Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Miscellaneous_11/04/1992_Fire-Rescue Task Force iE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive Tequesta, Florida 33469 -0273 • (407) 575 -6200 3 Fax: (407) 575 -6203 40 C0041 f; C A 4 T E Q U E S T A F I R E - R E S C U E T A S K F O R C E M E E T I N G M I N U T E S N O V E M B E R 4, 1 9 9 2 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Fire - Rescue Task Force held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, November 4, 1992 in the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida. The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m. by Chairman Wade Griest. Task Force members in attendance were: Chairman Wade Griest, Vice Chairman Robert Mortimer, Councilmember Ron T. Mackail, Mervin Crockett, Alec Cameron, Dr. Stanley Jacobs, and Hal Hutchinson. Mayor Earl L. Collings was also in attendance. Task Force member Thomas J. Rodth arrived at 5:35 p.m. Staff members present were: Village Manager, Thomas G. Bradford; Joann Manganiello, Village Clerk; Police Chief Carl Roderick and Deputy Building Official, Steven Kennedy. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA o Mayor Collings desired to comment under Item IV. o Village Manager Bradford asked to report on Fire Rescue Bid Specifications. o Boardmember Jacobs asked to read into the record, under Item IV, a letter from John Giba. o Chairman Griest asked to discuss upcoming meeting schedule under Item V; and discussion under ANY OTHER MATTERS regarding the Task Force's recommendation to the Village Council. o Boardmember Crockett asked to report, under Item IV, on a position paper regarding North County Ambulance. o Boardmember Hutchinson asked to discuss, under Item IV, a partial review of the Fire Rescue Report submitted by Village Manager Bradford at the previous meeting. Boardmember Jacobs also desired to make comment regarding that Report. Recycled Paper Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 2 --------------------- Councilmember Mackail moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Boardmember Crockett seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Mervin Crockett - for Ron T. Mackail - for Wade Griest - for Robert Mortimer - for Dr. Stanley Jacobs - for Alec Cameron - for Hal Hutchinson - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (October 28, 1992) Boardmember Cameron moved to approve the Fire - Rescue Task Force Minutes of October 28, 1992 as submitted. Boardmember Jacobs seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Mervin Crockett - for Ron T. Mackail - for Wade Griest - for Robert Mortimer - for Dr. Stanley Jacobs - for Alec Cameron - for Hal Hutchinson - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. IV. o Mayor Collings stated that, although at the last meeting he announced that he may be an ex- officio member of all Committees, he has since been informed by the Village Attorney that that was not so, and that he was glad to hear it, since that meant that he could talk to committee members without worrying about "The Sunshine Law ". He pointed out to the Board that the Fire Rescue Report presented by the Village Manager at the last meeting was not a recommendation but a response to the request of the Task Force. He felt the Board was not yet ready to make a recommendation to the Village Council. Mayor Collings passed out copies of a list of "Questions on Tequesta Fire Rescue Proposal" (Attachment " A " ), given to him by Donald Seay, to the Task Force members. Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4 1992 Page 3 --------------------- o Boardmember Hutchinson submitted to the Board, as well as citizens in attendance, a partial assessment of the Fire Rescue Report (see Attachment "B "). He felt the Report did not meet any of the criteria established by the Village Council. He further felt the Report had no benefits to the Village or any other community, and asked to be supplied with Mr. Bradford's purchase cost assessments for fire /rescue equipment. Boardmember Crockett felt he would like to review Mr. Hutchinson's assessment of the Report before making a recommendation, but that he would like to make a statement regarding North County Ambulance. Boardmember Jacobs felt it was feasible for Tequesta to have its own Fire Department and contract with North County Ambulance and do so cost - effectively. o Boardmember Crockett read into the record a Statement regarding North County Ambulance (NCA). It was his position that the contract offered by NCA to Tequesta and Jupiter Inlet Colony was a reasonable one and recommended that the Village accept the proposal. He felt that there was no need for in -house rescue services. Contract with North County Ambulance with our own fire department. o Boardmember Hutchinson said he was not prepared to recommend anything. Vice Chairman Mortimer stated that a large fire department has benefits, as well does a small fire department. When each is weighed out, they can run pretty close together. He was concerned that questions he had posed to PBC F /R, i.e., for the last three years in Tequesta, the number of: o fires; o HASMAT calls; o fire deaths; o rescues; and o estimated fire loss, have not yet been answered. These answers are needed so that the Task Force might determine the kind of department needed in Tequesta. Chairman Griest suggested that Chief Mortimer contact PBC Chief Iacona directly to receive answers to those questions. Chief Mortimer felt Village Manager Bradford's Report on Fire /Rescue Report was excellent. Chief Mortimer's comments on the Report were as follows: Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 5 --------------------- o Fire Apparatus: Recommendation was to purchase a new as opposed to a refurbished unit in ladders. Refurbished units pose problems. He recommends getting a four -wheel drive brush trucks: the State Forestry Service will loan brush units which are already set up (some being brand new) -the Village would only have to pay the insurance and upkeep; or they can be purchased from STARK as government surplus (federal government surplus) in Ft. Myers for $100 /each, which can be refurbished for less than $3000. Boardmember Cameron felt the Fire Rescue Report had elements of a workable plan. He felt that labor costs reflected in the Report were probably comparable to what a contracted entity would have to spend for the same thing, but only to have that entity increase their price at a later date. He questioned as to whether bids should even be sought. He believes Mr. Bradford's numbers are accurate, and doesn't think anyone can do much better. Chief Mortimer felt it was necessary to explore all other aspects and avenues, and felt bids should be solicited. Councilmember Mackail felt that, mechanically, the Fire Rescue Report was a workable plan. He agreed: competitive bids should be sought; and Tequesta needed to control its own destiny. He wants a first -class operation, wants to do it right and look at the long -term picture. He believes we have an obligation to deliver a service that is cost - effective and the best for Tequesta with or without Jupiter Inlet Colony. o Boardmember Jacobs read a letter from John Giba into the record (Attachment "C"): paramedics should administer medical care and transportation; allow firefighters to fight fires only. Boardmember Rodth arrived at 5:35 p.m. Boardmember Jacobs felt a useful piece of equipment would be a QRV quick response vehicle (approximately $48,000) (equipped for medical and fire) to be used as a first - response vehicle to be backed up by NCA. He felt NCA's proposal under Plan A, with two paramedics and one EMT, was best suited for Tequesta's needs. It was Boardmember Jacobs' recommendation that Tequesta: develop its own fire department; hire a Fire Chief; contract NCA for medical services. Boardmember Jacobs also thought a drive for funds - raise $100,000 - $200,000 should be considered (perhaps a golf tournament). Boardmember Rodth stated that he and the Commission of Jupiter Inlet Colony felt the Fire Rescue Report was a workable plan and that a contract with NCA was the most cost - effective. Fire- Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4 1992 Page 4 --------------------- o Fire - Medics (page 3): If Tequesta operates under an independent department, this should be evaluated carefully: five firefighters with the capability of using two hose streams, instead of a department with three firefighters which should handle the majority of calls. Five people over three is double the manpower; o Auxiliary (page 6): If auxiliary personnel are used, be certain to train them and use them in combat; otherwise, the department will not be able to keep them. Auxiliary personnel join to fight fires and are not as concerned about the dollars; o Training and education (page 9): Use the National Fire Academy in Emmetsburg, Maryland. The only cost is the food - the Federal Government pays for everything else. Chief Mortimer stated he has attended this Academy for eight years consecutively, (most recently in class with the Chief of the Los Angeles Fire Department), and feels that better training cannot be found. o Fire Code Enforcement (page 15): Chief Mortimer recommended that the Village adopt the 1991 Code and update every three years; recommended adoption of strong sprinkler code for new construction (the same cost factor as installing carpet) , and after 5 -6 years there is given an insurance break; o Vehicle Maintenance: Chief Mortimer felt the quote for aerial ladder testing at $4500 was a bit high, since that usually costs around $600. o New Equipment: Guarantees are from 12, 24 months and sometimes more, saving the department maintenance costs. o Membership Dues: Chief Mortimer recommended the International Firefighters Training Association, Oklahoma state (a leader in fire service) be used, which charges $75.00 /year. o Lease /Purchase: Consider local banks: who sometimes have lower rates, as well as allowing the monies to stay within the community. Consideration should also be given to government and state grants, as well as private donations - (Town of Palm Beach has not purchased a fire truck in ten years - it has all been donated). Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4 1992 Page 6 --------------------- o Village Manager Bradford submitted, and reviewed with the Board, a draft of bid specifications for the Village of Tequesta Fire /Rescue Protection, based on a motion made at the last Fire /Rescue Task Force Meeting (see attachment "D "): The draft asks for two alternate bids: 1) Village of Tequesta doing fire only; and 2) fire and EMS contracted out. The specs are for a five -year bid proposal, with a statement of costs per year, and a statement of overall benefits. Wackenhut needs six months from signing of contract to be on site and operational. Mr. Bradford stated the Village could not do the same as fast. If bids are sought, the deadline for response should be by 5:00 p.m. on December 14, with a pre - bid conference on December 1, making a decision no later than February 1, 1993, by which time the Task Force would be non- existent. Boardmember Crockett expressed reservations about contracting out for fire services. V. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF TEQUESTA FIRE /RESCUE SERVICE OPTIONS. Councilmember Mackail stated that, considering the time constraints, it might be beneficial for Tequesta to consider having its own fire department, with possibly considering contracting with NCA in the beginning, with eyes toward the future of Tequesta developing its own EMS services as needed. It appears that the original ten options are now down to three and perhaps only one. Assuming that a contract with an outside provider would probably not be any less than what it would cost the Village to provide its own fire service, the Board felt the only lesser expense could be in labor costs, and felt that lesser labor costs would only offer inferior labor, or labor unrest. Mr. Bradford stated that looking at Tequesta's General Government ($700,000), the only area of that which might experience upward pressure by the Village having its own fire department, would be legal services, which is presently approximately $75,000 /year. Boardmember Crockett stated he did not agree with Boardmember Hutchinson's concept of a 25% increase in G & A (Government and Administration). Business doesn't operate that way. It operates incrementally, and the incremental cost is minimal. Boardmember Jacobs asked Mr. Bradford if he thought we can do this operation for the $1M which we had between Tequesta and Jupiter Inlet Colony. Mr. Bradford replied, yes. Mr. Crockett commented that the nubmers prove it. Fire- Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 7 --------------------- Mr. Bradford stated that he is working on a long -term project, trying to establish what the local Jupiter /Tequesta economic multiplier is, in order to inform local businessmen what the dollar impact to the local economy would be by virtue of expenditures of Tequesta - Jupiter Inlet Colony- Jupiter -Juno Beach, particularly if a regional fire department was created, the positive impact to this local economy, by virtue of spending the money locally as opposed to paying to Palm Beach County. Boardmember Cameron noted that the money we save between Tequesta and Jupiter Inlet Colony could be spent on something else. He also noted that if we assume that Tequesta doesn't pull out of PBC F/R and other cities do, Palm Beach County's operating costs will go up and up. We have to consider that other cities may do the same thing (opt out). Boardmember Crockett moved that no Requests For Proposals be sent out to outside providers for the fire department. Boardmember Cameron seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Mervin Crockett - for Ron T. Mackail - for Wade Griest - for Robert Mortimer - against Dr. Stanley Jacobs - for Alec Cameron - for Hal Hutchinson - against Thomas Rodth - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. VI. ANY OTHER MATTERS A. Village Manager Bradford read, for the record, a list of written questions submitted by Donald Seay, and answered each individually: Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 8 --------------------- 1. What arrangements have been made for mutual aid? Have contracts been negotiated? What will the costs to Tequesta be to have an adequate backup? How does this consideration affect the ISO rating? No contracts have been negotiated. Mr. Bradford has spoken with Bill O'Brien, Director of Public Safety of Martin County and official source for the above subject; with Steve Wolfberg, Director of EMS of Martin County; corresponded with Mrs. Sue Whittle about Fire Rescue; spoken with Commissioner elect, Janet Gettig, Martin County regarding the above. Mr. O'Brien indicated Martin County would be most interested in entering into Mutual Aid (reciprocal) with Tequesta. Mutual benefit of the automatic response scenario as appears in the Fire Rescue Report was also discussed. Martin County currently operates that way and would be happy to look into such an arrangement with Tequesta. Chief Arrants of Palm Beach Gardens would be happy to have Tequesta join them in NAMAC regarding mutual aid. This benefits the ISO rating since Tequesta can show that "x" number of men will be at the scene. A mutual aid agreement counts as points regarding ISO rating, rating the fire department, on a scale of 1 to 10. The better a department is, the better the rating. Lake Park only has seven full - time people, a regular Class A Pumper and a Mini Pumper, is a member of NAMAC and has a rating of Class 4. 2. What is the source for the 15 auxiliary officers? How can these be adequately trained and experienced for $100 per month? What requirements will be placed on them concerning availability and responsiveness? The source of the officers would be the Jupiter /Tequesta /southern Martin County unincorporated market areas. The $100 /month is what other departments are paying. Some pay nothing. Responsibilities of the auxiliary force will be designated by the Fire Chief. 3. Please explain what is meant by "ISO Class 4. Does this relate to staffing levels, response time, or some other measure of effectiveness of service? Is certification by NFPA or some other agency required to ascertain the actual class for a particular community? This is a critical concern because a change in this rating could affect insurance premium levels for residential and commercial property owners. Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 9 Mr. Bradford gave an overview of the ISO rating system and stated again that he feels Tequesta will maintain a Class 4 rating. 4. What professionals have helped Mr. Bradford in developing his proposal? Does this proposal constitute a recommendation approved by outside experts, or is it just Tom's opinion of two possible options? It's just Tom's opinion of two possible options. Mr. Bradford and Police Chief Carl Roderick interviewed Fire Chief Arrants and Fire Chief Elmore questioning them thoroughly on different aspects of capital, personnel, and operating expenses. Other professionals used were: Bill Kascavelis, Finance Director; Steven Kennedy, Deputy Building Official, etc., are our own people. 5. What specific apparatus, gear, or training will be provided to handle hazardous waste spill cleanup? What costs will be absorbed by the Village to obtain the necessary backup in the case of an emergency? No specific apparatus, gear or training was placed in the Budget. Monies are in miscellaneous equipment and appear there to allow the Fire Chief to have the resources necessary to cover those items. Mr. Bradford envisions no dollars being spent to have necessary backup, because of reciprocal mutual aid. 6. Has Palm Beach County Fire Rescue reviewed the proposal for comments on the comparison of the proposed services with their operation? Could they possibly alter their contract with Tequesta to provide a service level equal to that proposed at a lower price? Mr. Bradford didn't know if PBC F/R reviewd the Report and asked Chief Jack Fredrickson if PBC had. Chief Jack Fredrickson responded from the audience regarding mutual aid stating that services must be equal to Palm Beach County in order for PBC to provide reciprocal mutual aid, and Mr. Bradford suggested that if Tequesta wanted to pay for mutual aid we could probab -ly contract with PBC. Boardmember Rodth suggested that if PBC abandons Station 11 in the future, wouldn't PBC and Tequesta desire mutual aid? Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 10 --------------------- 7. What is the financial status of North County Ambulance? Can we be sure of their existence in t he future? Mr. Bradford assumes the financial status is good. Jupiter Hospital would not take them over if their financial status was bad. Their existence in the future cannot be absolutely and positively assured, but its likely to exist since they are now under Jupiter Hospital. 8. What cost escalation provision has been provided in North County Ambulance's proposed contract of $166,000 per year for EMS service? Has this proposal been formalized? There is no cost escalation provision, so it is subject to show up on an annual basis, based upon the way it is written today. The proposal in the Fire Rescue Report has not been any more formalized that which is there, but reasonable assurance received from Peter Allen, NCA, and Art Ransdale of Jupiter Hospital indicates that Tequesta can budget and count on the dollar figure given by them for the first year of operation. 9. Please provide a cost savings analysis for the two proposals based on a per resident basis. My estimates are that based on cost savings provided, this translates to between $3.82 to $8.55 per month less compared to PBC /FR's present basis for cost (based on estimated millage difference on a property appraised at $150,000.) If the ERU method is adopted, this difference is even less. Estimated 1993 startup costs translate to about $120 to $170 from this property owner's 1993 taxes. This can be done on a per resident basis, or a per home basis, using the median value home in Tequesta but time has not yet allowed this opportunity. Preliminary spreadsheets show that if PBC F/R continues with the historical increase of 13.7 %, and choose the ERU avenue, and Tequesta decides on the NCA contract, with a 7% increase per year for Tequesta - after fives years the cost of the ERU method vs. the Tequesta cost using millage rate, the Tequesta costs are less. Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 11 --------------------- 10. Please address how traffic problems would be avoided in an emergency situation with a fire station adjacent to the police station, library, etc. If the Fire Station is located behind the Village Hall, the present walkway that exists, steps and handrails, will be cut off. Arrangements in the driveway area can be made, by moving signs and impediments, and perhaps police cars parked at an angle, to allow free and clear access straight out. It is expected that a firefighter, on first call, will stand in the traffic area to determine whether it is clear for the fire truck to exit the station. A flashing light could be placed to stop traffic on Tequesta Drive. 11. How can having a $$computer literate" fire chief eliminate the need for a secretary? Why aren't the cost of secretarial services included in the cost estimates? In the beginning, the need for secretarial services will not be eliminated. Part -time secretarial services are budgeted in the General Budget. Existing secretaries can also be used. Much paperwork will be done before the Fire Chief is put in place. However, on a regular, routine basis, a Fire Chief does not need to have a full -time secretary, in Mr. Bradford's opinion. 12. What is the estimated employee turnover rate for the two plans? What are the expected cost and service level impacts due to expected turnover rates? Employee turnover rate was not factored in. It is hoped there would be no significant turnover, as is the case for other Tequesta employees. 13. Has the structural integrity of the existing garage been thoroughly assessed to verify the feasibility of adding a second floor at the $39,450 estimated cost? The $39,450 does not include adding the second story. If the Village is forced to do that, the monies will need to be found, in the event Tequesta does not acquire Station 11. A structural engineer and the Village Deputy Building Official, who has Degree in Building Construction Services from the University of Florida have both thoroughly reviewed the garage. The cost estimates came from them and a General Contractor, to renovate the garage. Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 12 --------------------- 14. How were the millage rates for the potential regional fire /rescue department derived? The Village Finance Director acquired the assessed values from the Property Appraisers Office using property control numbers for Jupiter properties on the Tequesta side of the River, unincorporated PBC on the Tequesta side of the River, etc.: Multiplied the assessed value by .95 %, divided those numbers into the Budget numbers, giving the millage rate. 15. Where did the $10,000 cost for a 3- bedroom mobile home come from? Chief Roderick obtained those prices from a dealership in Stuart, which included the cost of a used mobile home, plus the utility hook -up and set -up charges. 16. Why were 1993 salaries projected at the low end of the proposed salary ranges? Was the survey done on 1992 levels? Total compensation levels should be increased at least 10% (about $40,000) to account for salaries being near the average of the proposed ranges. Salaries were projected at the low end of the scale because the Tequesta Wage Survey showed that we would be above average or at average for each position by paying the recommended dollar figure, plus the fact of 12,000 certified unemployed firefighters in the State of Florida, plus recession. Standard procedures for Tequesta for new hires: after 6 months, a satisfactory or better evaluation is rewarded with 2.5% raise; at first anniversary, anywhere from 0 -5% and another merit raise (average has been just under 3.5 %); projected COLA to be 3% on October 1, 1993. B. The Board determined that the next Fire Rescue Task Force Meeting would be held on Monday, November 9, at 4:30 p.m. Boardmember Jacobs commented that all the members should try to come to a decision at the next meeting as to what the Task Force should recommend. Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4 1992 Page 13 --------------- - - - - -- VII. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC John Bartlett, PBC /FR, stated he was told by Mr. Bradford that there were no plans to use an auxiliary force for sick time, vacation or overtime, but that the Tequesta Fire Rescue Report says otherwise. Mr. Bradford answered that, the Budget contemplates that the department will remain fully functional without the need of any volunteers. If the Chief wants to use volunteers to augment full -time forces, or reduce overtime, he will be allowed to make that decision. Richard Berube asked Mr. Bradford for his qualifications for putting together a Fire Rescue Report which should have been done by a professional, stating that Mr. Bradford was not a professional. Mr. Bradford stated that: 1) if someone had been hired to do the Report, citizens probably would have criticized the funds spent; 2) he has a Bachelors Degree in Political Science, a Masters Degree in Public Administration, been in City Management for twelve years, enough experience to qualify him for being fully capable of putting together an outline of Fire /Rescue which demystifies the subject for the citizens of that municipality. Boardmember Hutchinson left the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Chairman Griest suggested that Mr. Berube get together with Mr. Bradford to discuss in more detail any concerns he might have. Fire - Rescue Task Force Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Page 14 --------------- - - - - -- VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no other matters before the Board, Boardmember Crockett moved that the meeting be adjourned. Boardmember Rodth seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Mervin Crockett - for Thomas Rodth - for Wade Griest - for Robert Mortimer - for Dr. Stanley Jacobs - for Alec Cameron - for the meeting was adjourned at 7:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Fran Bitters Recording Secretary Date Approved: ATTEST: J nn Manganie o Village Clerk Questions on Tequesta Fire - Rescue Proposal 1. What arrangements have been made for mutual aid? Have contracts been negotiated? What will the costs to Tequesta be to have an adequate backup`? How does this consideration affect the ISO rating? 2. What is the source for the 15 auxiliary officers? How can these be adequately trained and experienced for $ 100 per month? What requirements will be placed on them concerning availability and responsiveness? 3. Please explain what is meant by "ISO class 4." Does this relate to staffing levels, response time, or some other measure of effectiveness of service? Is certification by NFPA or some other agency required to ascertain the actual class for a particular community? This is a critical concern because a change in this rating could affect insurance premium levels for residential and commercial property owners. 4. What professionals have helped Mr. Bradford in developing his proposal? Does this proposal constitute a recommendation approved by outside experts, or is it just Tom's opinion of two possible options? 5. What specific apparatus, gear, or training will be provided to handle hazardous waste spill cleanup? What costs will be absorbed by the Village to obtain the necessary backup in the case of an emergency? 6. Has Palm Beach County Fire - Rescue reviewed the proposal for comments on the comparison of the proposed services with their operation? Could they possibly alter their contract with Tequesta to provide a service level equal to that proposed at a lower price? 7. What is the financial status of North County Ambulance? Can we be sure of their existence in the future? 8. What cost escalation provision has been provided in North County Ambulance's proposed contract of $ 166,000 per year for EMS service? Has this proposal been formalized? 9. Please provide a cost savings analysis for the two proposals based on a per resident basis. My estimates are that based on cost savings provided, this translates to between $ 3.82 to $ 8.55 per month less compared to PBCFR's present basis for cost (based on estimated millage difference on a property appraised at $150,000.) If the ERU method is adopted, this difference is even less. Estimated 1993 startup costs translate to about $120 to $170 from this property owner's 1993 taxes. 10. Please address how traffic problems would be avoided in an emergency situation with a fire station adjacent to the police station, library, etc. 1 1. How can having a "computer literate" fire chief eliminate the need for a secretary? Why aren't the cost of secretarial services included in the cost estimates? 12. What is the estimated employee turnover rate for the two plans? What are the expected cost and service level impacts due to expected turnover rates? 13. Has the structural integrity of the existing garage been thoroughly assessed to verify the 1 feasibility of adding a second floor at the $39,450 estimated cost'? 14. How were the millage rates for the potential regional fire- rescue department derived? 15. Where did the $10,000 cost for a 3- bedroom mobile home come from? 16. Why were 1993 salaries projected at the low end of the proposed salary ranges? Was the survey done on 1992 levels? Total compensation levels should be increased at least 10% (about $40,000) to account for salaries being near the average of the proposed ranges. 2 Q I •4 ♦ 7� TO: TEQUESTA FIRE RESCUE TASK FORCE FROM: HAROLD "HAL" HUTCHINSON SUBJECT: RECORD OF PARTIAL ASSESSMENT "TEQUESTA FIRE RESCUE REPORT" DATE: 4 NOVEMBER 1992 MY ASSESSMENT TO DATE OF THE SUBJECT REPORT WAS MADE IN CONCERT WITH CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY VILLAGE COUNCIL -- "EQUAL OR BETTER, NO COMPRO- MISE IN THE QUALITY OF SERVICES, LESS COST, NO VOLUNTEERS ". FOR THE RECORD, "THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY MR. BRADFORD DOES NOT MEET ANY OF THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY VILLAGE COUNCIL. HERE IS WHY: AREAS ASSESSED 1 - STAFFING LEVEL AND STRUCTURE. 2- STAFF SALARIES. 3- TOTAL COSTS. 4- EQUIPMENT COST COMPARISON. COMMENTS 1- STAFFING LEVEL AND STRUCTURE. A- A FIRE CHIEF WITH ONLY FIFTEEN (15) "FIREFIGHTERS-PARAMEDICS- LIEUTENANTS", IS INSUFFICIENT AND DOES NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE PERSONNEL COVERAGE FOR "SICK TIME - VACATIONS - WORKER COMP. TIME - TRAINING- ETC. " . OVERTIME WOULD NOT BE ADEQUATE EITHER TO COVER THESE AREAS. IN ORDER TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE STAFFING LEVEL, THREE (3) ADD- ITIONAL PROFESSIONALS WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDED. IN ADDITION, A CAPTAIN SHOULD BE ADDED TO COVER AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR "OPER- ATIONS ACTIVITIES SUCH AS FIRE AND E.M.S. SERVICES- IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE CHIEF ADEQUATE TIME FOR ADMINISTRATION DUTIES. B- STAFF LEVEL IS INSUFFICIENT TO ADEQUATELY COVER "STRUCTURE FIRES AND RESPONSES TO COMMERCIAL CALLS ". VOLUNTEERS WOULD NOT BE ADE- QUATELY TRAINED TO PERFORM THIS IMPORTANT FUNCTION EITHER. 2- STAFF SALARIES A- SALARIES SHOWN FOR THE VARIOUS STAFF POSITIONS IS TOO LOW TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN "PROFESSIONAL, EXPERIENCED PERSONNEL" RE- QUIRED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE FIRE AND E.M.S. SERVICES. SALARIES SHOWN WILL ONLY ATTRACT "ENTRY LEVEL PERSONNEL " . IF HIRED, THEY WOULD REQUIRE CONSTANT TRAINING, ONLY GAIN EXPER- IENCE ON THE JOB AND LEAVE TO JOIN OTHER FIRE /EMS COMPANIES, WHO DO PAY HIGHER SALARIES. 3- TOTAL COSTS. TOTAL COSTS ARE SHOWN IN ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REPORT. I ALSO HAVE SHOWN A FIVE (5) YEAR PROJECTED COST COMPARISON BETWEEN "P.B.C. FIRE RESCUE AND TEQUESTA FIRE RESCUE" NOTE: COSTS FOR 1994 AND PROJECTED COSTS BEYOND THAT PERIOD USE "MR. BRADFORDS ANNUAL INCREASES OF 9% FOR TEQUESTA AND 13.7% FOR P.B.C. FIRE RESCUE ". IN ADDITION, I HAVE INCLUDED A SUMMARY WHICH SHOWS EXACTLY "HOW MUCH MORE" A TEQUESTA FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT WILL COST THE RESID- ENTS OVER THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS THESE COST PROJECTIONS AND THE SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL COST IN THE YEARS SHOWN, CLEARLY SHOW THAT IT WILL TAKE UNTIL THE YEAR "2000" TO BEGIN TO SAVE MONEY " $14,712.00 " . HOWEVER, IT WILL HAVE COST A TOTAL OF " 1,571,761.00 ", TO GET TO THAT POINT. CONCLUSION: MY LIMITED ASSESSMENT TO DATE OF "MR. BRADFORDS FIRE RESCUE REP- ORT" HAS CONVINCED ME-- - THERE ARE NO BENIFITS TO THIS VILLAGE, OR OR ANY OTHER COMMUNITY, TO EVEN CONSIDER IMPLEMENTING HIS PLAN. NOTE: I HAVE INCLUDED A COST COMPARISON BETWEEN " TEQUESTA AND PBCFR" FOR EQUIPMENT MR. BRADFORD MAINTAINS HE CAN PURCHASE HIS EQU- IPMENT FOR V/S WHAT PBCFR PAYS FOR THEIRS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A GROSS DIFFERENCE THERE ALSO. RESPECTFULLY, HARD "HA 11 �L�TSBA1 ATTACHMENTS HLH /hlh CC'S TO: CONCERNED CITIZENS IN ATTENDANCE VILLAGE COUNCIL TOM BRADFORD NEWS MEDIA SALARY COST ASSESSMENT F/Y 1993 $ 181,033.00 Total cost shown for salaries 79,031.00 25 % for Admin /Finance (G & A cost) $ 260,064.00 Village actual cost for F/R 5 months 332,255.00 PBC Fire - Rescue for 5 months $ 592,319.00 Actual Village Cost for 5 months 465,157.00 PBC Fire - Rescue for 7 months $1,057,476.00 Total F/R cost for 1993 797,410.00 PBC Fire - Rescue Cost for 1993 $ 260,066.00 Additional Cost to the Village TEQUESTA FIRE RESCUE W /EMS IN HOUSE F/Y 1993 $ 456,785.00 Net Expenditures 79,031.00 25 % Admin /Finance /G &A cost 5 months $ 535,816.00 Actual Village Cost for F/R 5 months 332,255.00 PBC Fire - Rescue for 5 months $ 868,071.00 Actual Village Cost for 5 months 465,157.00 PBC Fire - Rescue Cost for 7 months $1,333,228.00 True Cost to Village for 1993 797,410.00 PBC Fire - Rescue Contract Cost $ 535,818.00 More Cost than with PBCFR It's obvious, by these numbers, it will cost the residents of Tequesta $ 535,818.00 more in F/Y 1993 to implement your plan. It's also obvious you have not considered sharing this cost with "Jupiter Inlet Colony." TEQUESTA FIRE RESCUE W /EMS IN HOUSE F/Y 1994 $ 952,490.00 Net Expenses 206,746.00 25 % for Admin /Finance /G &A F/Y 1994 $1,159,236.00 Total Village Cost F/Y 1994 906,655.00 PBCFR with 13.7 % increase $ 252,581.00 More Cost than with PBCFR FIVE (5) YEAR PROJECTION F/Y TEQUESTA/9% PBCFR /13.7% DIFFERENCE 1995 $ 1,263,567.00 $ 1,030,867.00 + 232,700.00 1996 $ 1,377,288.00 $ 1,172,095.00 + 205,193.00 1997 $ 1,501,244.00 $ 1,332,672.00 + 163,572.00 1998 $ 1,636,356.00 $ 1,515,249.00 + 121,107.00 1999 $ 1,783,628.00 $ 1,722,838.00 + 60,790.00 FIVE (5) YEAR TOTAL $ 768,650.00 2000 $ 1,944,155.00 $ 1,958,867.00 >14,712.00< SEVEN (7) YEAR ADDITIONAL COST SUMMARY 1993 $ 535,818.00 1994 $ 252,581.00 1995 $ 232,700.00 1996 $ 205,193.00 1997 $ 163,572.00 1998 $ 121,107.00 1999 $ 60,790.00 TOTAL $1,571,761.00 ♦ 4 w TEQUESTA FIRE RESCUE EQUIPMENT COST TEQUESTA COST PBCFR COST Class A - 1,250 G.P.M. Pumper (New) $ 175,000.00 $ 228,000.00 = (41) (Equipment) 31,475.00 50,755.00 Total. $ 206,475.00 $ 278,755.00 75' Aerial Ladder Truck $ 233,000.00 $ 345,000.00 (41) (Equipment) 31,475.00 60,000.00 Total $ 254,475.00 $ 405,000.00 Rescue Unit (New) (42) -. J � $ 50,000.00 $ 85,000.00 (Equipment) 25,400.00 $ 39,037.00 Total $ 75,400.00 $ 124,037.00 Rescue Unit (Used) (42) $ 30,000.00 25,400.00 J. G. REALTY CONSULTANTS John J. Glba Plata 222 - Suito 219 R.R. Real 6.tatu 9tot,. U.S. N1, Tocluata, F1ocida 33488.2742 (407) 748.4800 7z � T6 A.� WVW _ 9� cy -> &cog- ov f. °t. Y-e, ( w� .Vtanatement Coum.littt Feuibility Stu&m R.E. tnve.tawm Mutet tt""Ich J. G. REALTY CONSULTANTS John J . Gib& piss& 222 - Suite 212 H.R. Rest Estate Nrots► U.S. #I, Tequests, FloridR 33460.2742 14071 148.4500 CMo CV44;? s o I At • k) r 5 w O/ s tom p ( Z%,Ot elll a WV444 -t y wv-- -t� 2 ; v Y-&-A �4 ---f 04 jAol� 'o , 000 — f w, " WA�^� 1 `t s _. Y-o AL Yo 7' ¢ VA M anagement Counselled F•Yibilmy S t udies R.l. Ier.N e•n1 Mutes N•M.Rh