!ry ~"~
: 'It. t:' t, . '1 :....,,.... I
"i.I-:-I..'_-''"',O^"
, , .. , - '~-"L.
" . ':~" .,
0'-,',:, ",
I.. l
-- '. {Dl""
r~' ..J ,..,
WQ ~ <<;. ....J
~UWfJ;@
Re: Firefighter/Paramedic Bmployment Opponunities
Dcar Chief Dickman:
."
In Pebt\lary of 1997, the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District will be hiring
Firefighter/Paramedics and conducting the District's 97-1 Firefighter/Paramedic Academy. Th~
District would like to extend an invitation to interested Dougherty Regional Fire Authority
employees to participate it! the District's standard hiring process for the ("ntry level
Firefighter/Paramedic positions. Prospect.ive employees must be available for employment with
the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District in February 1997.
The District nonnally requires that individuals seeking employment as a Firefighter/Paramedic
hold a California Paramedic certification as well as Firefighter I certification. As such, the
invitation is extended to those Dougherty employees who are currently California certified as a
Paramedic. However, at this time only, the District will waive the Paramedic certification to
those Dougherty Regional Fire Authority employees who are currently enrolled in DOllghelty's
Paramedic program. This requirement exception is contingent upon successful completion of the
Paramedic program and confinnation of state Paramedic cenification.
In addition to the requirements set forth above. the prospective employee must successfully
complete to the District's satisfaction the following:
· Oral Interview
· Skills Evaluation
· Background Investigation
· Psychological Evaluation
Medical Examination/Evaluation
e:: Interested palties must submit a letter of interest to my attention no later than November l. 1996.
),/
EXHIBIT 2
V..... I .1.1 :;lb U.l' U'-lr-'I'I lJUUGHt../'.: I Y r It-<:t.
Chief Karl D. Diek.man
Dougherty Regional Fin:; Authority
October 8, 1996
Page Two
Thank you for taking the time to review this infonnation. Please feel free to contact me should
YOll have any questions regarding the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District's hiring process
or the inv itation outlined in this letter.
1
j'
1
.I
J
I
Sincerely,
~~/k-~
Chief
cc: Dl\tl Benfield
WDth'l
})-
P.3/3
.
.'
.
~.
:."
. . -.
,.
,~
Twin Valley Fire Department
DATE:
October 30, 1996
TO:
Richard Ambrose, Dublin City Manager U
Deborah Acosta, Pleasanton City Manag~~p--'" .
Jerry Peeler, Livermore City Manager ~.
Stewart Gary, Twin Valley Fire Chief ~
Status of Twin Valley Fire Department Fonnation
FROM:
SUBJECT:
As requested by the Dublin City Council at its meeting on October 1, 1996, the Twin Valley Fire
Department partners completed several critical elements needed to implement the partnership. These
accomplishments were made within an extremely tight timeframe and are outlined below. HopefullYf
these accomplishments will demonstrate to the City of Dublin that the Twin Valley Fire Department is
a reality and can assume fire department operations for Dublin at midnight, July 1, 1997, or at another
earlier, mutually agreed upon date.
L Management
A. Fire Chief and Command Staff
The two partner City Managers have appointed Stewart Gary, Livermore Fire Chief, as the
Twin Valley Fire Chief. He is actively working with the command staffs to functionally
consolidate them into one operational management team by late December.
The partner cities will completely share chief officers, fire prevention and clerical person-
nel. These costs will be allocated to each partner agency as outlined in the next section.
B. Cost Allocation
The Twin Valley partners hired David M. Griffith & Associates (DMG) to complete the
internal Cost Allocation Plan for the two-city partnership. The DMG team worked with
the partner cities to develop a structure that allows the seamless sharing of resources for
the common good while accurately allocating costs. I am pleased to report both City Man-
agers have agreed to the Cost Allocation Plan.
CITY of DUBLIN
Twin Valley Fire Proposal
EXHIBIT 3
Twin Valley Fire Proposal - October Update
Page 2
Simply, the cost plan spreads all overhead expenses over four areas:
.
· Management Services
· Fire Prevention
· Line Administration
· Hazardous Materials Regulation
The existing combined expenses are placed into each category and then "allocated" to
each partner based on a formula unique to each category as follows:
· Management Services. costs shared 50% each
· Fire Prevention - costs divided by the annual number of inspections
· Line Administration - one-half of these costs is allocated by the number of
fIre companies in each department, the other half is allocated based on the
annual calls for service in each department
· Hazardous Materials - costs are shared 50% each
Each partner City offsets its expenses by whatever fee and permit revenue is received. In
this system the Cities can then set unique fIre. prevention fees. The remaining costs are
allocated to each partner City's General Fund based upon each City's usual and custom-
ary costs for these items.
:.
For the expenses of operating fIre companies, each City will pay for the direct costs of the'
ftre companies and stations located within it. The joint labor agreement will determine
personnel expenses, but each City can add fire stations based upon its mm growth and
ability to fund.
ll. Labor Relations
The partners hired an independent labor relations specialist to conduct Meet and Confer negotiations
with a joint bargaining team from the Livermore and Pleasanton Fire Unions. The Twin Valley part-
ners, along with their workforces, are pleased to report to Dublin the following agreements:
A New Joint Union Agreement
After multiple bargaining sessions, the parties have signed an "Agreement in Principle"
on a comprehensive multiyear contract that completely merges the two workforces into
one. All economic issues and operational language issues have been agreed to by both
parties.
.
CITY of DUBLIN
Twin valley Fire Proposal
.
'.:
, ,
...
'P
Twin Valley Fire Proposal - October Update
Page 3
At this point, the fmallanguage and comprehensive M.O.V. document is being drafted by
our consultant. The finished M.O.V. will then be presented for full ratification votes to
the combined workforce and the two City Councils in November. Both City Councils
were kept informed of the progress of the negotiations and are familiar with the key fman-
cial parameters of the M.O.V.
B. New Sinf:le Union
Livennore Firefighters IAFF Local #2318 and Pleasanton Firefighters IAFF Local #1974
have already taken a formal vote and agreed to merge their Locals under IAFF bylaws.
The papers are being forwarded to the lAFF staff to finish the process. The new unit will
be known as IAFF Local #1974. The President is Bruce Ranney of Livermore and its Vice
President is Larry Howard of Pleasanton. The other 11 Board Officers and members are
from both cities.
Local #1974 wants to express its enthusiasm for a consolidated frre department in the'
Valley and its willingness to openly accept as members employees from the Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority. DRFA employees will have a voice in the new Local and their
existing seniority and rank will be honored as they move into the Twin Valley labor agree.
ment and operational policies.
m. Approval Time Lines
The next steps for the partner Cities are:
. Hold a J .P.A. Board meeting to fmalize the structure and bylaws
. Have Local #1974 ratify the labor agreement
. Have both City Councils adopt the final merger, M.O.D., and cost
allocation plans
We expect to proceed as quickly as possible with these approvals and expect both City Councils to
have completed their deliberations by the first City Council meetings in December. We expect the
joint management team to become operational shortly thereafter.
IV. Other Terms, Conditions and Understandings
A. Employee Hirinf:
As stated in our RFP response, all DRFA personnel crossing over to Twin Valley Fire will
be employed by one employer and be part of one workforce with equal employment
rights and career opportunities.
CITY of DUBLIN
Twin Valley Fire Proposal
Twin Valley Fire Proposal - October Update
Page 4
We stated at the October I, 1996 Dublin City Council meeting that we may not be abl"':
absorb the last two available DRFA Firefighters on July I, 1997. However, Twin Val~
has identified opportunities to enable us to change our position on this issue. We will
absorb the two remaining DRFA personnel at the start of the contract. Along with our
other vacancies and given a 24.person contract option, all 32 DRFA line personnel can be
absorbed.
B. Future Ability to Join Twin Valley Joint Powers Authority
The Twin Valley partners agree that the City of DubUn can reserve theright to join the
Twin Valley Fire Department Joint Powers Authority during the term of Dublin's con-
tract with Twin Valley Fire. Dublin's cost would be based on the cost allocation fonnula
being used by Twin Valley Fire at the time Dublin joins the J.P.A.
C. TenTI of A\:reement
The Twin Valley partners agree to a first contract tenn of five years with Dublin, with
options for two five-year renewals. During final contract negotiations for the first con.
tract, an acceptable re-opener clause will be agreed to by the parties.
Thirty days .ago ~ requested, we committed to proceed wi~ the critical f?nn~ti~n steps for the T.'
Valley partnership. We have met and exceeded our commItment to Dublm Wlthm an unprecedenteu .
timeframe to complete many of the difficult negotiation issues for the fonnation of the Twin Valley
Fire Department
It is this same spirit of commitment, cooperation and "can do" attitude that we will bring to the City
of Dublin as your fire service provider.
.
-. .."
CITY of DUBLIN
Twin Valley Fire Proposal