Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022.0822.TCWS.Packet NOTICE OF MEETING WORK SESSION FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL Mayor Ginny Dickey Vice Mayor Gerry Friedel Councilmember Sharron Grzybowski Councilmember Alan Magazine Councilmember Peggy McMahon Councilmember Mike Scharnow Councilmember David Spelich TIME:WORK SESSION TO CONVENE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE SPECIAL MEETING WHEN:MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 2022 WHERE:FOUNTAIN HILLS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 16705 E. AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS, FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ Councilmembers of the Town of Fountain Hills will attend either in person or by telephone conference call; a quorum of the Town’s various Commission, Committee or Board members may be in attendance at the Council meeting. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to A.R.S. §1-602.A.9, subject to certain specified statutory exceptions, parents have a right to consent before the State or any of its political subdivisions make a video or audio recording of a minor child. Meetings of the Town Council are audio and/or video recorded and, as a result, proceedings in which children are present may be subject to such recording. Parents, in order to exercise their rights may either file written consent with the Town Clerk to such recording, or take personal action to ensure that their child or children are not present when a recording may be made. If a child is present at the time a recording is made, the Town will assume that the rights afforded parents pursuant to A.R.S. §1-602.A.9 have been waived. AGENDA 1.CALL TO ORDER – Mayor Ginny Dickey 2.ROLL CALL – Mayor Dickey 3.REGULAR AGENDA A.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION: Presentation of the final report on the Town's Fire and Emergency Medical Services by McGrath Consulting. 4.ADJOURNMENT CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF NOTICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing notice was duly posted in accordance with the statement filed by the Town Council with the Town Clerk. Dated this ______ day of ____________________, 2022. _____________________________________________ Linda G. Mendenhall, MMC, Town Clerk The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 480-816-5199 (voice) or 1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in the meeting or to obtain agenda information in large print format. Supporting documentation and staff reports furnished the Council with this agenda are available for review in the Clerk's Office. Town Council Work Session of August 22, 2022 2 of 2 ITEM 3. A. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: 08/22/2022 Meeting Type: Town Council Work Session Agenda Type: Regular Agenda Submitting Department: Administration Prepared by: David Pock, Finance Director Staff Contact Information: David Pock, Finance Director Request to Town Council Work Session (Agenda Language): DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION: Presentation of the final report on the Town's Fire and Emergency Medical Services by McGrath Consulting. Staff Summary (Background) McGrath Consulting was selected to provide an analysis of the Town's fire and emergency medical services during a Request for Proposal (RFP) process in October 2021, and a contract for those services was approved by the Town Council on November 16, 2021. Since that time, McGrath has met with Town and numerous fire officials in the surrounding area. Data was also compiled related to contract/personnel costs, calls for service and dispatch/response times. Using the information received, McGrath Consulting has completed their analysis of the Fire and Emergency Medical Services for the Town and has detailed their findings in the attached Final Report. This report will be presented by consultants from McGrath Consulting, and they will be available to answer any related questions about their analysis. Attachments Presentation Fire EMS Final Report Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Director (Originator)David Pock 08/08/2022 09:17 AM Town Attorney Aaron D. Arnson 08/09/2022 10:30 AM Town Manager Grady E. Miller 08/15/2022 02:54 PM Town Manager Grady E. Miller 08/18/2022 10:52 AM Form Started By: David Pock Started On: 08/08/2022 07:44 AM Final Approval Date: 08/18/2022 Town of Fountain Hills Financial Analysis Fire Department Operations 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 1 Project Scope McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. was commissioned by the Town of Fountain Hills to conduct an independent, non-biased study and cost analysis of fire department operations. The goal of this study is to determine whether the Town should renew its current contract with Rural Metro, seek an intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with another nearby municipality, or establish its own in-house Fire Department. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 2 Study Methodology 1. Understand the overall contractual situation with Rural Metro •Rural Metro’s history •Current business models under their parent company Global Medical Response, Inc. •Current contract for services with the Town of Fountain Hills •How services are currently provided to the Town •Collective bargaining contract with Rural Metro employees 2. Understand how fire services are provided throughout the Phoenix Valley •Role of Regional Automatic Aid System •Role of the Regional Dispatch Centers (PSAPs) •Who are the participating municipalities/districts within the Automatic Aid System •What are the pros and cons of the Automatic Aid System 3. Analyze Fountain Hills compliance with national fire service standards/best practice models 4. Analyze options related to how best to provide fire protection services in the future 5. Analyze projected costs based on options 6. Provide recommendations based on study findings and options 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 3 Study Process •Interviews •Fountain Hills Elected Officials •Fountain Hills Town Leadership •Fire Service Leadership Fountain Hills/Rural Metro Mesa Fire and Medical Department Scottsdale Fire Department Rio Verde Fire Protection District Daisy Mountain Fire & Medical Central Arizona Fire and Medical Authority Phoenix Fire Department Cliff Jones, Fire Chief (Ret.), Tempe Fire Department Randy Roberts, Fire Chief (Ret.), Rural Metro assigned to Fountain Hills •Other External Service Providers Arizona Municipal Risk Retention Pool Public Safety Personnel Retirement System CuraLinc Healthcare -- Employee Assistance Program 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 4 Study Process •Document/Data Review •Regional Public Safety Studies related to changes in contract services for fire protection •Public Document Review – Regional Public safety Agencies (i.e., letters, memos, training documents, strategic plans, etc.) •Regional Dispatch Services – Costs and Budgets Salt River implementation costs (Estimated) Cave Creek implementation costs (Estimated) Rio Verde Fire District dispatch budget and assessed fees paid to TOPAZ communications 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 5 Study Process Fountain Hills Specific Data Personnel Policies: Amended and Restated, April 2018 Pay Plan: Fiscal Year 2021 – 2022 Employee Benefit Guide: 2021 – 2022 Arizona Municipal Risk Retention Pool Benefit Guide Rural Metro monthly data reports for FY 15/16 – FY 20-21 Paychex Services Agreement Fountain Hills Community Survey - 2021 (See pages 7 – 10 of report) 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 6 Study Limitations It is important to note that due to confidentiality clauses in the contract with Rural Metro, the consulting team received limited data, service analysis, and side-by-side comparative costs. The consulting team did their absolute best to minimize the impact of the limitations where possible. A detailed description of the study’s limitations is noted in the body of the report. (See pages 11 of report) 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 7 Key Takeaways •Fountain Hills has a very low fire- dollar loss rate. (See pages 13 – 14 of report) 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 8 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS Building and site plan reviews Building and site inspections Public education activities Response capabilities and professionalism of fire department staff Sprinkler and alarm requirements Key Takeaways •Rural Metro appears to be meeting all contractual obligations as detailed in the contract with the Town of Fountain Hills. (See pages 28 - 29 of report) •Average 5-minutes or less response time for the first arriving unit (<300 seconds). •An 8-minute overall response area based on fire station locations. •Response standards (in both cases) are to be met 90% of the time. •The current contract does not require compliance with NFPA 1910 (staffing and deployment). •The current contract does not require compliance with NFPA 1221 (call processing and dispatch). 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 9 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 10 Key Takeaways 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 11 Key Takeaways Chief Ott and the Rural Metro leadership team assigned to Fountain Hills are professional and clearly working to provide quality services within the context of the contract. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 12 Key Takeaways The trend over the last 30+ years is for municipalities/districts in Arizona to move away from contractual fire services provided by Rural Metro. o Fountain Hills is one of only two true municipal master contracts that still exist. o Carefree, AZ, who has the other master contract, is evaluating options for a potential change. o Since Rural Metro is not adding new master contracts, one can surmise that the model is no longer a priority under Global Medical Response (GMR) leadership. o This is concerning and must be a primary focus when considering the future of fire protection for the Town of Fountain Hills. o It is impossible to predict how long Rural Metro will be willing to sustain Master Contracts. (See pages 16 - 20 of report) 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 13 Key Takeaways Generalized listing of Arizona communities/fire protection districts that have ended subscription and/or master contracts with Rural Metro. In some cases, the ending of service was driven by Rural Metro. 1988: Flowing Wells Fire District (now Northwest Fire District)1988: “The Boot” Annexation Area (Annexed into the City of Phoenix) 1989: Sun City Fire District1989: Town of Youngtown (now covered by Sun City Fire District)1989: Ahwatukee (Annexed into the City of Phoenix) 1989: Laveen Fire District (now covered by Phoenix Fire Department) 1989: Daisy Mountain Fire District 1992: Northwest Fire District1993: Town of Gilbert1994: Sun City West Fire District (now North County Fire & Medical District) 2005: City of Scottsdale2007: Town of Paradise Valley (now covered by Phoenix Fire Department) 2008: Town of Queen Creek 2010: Litchfield Park2020: Town of Cave Creek2022: Town of Carefree (Currently under review. At the time of this report, Carefree has signed an 18-month contract with Rural Metro to allow analysis and development of a possible transition plan.) 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 14 (See pages 18 of report) Key Takeaways •A primary reason for the movement away from contracted fire services is the desire for local control. •Desire to be part of the Regional Automatic Aid System•The Rural Metro model does not meet staffing and training standards,•The Rural Metro model does not meet response time standards. •Leadership Challenge - The assigned Rural Metro Fire Chief is often caught in the middle between the Town Manager and the Council while simultaneously reporting to senior leadership at Rural Metro. ARTICLE I, Section 1.6, Subsection E: The Town Manager shall be responsible for coordinating all services within the primary service area as well as conveying the wishes of the Town to the Fire Chief with respect to such services. The Fire Chief shall, at all times, consider the request of the Town Manager with respect to the implementation of fire protection and emergency medical services. While the Town Manager shall have no chain of command authority to direct the operations of Rural Metro employees, such authority being reserved to the Fire Chief, the parties to this agreement understand that the Town expects Rural Metro to reasonably respond to its needs for fire protection and emergency medical services as communicated through the Town Manger. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 15 (See pages 20 - 21 of report) Understanding and Applicability of NFPA Standards and the Regional Automatic Aid System 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 16 Regional Automatic Aid System Mutual Aid Mutual aid is not automatic. •Aid is requested on an ad hoc basis by the local incident commander. •Mutual aid, even in the best situations, takes time to put into operation. Automatic Aid The Regional Automatic Aid System utilized in the Phoenix Valley has been in existence since 1976. •Provides the closest, most appropriate fire service resource regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. •It is easily and decisively the “gold standard” for automatic aid systems operated throughout the United States. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 17 (See pages 23 - 24 of report) Regional Automatic Aid System Shared communication centers All assets maintained by a member of the Automatic Aid System are available, shared, and operated as if the asset is the property of the entire system and not just belonging to a single community/district. Operation and staffing of specialty response teams (examples): o Hazardous Materials o Technical Rescue Teams (Trench Rescue, Structural Collapse Rescue, Confined Space Rescue, High-angle Rescue) o Dive/Swift Water Rescue o Mountain Search and Rescue o Fire Cause and Origin Investigation Shared specialized unit response: o Command Team o Rehab o Brush Fire Response o Water Tenders 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 18 Regional Automatic Aid System •Hallmarks of the system: •Shared standard operating procedures •All personnel trained to same minimum standards with participation in regular joint continuing education •Staffing standard of 4-person companies •Designed to meet national standards (NFPA 1710) •Ensures that the same number of firefighters will arrive on-scene and be able to perform standardized functions regardless of jurisdiction •Staffing applies to all engine and ladder companies •Regional Dispatch Centers •Compliance with NFPA 1221 - call processing and dispatch •Automatic dispatch of closest resource based on geographical location •Rural Metro is blocked from being part of the Regional Automatic Aid System due to compliance standards. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 19 National Fire Protection Association •NFPA 1221: Standard for the Installation, Maintenance, and Use of Emergency Services Communications Systems Covers all aspects of service delivery, from receiving calls to dispatching emergency units to the correct location in the appropriate time period. •NFPA 1710: Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments Provides specific details on fire department service capabilities, staffing, deployment, and response times. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 20 (See pages 24 - 33 of report) NFPA 1221 – Call Processing and Dispatch Standards 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 21 Emergency Call Processing Standards PSAP Function Process Time Standard Performance Criteria 9-1-1 Calls Answered ≤15 Seconds 90% of the time ≤20 Seconds 95% of the time Time to Dispatch ≤60 Seconds 90% of the time ≤90 Seconds 95% of the time Emergency Call Processing Flowchart Event (Something happened requiring emergency assistance) Call Initiated (Call placed to 9-1-1 requesting help) Call Rings at PSAP Call Answered Call Processing (Determining the nature of the emergency & call location) Call Entry (Entering call information into CAD) Call Dispatch (Emergency responders notified of the call) 15 - Seconds 60 - Seconds NFPA 1221 – Call Processing and Dispatch Standards •Fountain Hills fire assets are dispatched by Rural Metro communications. •Due to the required call transfer from the public safety answering point (PSAP) to Rural Metro, an automatic delay is currently built into the system. •Rural Metro, within the contractual agreement with Fountain Hills (ARTICLE 1: Section 1.4, Subsection B), states that the communication center dispatch times will meet call processing standards once they receive the call. •Although requested through the Fire Chief, no computer aided dispatch data related to call processing was provided. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 22 (See pages 30 of report) NFPA 1710 –Staffing based on required tasks 8/10/2022 23 Open air strip shopping (13,000 – 196,000 ft2) and Apartment (1200 ft2 per unit constructed in a 3-story or garden apartment configuration) Task/Role Staff Number Needed Establishment of incident command outside the hazard area for the overall coordination, direction, and safety of the initial full alarm assignment. This number includes the incident commander and a safety officer. 2 Establishment of two uninterrupted water supplies with each supply line maintained by an operator. 2 Establishment of an effective water flow application rate of 500 gallons per minute (GPM) from three handlines, each of which has a minimum flow rate of 150 GPM. 6 One support member for each attack and backup line to assist in stretching of hose lines, utility control, and forcible entry as necessary 3 Provision of at least two victim search and rescue teams 4 Establishment of an initial medical care component capable of providing immediate on-scene emergency medical support and transport that provides rapid access to civilians or firefighters potentially needing medical treatment. 2 Provision of at least two teams to raise ground ladders and perform ventilation 4 If an aerial device is used in operations, one member is required to function as the aerial operator to maintain primary control of the aerial device at all times. 1 At a minimum, an initial rapid intervention crew (IRIC) assembled from the initial attack crew and, as the initial alarm response arrives, a full and sustained rapid intervention crew (RIC) established. (OSHA Respiratory Protection Standard; 29 CFR § 1910.134): 4 Total staffing numbers required for compliance 27 *28 if aerial ladder is being used Single-family dwelling (2000 ft2) Task/Role Staff Number Needed Dedicated incident commander 1 Pump operator with a dedicated water supply 1 Ability to establish and operate 2-handlines (attack and backup) 4 One support member for each attack and backup line to assist in stretching of hose lines, utility control, and forcible entry as necessary 2 Provision of at least one victim search and rescue team 2 Provision of at least one team to raise ground ladders and perform ventilation 2 If an aerial device is used in operations, one member is required to function as the aerial operator to maintain primary control of the aerial device at all times. 1 At a minimum, an initial rapid intervention crew (IRIC) assembled from the initial attack crew and, as the initial alarm response arrives, a full and sustained rapid intervention crew (RIC) established. (OSHA Respiratory Protection Standard; 29 CFR § 1910.134): 4 Total staffing numbers required for compliance 16 *17 if aerial ladder is being used NFPA 1710 – Response Time and Staffing Standards 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 24 Response Time Standards – First Alarm Assignment Unit(s) Time from Dispatch to Arrival Performance Standard First Engine Company 240 sec. (4 minutes) 90% of the time Second Engine Company 360 sec. (6 minutes) 90% of the time Full Initial Alarm Assignment 610 sec. (10 minutes and 10 seconds) 90% of the time Fountain Hills/Rural Metro (assuming that all units are available and not on other calls) will respond with the following vehicles: •2 – Engines •1 – Ladder Tender •1 – Rescue (Dual role EMS providers) •1 – Medic (Single role EMS providers) •1 – On call Command Officer Total Staff: 11 Firefighter NFPA 1710 – Response Time Standards •The Regional Automatic Aid System is designed to share resources to help meet staffing and response time standards. •Scottsdale has stopped providing mutual aid to Rural Metro. •Mutual aid must be mutual. •Rural Metro is unable to meet response standards of the Automatic Aid System. •Mutual Aid agencies have a built-in delay due to call processing time between dispatch agencies. •Rural Metro will send assets from other communities: •Lengthy response times •Minimal staffing Mutual Aid Partners: Station Location and Travel Distances To Fountain Hills Town Hall Fire Station Miles Minutes Fort McDowell 4.5 9 Scottsdale Station 607 6.1 11 Scottsdale Station 606 9 14 Rio Verde 11 17 Salt River Station 294 13.9 18 Scottsdale Station 604 11.2 18 Scottsdale Station 608 10.8 19 Salt River Station 292 13.4 19 Rural Metro Station 826 (Scottsdale) 15.6 22 Salt River Station 291 15.9 22 Salt River Station 293 15.8 23 Rural Metro Station 821 (Carefree) 29.4 39 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 25 _____ = Regional Automatic Aid System _____ = mutual aid _____ = nearest Rural Metro stations out of town Key Takeaways •Under the current model, the intent of NFPA 1221 is not being met due to call transfer requirements between dispatch centers. •Under the current response model employed by Rural Metro, NFPA 1710 is not being met related to response times and staffing standards. •If the Town discontinued the contract with Rural Metro and worked to comply with the standards required of the Regional Automatic Aid System, the system would help/allow the Town to meet NFPA 1221 and 1710 standards. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 26 Options 1. Status Quo:Continue a contractual relationship with Rural Metro. 2. Option #1:Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department using the current staffing level. 3. Option #2:Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department that is compliant in staffing and response times. This option will allow Fountain Hills to become part of the Regional Automatic Aid System. 4. Option #3:Discontinue contract with Rural Metro and enter an IGA with Scottsdale to provide personnel only. 5. Option #4:Enter an IGA to merge Fountain Hills fire services into Scottsdale Fire Department. 6. Option #5:ConsolidateintoRioVerdeFireDistrict. 7. Option #6:Requestproposals(RFP)fromotherproviderssimilartoRuralMetro. (See Pages: 40-48 for full description and methodology of options.) 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 27 Status Quo: Continue a contractual relationship with Rural Metro. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 28 Option #1: Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department using the current staffing level. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 29 Standalone Department: DOES NOT MEET Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Fire Chief 1 Fire Marshal 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Training Officer 1 Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 18 * Total full-time employees – all categories: 34 Option #1: Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department using the current staffing level. •Since there is no longer a “backfill pool,” the department will need to increase staffing per shift to cover paid-time-off (PTO). •This translates into six (6) additional new-hire firefighters. •In addition to the new full-time firefighters, the department will require administrative support. •It is recommended that a full-time administrative assistant be added to assist in records management and the processing and tracking of data. •Information Technology and Human Resource support will likely also be needed. Included in cost projections are the salary and benefits for a full-time Human Resource Generalist and a .5 FTE Information Technology Specialist. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 30 Option #1: Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department using the current staffing level. •Since Rural Metro will no longer be responsible for staff training, it is recommended that a full-time training officer be hired to work a 40-hour week. •This position will be responsible for daily shift training/drills, EMS continuing education, succession planning/staff development and ongoing employee safety. •This position will ensure mandatory training and department compliance with all required standards as established by OSHA or similar regulatory bodies. •The Arizona Municipal Risk Retention Pool (AMRRP) has provided an initial estimated insurance adjustment. •Expect higher claims experience and the Town will be providing case management services. •2021 Senate Bill 1451 – Presumptive Cancer Law will have future financial impacts to all AMRRP members. •Proactive wellness, testing, and risk management services will be an important function. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 31 Option #2: Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department that is compliant in staffing and response times. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 32 * Total full-time employees – all categories: 40 Standalone Department: MEETS Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Fire Chief 1 Fire Marshal 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Training Officer 1 Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 24 Note: Included in the section titled “Other Personnel and Related Administrative Costs” is the projected expenses for recruit training at a regional fire academy. If incumbent RuralMetro firefighters were hired and sent to a “bridge academy,”the costper student would be less, therebyrealizing a savings in this category. Option #2: Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department that is compliant in staffing and response times. •Since there is no longer a “backfill pool,” the department will need to increase staffing per shift to cover paid-time-off (PTO). •This translates into nine (9) additional new hire firefighters. •Avoidance of backfill overtime will be important for work life balance and will likely reduce employee turnover. If the Town does not want to hire three (3) additional firefighters at startup, it should strategically plan to add the three (3) firefighters in the future since tenure will likely increase leave time benefits requiring more backfill coverage. The Town should also ensure that the overtime budget realistically covers benefited time off. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 33 Option #3: Discontinue contract with Rural Metro and enter an IGA with Scottsdale to provide personnel only. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 34 * Total full-time employees – all categories: 0 Contractual Staffing from Scottsdale: Meeting Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Division Chief (Acting as “Fire Chief” for the town 1 Fire Marshal 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 24 Option #4: Enter an IGA to merge Fountain Hills fire services into Scottsdale Fire Department. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 35 * Total full-time employees – all categories: 0 IGA with Scottsdale for full FD Services: Meeting Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 24 The budget for this Option is expected to be similar to the one for Option #3 with a reduction in salaries for the Division Chief (Acting as “Fire Chief” for the town), Fire Marshal, Administrative Assistant, HR Generalist, and IT Specialist. A total of $476,885 in reduced dollars is anticipated from what is shown in Option #3. Regional Dispatch Center 8/10/2022 36 Options 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 37 Recommendations 1. Should the Town continue using contractual services, it is strongly recommended that a contingency plan be developed for the possibility that Rural Metro might exercise their right to end their contractual relationship. Work on this contingency plan should begin immediately and be complete within 12-months. 2. If, at a point, the Town elects to create and operate a fire department, a primary goal should be compliance with the standards that allows membership in the Regional Automatic Aid System (Option #2). It is further recommended that a consultant knowledgeable in the Regional Automatic Aid System be hired to help the Town prepare its application and assist with plan implementation. 3. It is recommended that any move toward creation of a municipal fire department include the additional positions in Human Resources (HR) and Information Technology (IT) as outlined in this report. (See Section Titled: Human Resources and Internal Considerations.) 4. If the Town elects to create a municipal fire department, it is recommended that all fire employees be placed in the Arizona Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS). Participation in this system will be important related to recruitment and retention of fire service personnel. 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 38 Questions/Comments/Discussion 8/10/2022 Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant 39 Financial Analysis Fire Department Operations Conducted By: McGrath Consulting Group PO Box 865 Jamestown, TN 38556 August 2022 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 2 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. P.O. Box 865 Jamestown, TN 38556 Office (815) 728-9111 Dr. Tim McGrath, CEO tim@mcgrathconsulting.com Chief Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant chaigh@mcgrathconsulting.com Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant malayna@mcgrathhumanresources.com www.mcgrathconsulting.com ©Copyright 2022 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise without the expressed written permission of McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 3 Table of Contents Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Study Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 8 Interviews ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Review of Regional Public Safety Studies ...................................................................................... 10 Additional Regional Information Reviewed .................................................................................. 10 Regional Dispatching Services - Costs ........................................................................................... 11 Fountain Hills Specific Data ........................................................................................................... 11 Additional Options for Consideration ............................................................................................... 11 Study Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 11 Support of Town and Department Personnel ................................................................................... 12 Snapshot in Time .............................................................................................................................. 13 Consulting Team ............................................................................................................................... 13 Appendix ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Historical Overview/Background Information .......................................................................................... 14 Fountain Hills .................................................................................................................................... 14 Rural Metro (Source: Rural Metro Website) .................................................................................... 16 Movement Away from Contracted Fire Protection ................................................................................... 19 Scottsdale Situation .......................................................................................................................... 19 Control of Fire Protection ................................................................................................................. 21 Regional Automatic Aid System ................................................................................................................ 22 Difference Between Automatic Aid and Mutual Aid ......................................................................... 24 Applicability of Automatic Aid to National Standards ....................................................................... 25 Current Fountain Hills Model ............................................................................................................ 32 Impact of Automatic Aid ................................................................................................................... 33 Central Arizona Life Safety System Response Council............................................................................... 35 Communication and Dispatch ........................................................................................................... 35 Staffing Levels ................................................................................................................................... 35 Minimum Firefighter Training Standard............................................................................................ 36 Regional Dispatch Centers ........................................................................................................................ 36 Phoenix Fire Regional Dispatch/Phoenix Regional Wireless Consortium (PRWC) ............................. 36 Mesa Fire Regional Dispatch/ Mesa Regional Wireless Cooperative (TOPAZ) .................................. 37 Estimated Startup Costs .................................................................................................................... 37 Staffing Options and Costs ........................................................................................................................ 39 Status Quo ........................................................................................................................................ 39 Create own Fire Department ............................................................................................................ 40 Intergovernmental Agreement ......................................................................................................... 44 Consolidate into Rio Verde Fire District ............................................................................................ 46 Request for Proposal (RFP) ............................................................................................................... 46 Human Resources and Internal Considerations ........................................................................................ 48 Internal Services ............................................................................................................................... 48 Personnel Costs ................................................................................................................................ 49 Appendix A – Data Request ...................................................................................................................... 51 Appendix B – Regional Automatic Aid Agreement .................................................................................... 56 Appendix C – Summary of Fountain Hills Fire Department Startup Costs ................................................. 69 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 4 Startup Year ...................................................................................................................................... 69 Subsequent Year ............................................................................................................................... 70 Table of Figures Figure 1: Side-by-Side Option Comparison - Financial ............................................................................... 7 Figure 2: Fountain Hills Total Incident Responses .................................................................................... 15 Figure 3: Fountain Hills Fire Loss in Dollars .............................................................................................. 15 Figure 4: Fountain Hills Average Response Times .................................................................................... 29 Figure 5: 5-Minute Time Zone Compliance .............................................................................................. 30 Figure 6: 8-Minute Time Zone Compliance .............................................................................................. 30 Figure 7: Fountain Hills Response Zones per Fire Station ........................................................................ 34 Figure 8: Projected Dispatch Costs ........................................................................................................... 38 Figure 9: Status Quo Budget Projection ................................................................................................... 40 Figure 10: Department Employee Count - Option #1 ............................................................................... 41 Figure 11: Annual Budget for Option #1 .................................................................................................. 42 Figure 12: Department Employee Count Option #2 ................................................................................. 43 Figure 13: Annual Budget for Option #2 .................................................................................................. 43 Figure 14: Maintenance Costs .................................................................................................................. 44 Figure 15: Personnel Option #3 (All employees belong to Scottsdale) .................................................... 45 Figure 16: Annual Budget for Option #3 .................................................................................................. 45 Figure 17: Personnel Option #4 (All employees belong to Scottsdale) .................................................... 46 Table of Tables Table 1 : Task and Staffing Standards - Single Family Residential Structure Fire ...................................... 27 Table 2: Response Time Standards - First Alarm ...................................................................................... 27 Table 3: Task and Staffing Standards - Strip Shopping Center & Apartment Building .............................. 28 Table 4: Response Time Standards - First Alarm at Strip Shopping Centers and Apartments .................. 29 Table 5: Emergency Call Processing Standards ........................................................................................ 31 Table 6: Emergency Call Processing Flowchart ........................................................................................ 31 Table 7: Mutual Aid Partners - Station Location and Travel Distances ..................................................... 33 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 5 Executive Summary McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. was commissioned by the Town of Fountain Hills to conduct an independent, non-biased study and cost analysis of fire department operations. The goal of this study is to determine whether the Town should renew its current contract with Rural Metro, seek an intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with another nearby municipality, or establish its own in-house Fire Department. Consultants worked to understand the overall contractual situation with Rural Metro as well as how fire services are provided throughout the Phoenix Valley. This included working to recognize and appreciate Rural Metro’s history and current business models under their parent company Global Medical Response, Inc. Important were interviews with Fountain Hills elected officials to determine their individual perspectives related to how services are currently provided. In addition, consultants reviewed a 2021 Community Survey Report completed by ETC Institute of Olathe, Kansas. Extensive work was done to understand the Regional Automatic Aid System as well as the Regional Communication Systems (Phoenix Regional Communications and Mesa Regional Communication System). An analysis was conducted related to Fountain Hills compliance with national fire service standards/best practice models. The national standard referenced throughout the report as well as the one used by the Regional Automatic Aid System is the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710: Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments. It is important to note that due to confidentiality clauses in the contract with Rural Metro, the consulting team received limited data, service analysis, and side-by-side comparative costs. The consulting team did their absolute best to minimize the impact of the limitations where possible. A detailed description of the study’s limitations is noted in the body of the report. Options were developed related to both “status quo” or discontinuation of a contract with Rural Metro. These options include a detailed financial analysis of likely future costs while considering the limitations of the study. Four options were evaluated and costed with two additional options detailed within the body of the report. Key takeaways from the study include: • Fountain Hills has a very low fire-dollar loss rate. • Rural Metro appears to be meeting all contractual obligations as detailed in the contact with the Town of Fountain Hills. • The Rural Metro leadership team assigned to Fountain Hills is professional and clearly working to provide quality services within the context of the contract. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 6 • The trend over the last 30+ years is for municipalities/districts in Arizona to move away from contractual fire services provided by Rural Metro. o Fountain Hills is one of only two true municipal master contracts that still exist. o Carefree, AZ, who has the other master contract, is evaluating options for a potential change. o Since Rural Metro is not adding new master contracts, one can surmise that the model is no longer a priority under Global Medical Response (GMR) leadership. This is concerning and must be a primary focus when considering the future of fire protection for the Town of Fountain Hills. It is impossible to predict how long Rural Metro will be willing to sustain Master Contracts. • Under the current response model employed by Rural Metro, NFPA 1710 is not being met related to response times and staffing standards. Rural Metro is not allowed to participate in the regional automatic aid system, and Rural Metro assets responding from other locations coming to assist Fountain Hills exceed reasonable response times. • If the Town did not contract with Rural Metro and could join the Regional Automatic Aid System, the system would help/allow the Town to meet NFPA 1710 standards. • Financially, the most economical option for both meeting NFPA 1710 and participation in the automatic aid system is through a contractual relationship with the City of Scottsdale, whereby the Fountain Hills stations, and apparatus are merged fully into the Scottsdale Fire Department. • Should the Town move away from Rural Metro and not join Scottsdale, a decision will need to be made related to choosing a regional dispatch center to replace Rural Metro Dispatch. The below chart provides a side-by-side financial comparison of the four (4) options detailed in this report. The options as reported utilize Fiscal Year 2023 – 2024 cost projections and include between $260,000 - $280,000 in original startup costs (applicable to options #1 and #2). Startup costs would be reduced in subsequent years. The financial difference reported in the chart compares the projected costs of each category against the status quo number. Non-financial options are detailed and provided within the body of the report and are not addressed in this executive summary chart. To assist in understanding the following chart: • Status Quo: Continue a contractual relationship with Rural Metro. This option will not allow Fountain Hills to become part of the Regional Automatic Aid System and will not bring the Town into compliance with NFPA 1710. • Option #1: Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department using the current staffing level. The current staffing level does not meet the standards of NFPA 1710 related to staffing and response times. This option will not allow Fountain Hills to become part of the Regional Automatic Aid System. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 7 • Option #2: Create a Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department that is compliance in staffing and response times and meets NFPA 1710. This option will allow Fountain Hills to become part of the Regional Automatic Aid System. Figure 1: Side-by-Side Option Comparison - Financial * See Pages: 40-48 for full description and methodology of options. Recommendations: 1. Should the Town continue using contractual services, it is strongly recommended that a contingency plan be developed for the possibility that Rural Metro might exercise their right to end their contractual relationship. Work on this contingency plan should begin immediately and be complete within 12-months. 2. If, at a point, the Town elects to create and operate a fire department, a primary goal should be compliance with the standards that allows membership in the Regional Automatic Aid System (Option #2). It is further recommended that a consultant knowledgeable in the Regional Automatic Aid System be hired to help the Town prepare its application and assist with plan implementation. 3. It is recommended that any move toward creation of a municipal fire department include the additional positions in Human Resources (HR) and Information Technology (IT) as outlined in this report. (See Section Titled: Human Resources and Internal Considerations.) 4. If the Town elects to create a municipal fire department, it is recommended that all fire employees be placed in the Arizona Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS). Participation in this system will be important related to recruitment and retention of fire service personnel. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 8 Introduction The scope of work as detailed in the request for proposals includes a focus on two key areas: 1. A comprehensive analysis of a Town-operated fire department compared to the currently contracted Rural Metro operation. This includes current and historical costs. 2. A proposal of a complete cost structure for the creation and operation of a municipal fire department including foreseeable future costs. Specific areas of focus are to include: a. Employee recruitment, training, and on-boarding costs b. Personnel costs, such as salaries and benefits c. Insurance costs: liability, worker’s compensation, employee health insurance d. Vehicle/Equipment/Maintenance costs e. Cost of joining TOPAZ Communication f. Employee retirement costs In 2021 Fountain Hills contracted with ETC Institute to conduct a community survey report. The focus of the survey was to gather information on residents’ level of satisfaction with Town services. Within the overall survey, satisfaction with the quality of fire protection currently provide by Rural Metro was rated very high with a 91.7% approval rating. Similarly, the quality of EMS service received an overall approval rating of 87.9%. Helpful to Town leadership in understanding how best to evaluate options related to continued fire protection, residents’ listed fire protection as one of the top four services that they would be least willing to reduce or eliminate Study Methodology To fully understand the issues, the lead consultant conducted numerous interviews with elected officials, town leadership, and regional fire service leaders. The lead consultant was given tours of all Fountain Hills Fire Department facilities as well as a driving tour of the community, surrounding wildland urban interface, target hazards, and special risk concerns related to fire/EMS/rescue protective services. These tours were conducted by Fountain Hills/Rural Metro Fire Department leadership. A detailed literature review was conducted related to recent studies conducted on this issue by other communities and fire protection districts. The goal in obtaining and reviewing these documents was to see how other researchers have evaluated similar issues, with the hope of providing insight into the questions being asked by the Town of Fountain Hills. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 9 A literature review is essential in that it shows familiarity of issues and helps to develop focus and topic trajectory for the investigation. It provides insight into what has already been done and identifies what is known related to the topic. Importantly, a well-done literature review also provides historical context on the issue. Over the past 30- plus years numerous communities and fire protection districts throughout Arizona have studied the issue of contractual fire service. Contractual fire service has been a hotly debated topic since the late 1980s. Looking at the history of this issue, a clearer understanding of the topic is realized including an understanding of how the subject has been managed by other communities and fire protection districts. This historical picture can then be used to inform decision-making today. An added benefit of this literature review is the fact that current financial data from other communities and fire protection districts is readily available. Since other communities have recently, or are currently, wrestling with this same issue, costing metrics and data exist which can be used to inform and compare against data calculated specifically for Fountain Hills. Study methodologies broke down as follows: Interviews Elected Officials: • Mayor Ginny Dickey • Vice Mayor Gerry Friedel • Councilmember Alan Magazine • Councilmember Sharron Grzybowski • Councilmember Peggy McMahon • Councilmember Mike Scharnow • Councilmember David Spelich Town Leadership: • Town Manger Grady E. Miller • Finance Director David Pock • Administrative Services Director David Trimble • Fire Chief Dave Ott • Fire Marshal Mike Winters • Procurement Administrator Robert Durham Fire Service Leadership: • Fire Chief Mary Cameli, Mesa Fire and Medical Department • Assistant Chief Mike Dunn, Mesa Fire and Medical Department • Jason Taylor, Planning and Research Manager, Mesa Fire and Medical Department • Fire Chief Tom Shannon, Scottsdale Fire Department McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 10 • Fire Chief Jay Ducote, Rio Verde Fire Protection District • Deputy Chief Scott Krushak, Rio Verde Fire Protection District • Fire Chief Brian Tobin, Daisy Mountain Fire & Medical • Scott Freitag, Fire Chief, Central Arizona Fire and Medical Authority • Scott Walker, Executive Assistant Chief, Phoenix Fire Department • Cliff Jones, Fire Chief (Ret.), Tempe Fire Department • Randy Roberts, Fire Chief (Ret.), Rural Metro assigned to Fountain Hills Other External Service Providers: • Arizona Municipal Risk Retention Pool • Public Safety Personnel Retirement System • CuraLinc Healthcare -- Employee Assistance Program Review of Regional Public Safety Studies • Fire Service Proposal – Town of Carefree, Scottsdale Fire Department, 2011 • Alternative Fire Services Report (DRAFT), Town of Fountain Hills, February 2019 • Standards of Cover Strategic Planning Report, Town of Queen Creek, Center for Public Safety Management, LLC, May 2020 • Fire Service Options, Town of Cave Creek, Public Safety Resource Management (PSRM), August 2020 • Fire Service Scope of Work, Town of Cave Creek, Daisy Mountain Fire District, November 2021 • Public Safety Advisory Committee - Report and Recommendations, Town of Carefree, January 2022 Additional Regional Information Reviewed • Letter addressed to Town of Carefree from Daisy Mountain Fire & Medical detailing “ballpark” costs for them to provide contractual services • Letter addressed to Town of Carefree from City of Scottsdale Fire Department detailing “approximate” costs for them to provide contractual services • An Internal Rio Verde Fire District memo from March 2021 detailing “all in costs” for a new full- time career firefighter: This data includes funding for a Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) Tier 3 pension as well as employee paid insurance and required social security. The total cost was extrapolated out over a 3-year period showing all anticipated cost increases. • Intergovernmental Agreement for the Regional Metropolitan Phoenix Fire Service Automatic Aid • Letter from the Town of Carefree requesting inclusion in the Regional Automatic Aid System including the response from the Life Safety Council • Collective Bargaining Agreement between Rural Metro Fire and United Fire Fighters Association of Maricopa County IAFF Local 3878, 2020 – 2025 • Central Arizona Life Safety Council: Managing Fire & EMS Service Delivery in These Tough Economic Times McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 11 • Phoenix Regional Automatic Aid Bridge Fire Academy – Proposal, September 9, 2021 • Phoenix Regional Automatic Aid Bridge Fire Academy – PowerPoint Presentation, September 9, 2021 • Letter addressed to Town of Cave Creek from Daisy Mountain Fire & Medical detailing startup costs • Arizona Retirement System website • Compensation Structures for the City of Mesa, City of Tempe, City of Scottsdale, Daisy Mountain Fire District, and Rio Verde Fire District Regional Dispatching Services - Costs • Salt River implementation costs (Estimated) • Cave Creek implementation costs (Estimated) • Rio Verde Fire District dispatch budget and assessed fees paid to TOPAZ communications Fountain Hills Specific Data • Fire Protection and Emergency Services Agreement between The Town of Fountain Hills and Rural Metro Fire Department, Inc. • Personnel Policies: Amended and Restated, April 2018 • Pay Plan: Fiscal Year 2021 – 2022 • Employee Benefit Guide: 2021 – 2022 • Arizona Municipal Risk Retention Pool Benefit Guide • Rural Metro monthly data reports for FY 15/16 – FY 20-21 • Paychex Services Agreement • Fountain Hills Community Survey - 2021 Additional Options for Consideration It was made clear by town leadership that additional options beyond the three identified 1) status quo; 2) seek an intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with another nearby municipality; 3) establish an in-house Fire Department, should be proposed, and brought forward for consideration. Additional options do exist and will be discussed later in this report. Study Limitations Rural Metro is a private for-profit corporation operating as a division of Global Medical Response (GMR). GMR operates with more than 36,000 employees, bringing together multiple businesses including American Medical Response (AMR), Rural Metro Fire, Air Evac Lifeteam, REACH Air Medical Services, Med- Trans Corporation, AirMed International, Guardian Flight, and others. Due to their size, they are considered one of the largest air, ground, managed medical transportation, and community industrial/specialty and wildland fire services providers in the world. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 12 Since GMR is a privately held company, this study is limited in the ability to obtain data related to the financial health of Rural Metro and how their profit/loss status may impact the long-term stability of the provider. Also limiting the study is the inability to obtain data from Rural Metro. The agreement between the Town of Fountain Hills and Rural Metro stipulates the following related to confidentiality and data sharing. Article V – CONFIDENTIALITY: From and after the date hereof [June 30, 2017], neither party hereto will reveal, divulge, or make known to any person, firm, or corporation any Confidential Information (as hereinafter defined) obtained by such party during the term of this Agreement. “Confidential Information” includes but is not limited to: financial information; audited and unaudited financial reports; operational budgets and strategies; methods of operation; strategic plans; business methods, practices or plans; marketing plans and strategies; management systems programs; computer systems; personnel and compensation information and payroll data; insurance data and loss history; education and training materials; and other such reports, documents or information. This confidentiality clause significantly hinders comparative analysis on this report as it relates to: • Recruitment, hiring, on-boarding, and employee turnover • Staff training and development • Insurance costs including liability, workers compensation, etc. • Costs of communication/dispatch • GMR strategic planning related to Rural Metro Additionally, the consultants were unable to obtain performance data criteria related to the AMR dispatch center/system. This prevented a true comparative analysis of compliance with national standards related to call processing times and fire apparatus/company response and deployment times. This general lack of comparative data significantly weakens the overall side-by-side analysis of this study making it impossible to evaluate the true comparative costs associated with maintaining fire services within the Town of Fountain Hills. Support of Town and Department Personnel The consulting team appreciates the assistance of David Pock who served as the project manager for this study. Mr. Pock’s assistance in the coordination of interviews and access to data was beneficial to understanding the overall situation. A special thanks is also extended to Fire Chief David Ott for his support and assistance throughout the development of this study. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 13 Snapshot in Time It is important for the reader to understand that a study of this nature is a snapshot in time, and findings are based on the assessment of the situation during site visits and the material/data provided. The topic of contractual fire service in the Phoenix Valley is very dynamic, thereby making it impossible to capture in this report a complete narrative related to the decision making underway in some of the neighboring communities. Consulting Team The recommendations made within this report are based on the best quantitative data discovered and qualitative observations by the Consulting Team, who have spent years in either fire, EMS, emergency services, human resources, emergency management, or an aspect related to those endeavors. Three consultants participated in the study. Each addressed topics that were appropriate to their specific skills and expertise: • Dr. Tim McGrath, CEO McGrath Consulting Group o Project Manager o 33 years Fire/EMS (paramedic) experience • Chief Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant o Lead Consultant o 38 years Fire/EMS (paramedic) /Emergency Management experience o Experience serving as Interim Village Manger o 15 plus years of managing municipalities’ organizational and operational strategic planning • Ms. Malayna Halvorson Maes, Senior Consultant o Human Resources Consultant o 20-years’ experience in both private and public sector human resources o Experience as the Human Resources Director and Senior Advisor for a large county in northern Wisconsin. o Experience serving as Interim County Administrator Appendix • Appendix A: A listing of the data requested by the consulting team prior to the first site visit • Appendix B: Regional Automatic Aid Agreement • Appendix C: Summary of startup costs - Fountain Hills Municipal Fire Department McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 14 Historical Overview/Background Information Fountain Hills Fountain Hills is a planned use community incorporated in 1989. The land comprising the community was purchased by the McCulloch Oil Company (McCulloch chainsaws), doing business as McCulloch Properties, and was developed by the company’s president C.V. Wood. McCulloch Oil Company’s founder Robert P. McCulloch is known for the planned use community of Lake Havasu City, AZ. The fountain in Fountain Hills was used as the marketing draw similarly to the London Bridge in Lake Havasu City. Fountain Hills is primarily a bedroom community with supporting commercial space. There is a small industrial area with light hazards. The town’s wastewater and drinking water treatment facilities are the primary high hazards. The Town has significant wildland urban interface including McDowell Mountain Preserve Spanning over 1000 acres of Sonoran Desert. This wildland interface provides tremendous risk with a strong potential for loss to both residential structures and infrastructure should a large wildland fire occur. In 2004 the Town requested a proposal for assumption of fire services from the City of Scottsdale. The decision was made to continue contractual services with Rural Metro due to a lower cost option. In FY 2020 – 2021 Rural Metro, through the Fountain Hills contract, made 4,215 incident responses which is well within the lead consultant’s experience for a community and population base like Fountain Hills. Interestingly, the department has realized an increase in call volume of 1,024 responses over a six-year period, equating to a 13% annual increase. This is significant and a trend that needs to be monitored. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 15 Figure 2: Fountain Hills Total Incident Responses A six-year average of total fire loss in dollars for the Town of Fountain Hills is $309,323. In the lead consultants experience, this number is very low compared to population base and the value of the property protected. This is likely attributed to a combination of factors including but not limited to: • Building and site plan reviews • Building and site inspections • Public education activities • Response capabilities and professionalism of fire department staff • Sprinkler and alarm requirements Figure 3: Fountain Hills Fire Loss in Dollars McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 16 Rural Metro (Source: Rural Metro Website) On February 2, 1948, Rural Fire Protection went into service on a shoestring budget, one truck, a 30 x 30 station fully furnished with used goods and eager anticipation. Two weeks later, their first call defied the law of averages with not one fire, but two at the same time. By 1950, Rural Fire Protection was operating in the, then town of Scottsdale, a budding city outside of Phoenix with a population of just over 2,000. In April, a massive fire erupted in the Arizona Crafts Center and Rural Fire Protection charged in to help. This event cemented their future as the first fire department for Scottsdale, Arizona. More than 50 years later (2003), Rural Fire protection bowed out, allowing the City of Scottsdale to raise its own fire department to service nearly 200,000 citizens. During the 50 years that Rural Fire Protection was servicing Scottsdale, it acquired Metropolitan Fire in 1959, making it Rural/Metro Fire Department. In the same fashion, Rural/Metro expanded to Pima County replacing Catalina Fire Department in 1962, and then to Yuma County replacing the Tri-State Fire Department in 1971. In 1976, Rural/Metro Fire Department made a historic move outside of Arizona, purchasing Knoxville Fire Department and taking Rural/Metro Fire to the national stage. Founder Lou Witzeman even sat for an interview on 60 Minutes (1968) and later Good Morning America (2000). One man, a green fire truck, “hard work, brains and luck.” More than seventy years later Rural Metro Fire Department boasts 42 stations, more than 100 fire apparatus, and more than 1,000 employees—and is a part of Global Medical Response’ family of first response solutions. Lou’s “white horse” cause has come full circle. “It takes hard work, luck, brains, guts and a sense of humor.” In his experiment of free enterprise gone wild, Lou found these five things key to growth, creation, acceptance, and survival. From an enthusiastic 22-year-old to a pioneer in the fire industry, Louis A. Witzeman gave birth to a revolutionary idea, fought his way to the top and handed over the reins in eternal rest in 2004. For more than 70 years, Rural/Metro Fire Department, carries on the courageous fight of a young journalist and his “white horse” cause. Continuing to put in “hard work” in communities across the nation. Serving as the “white horse” for those in need. With a little “luck, brains, guts and sense of humor,” Rural/Metro Fire Department looks forward to the next 70 years with eager anticipation, determination, and promise. Key Timeline Markers • Rural Metro was purchased in 2011 by the private equity firm Warburg Pincus for an estimated $438 million. • Rural Metro, under the ownership of Warburg Pincus, filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy in 2013. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 17 • Rural Metro was purchased by American Medical Response (AMR) in 2015. • Rural Metro and AMR was purchased by Global Medical Response (GMR) in 2018. Global Medical Response, Inc. is located in Greenwood Village, Colorado. It reportedly generates $4.4 billion in annual sales (USD). There are 522 companies in the Global Medical Response, Inc. corporate family. Rural Metro Contract Models Rural Metro breaks contracts down into the following five areas: 1. Master Contract/Community Fire Contract: Under a master contract, Rural Metro provides all staffing and PPE needed for community fire protection. In some situations, this might also include apparatus, tools and equipment and a facility based on the needs and desires of the community protected. Fountain Hills has been a Master Contact Community with Rural Metro for many years. Arizona communities that utilize this model: • Leisure World, Mesa (Although categorized by Rural Metro as a master contract, the services provided to Leisure World are not a true comparison to those in Fountain Hills and Carefree.) • Fountain Hills Fire Department, Fountain Hills • Carefree Fire Department, Carefree 2. Membership/Subscription: Under a membership/subscription situation, Rural Metro offers to homeowners, landowners, and commercial property owners who are not covered by a municipal or fire protection district a subscription contract for fire protection. Subscription contracts are not overly common throughout the United States. Although they do exist, it is much more common for a State Fire Marshal’s Office to assign all properties not within a municipality to a fire protection district. The fire protection district, operating as a body of local government, establishes a tax rate and assessment process to collect fees to provide fire protection. Under this scenario, all properties receive fire protection, and everyone pays for the services provided. In Arizona, this “forced fire protection” model is not utilized, thereby allowing a subscription model to exist. Rural Metro’s business model capitalizes on this situation by filling the fire protection void through the subscription process. Under Rural Metro’s subscription model, if enough properties are grouped together within a geographical region, Rural Metro will staff a fire station and apparatus to meet the contractual standard for response time as agreed to within the subscription contract. If there are not enough properties to financially sustain a fire station, assets will respond to the contracted address from the closest Rural Metro facility(s). McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 18 Unincorporated areas of Arizona that utilize this model are as follows: • Sahuarita • San Tan Valley • Tucson • Unincorporated East Maricopa County • Unincorporated Rio Verde • Unincorporated West Maricopa County • Waddell • Wildland – State and Federal seasonal personnel • Yuma 3. Seasonal Contract Firefighters: Rural Metro provides seasonal contract firefighters for wildland response throughout the United States. 4. Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF): Rural Metro contracts with airports to provide ARFF services. This may be full, 24-hour ARFF services or staffing during hours of operation. Basically, whatever the airport needs. Covered ARFF operations: • Acadiana Regional Airport, New Iberia, LA • Bismarck Airport, Bismarck, ND • FedEx World Headquarters, Memphis, TN • John Glenn International Airport, Columbus, OH • Lafayette Regional Airport, Lafayette, LA • Morristown Municipal Airport, Morristown, NJ • Sikorsky Aircraft, Jupiter, FL 5. Industrial/Installation Fire Protection: There are currently none in Arizona but Rural Metro covers installations in several other states. • Barrick Gold Mine, Goldclonda, NV • BASF Refinery, McIntosh, AL • BMW Factory, Greer, SC • Citgo Petroleum Corporation, Lemont, IL • Citgo Petroleum LCMC, Lake Charles, LA • Crazy Mountain Ranch, Clyde Park, MT • CVR Energy, Coffeeville, KS • CVR Energy, Wynnewood, OK • El Paso Refinery, El Paso, TX • Flint Hills Resources-LP, Rosemount, MN • Indorama Ventures, Westlake, LA • INEOS, Joliet, IL • Phillips 66 Refinery, Wood River, IL • St. Paul Park Refinery, St. Paul, MN • Volkswagen Group of America, Chattanooga, TN • Western Gallup Refinery, Gallup, NM • Wieland Rolled Products, East Alton, IL Movement Away from Contracted Fire Protection Over the years, many communities/fire protection districts have elected to move away from Rural Metro contracts and begin providing their own services. The primary reasons noted for these moves: • Communities want control of their fire protection services • Stability of services • Cost of services • Communities want to be part of the regional automatic aid system (automatic aid will be discussed as a major heading later in this report) Due to limitations in research, the following list and timeline may not be all inclusive but serves to provide a generalized listing of Arizona communities/fire protection districts that have ended subscription and/or master contracts with Rural Metro. In some cases, the ending of service was driven by Rural Metro. • 1988: Flowing Wells Fire District (now Northwest Fire District) • 1988: “The Boot” Annexation Area (Annexed into the City of Phoenix) • 1989: Sun City Fire District • 1989: Town of Youngtown (now covered by Sun City Fire District) • 1989: Ahwatukee (Annexed into the City of Phoenix) • 1989: Laveen Fire District (now covered by Phoenix Fire Department) • 1989: Daisy Mountain Fire District • 1992: Northwest Fire District • 1993: Town of Gilbert • 1994: Sun City West Fire District (now North County Fire & Medical District) • 2005: City of Scottsdale • 2007: Town of Paradise Valley (now covered by Phoenix Fire Department) • 2008: Town of Queen Creek • 2010: Litchfield Park • 2020: Town of Cave Creek • 2022: Town of Carefree (Currently under review. At the time of this report, Carefree has signed an 18-month contract with Rural Metro to allow analysis and development of a possible transition plan.) Scottsdale Situation Numerous interviewed individuals referred to Rural Metro’s contact with Scottsdale as the company’s “crown jewel.” In 2005, at the time of Rural Metro’s pullout of Scottsdale, the city had a population of 227,717. This represented the largest municipality protected by Rural Metro. Two years prior (2003) voters soundly defeated an initiative to move away from Rural Metro and create a municipally owned fire department. Yet shortly after the vote, Rural Metro gave notice to Scottsdale of their intent to cancel their contact. They reportedly said that the contract had been determined to be no longer profitable. The City of Scottsdale was given 19-months to create their own fire department. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 20 In an East Valley Tribute article titled Fire Department started from scratch will succeed longtime Rural Metro team, published June 26, 2005, then Tempe Fire Chief Cliff Jones was quoted as saying “the transition is of historic proportions” meaning that there is no national precedent for building a fire department for a city the size of Scottsdale. In an interview with Chief Jones by the lead consultant, Chief Jones said that it has become common for towns to shed their reliance on Rural Metro and launch municipal or fire district departments. He indicated that in many cases the decision to move away from Rural Metro is driven by community leadership, however, there are other historical instances where, like in the Scottsdale situation, Rural Metro elected to discontinue service to an area due to the lack of profitability. When the move is driven by Rural Metro, the move can be problematic for communities as they strive to create their own department. Well documented cases involving Rural Metro’s pullout are New River (now covered by Daisy Mountain Fire District) and Ahwatukee and the East Valley (now covered by the City of Phoenix). In the book You Don’t Always Get What You Pay For: The Economics of Privatization, (2000) written by Dr. Elliott D. Sclar, a professor and economist at Columbia University and Director of the Center for Sustainable Urban Development, Dr. Sclar devotes a considerable amount of focus to the Rural Metro example in Chapter 4 of the book. Nearly every important study advocating or studying the privatization of municipal services refers to Scottsdale, yet few cities have followed its example. Even among those that have, they often drop the practice after a brief experiment because the Scottsdale experience is historically unique. Although it demonstrates that private for-profit fire protection is feasible in the United States, it is an example of a monopoly rather than competitive contracting. Every year, without competitive bidding, Rural Metro and the City of Scottsdale negotiate a cost-plus-profit contract for fire protection for the next twelve months. Dr. Sclar goes on: Because Rural Metro is a for-profit firm, it has strong market incentives to economize its staffing levels, which is does with an elaborate staffing patten that involves on-call reserve firefighters as well as volunteers. It can manage in this fashion only so long as the population density of Scottsdale remains significantly less than the regional average. As urbanization proceeds, pressure on the company to conform to regional staffing norms becomes irresistible. Given the cost-plus nature of the Scottsdale – Rural Metro relationship [8.5% profit on the direct cost of service], it is difficult to see how the city can avoid absorbing these added staffing costs. It is easy to envision a time and situation in which an economically booming Scottsdale is transformed from one of the lowest-cost providers in the area into one of the highest. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 21 If it’s such a good idea… Arizona is a politically conservative state. If for-profit fire service was clearly more cost-effective than direct municipal service, little would stop neighbors of Scottsdale from following its example. Despite the favorable reviews garnered nationally by Rural Metro, there is no local groundswell of support to have other cities sign on the dotted line. Indeed, some newer jurisdictions that had contracted with the Scottsdale-based provider have switched to municipal fire protection. Interestingly Dr. Sclar’s book was published in 2000, three years prior to Rural Metro’s notice to Scottsdale of their intent to abandon their contract and five years before the City of Scottsdale began operation of their newly created municipal fire Department. Control of Fire Protection A primary reason for movement away from contracted fire services is the desire for local control. In the case of a master contract as utilized by Fountain Hills, the town owns the fire stations, apparatus, and equipment, it just doesn’t employ the fire service personnel directly. This ownership of facilities and equipment may or may not be historically consistent with other Rural Metro master contracts. Fire Chief In Fountain Hills, Rural Metro has assigned a designated fire chief to serve as a department head for the community. Although Chief David Ott is assigned to this position, the town manager ultimately has no direct control over Chief Ott and/or the operation of the fire department. Per the existing Rural Metro agreement, the Town Manager has advisory input that is to be “considered” by the Fire Chief. ARTICLE I, Section 1.6, Subsection E: The Town Manager shall be responsible for coordinating all services within the primary service area as well as conveying the wishes of the Town to the Fire Chief with respect to such services. The Fire Chief shall, at all times, consider the request of the Town Manager with respect to the implementation of fire protection and emergency medical services. While the Town Manager shall have no chain of command authority to direct the operations of Rural Metro employees, such authority being reserved to the Fire Chief, the parties to this agreement understand that the Town expects Rural Metro to reasonably respond to its needs for fire protection and emergency medical services as communicated through the Town Manger. In the opinion of the Lead Consultant, Fountain Hills is blessed to have a dedicated and professional individual serving as fire chief; however, Chief Ott is often caught in the middle as he works to manage the expectations of the Town Manager and the Council while simultaneously reporting to senior leadership at Rural Metro. This unenviable position has more than once placed Chief Ott “between a rock McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 22 and a hard place” as he tries to navigate the needs of the community while working under the direction of a for-profit company. Cost of Service As evidenced by the literature review, some communities/fire districts have found it more economical to operate their own departments while others have elected to create their own departments even though a cost increase was realized. In this latter situation, the driving factor reportedly was the continuity of service provided by their own department and the ability to control costs at the local level. Rural Metro has had a presence in Fountain Hills since the early 1970s. The current contract began with the 2017/2018 fiscal year and is a 5-year agreement with two 2-year extensions, potentially extending to 2026. Each year of this multi-year contract includes a 3% annual multiplier. This multiplier is believed to have been the same number used throughout Rural Metro’s history working in the Fountain Hills area. The contract price upon commencement of the current agreement in 2017 was $3,508,053 annually. Stability of Services As communities/districts have moved away from contractual services, Fountain Hills remains one of the last master contract communities offered by Rural Metro. The other two master contracts are with the Town of Carefree, who is currently evaluating options related to a move away from Rural Metro, and the retirement community of Leisure World located in Mesa. Since Rural Metro is not adding new master contracts, one can surmise that the model is no longer a priority under Global Medical Response (GMR) leadership. This is concerning and must be a primary focus when considering the future of fire protection for the Town of Fountain Hills. Under the current contact, ARTICLE II: Section 2.2 and 2.3 address agreement termination. • Rural Metro may terminate for convenience upon 2-years written notice to the town. • The Town may terminate for convenience 365-days after serving notice to Rural Metro. Regional Automatic Aid System In any deliberations related to a change in fire protection services, the issue of Regional Automatic Aid must be understood and considered. The Regional Automatic Aid System utilized in the Phoenix Valley has been in existence since 1976. It is a time-tested deployment model that provides the closest, most appropriate fire service resource regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. It is easily and decisively the “gold standard” for automatic aid systems operated throughout the United States. It was the original model for fire department shared services and continues to set the example for excellence in asset deployment and cost efficiency. Key aspects of the system include but are not limited to: McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 23 • Shared communication centers: Individual communities do not need to maintain their own public safety answering point (PSAP) and dispatch center. • Joint equipment purchasing • Better geographically-located facilities/fire stations designed to provide timely emergency response coverage to a designated district/area instead of a single-focused community model. This is accomplished through a conscious distribution of resources within a member’s jurisdictional boundaries to ensure that no participant unfairly benefits at the expense of another member and that jurisdictional equity and autonomy is maintained. • All assets maintained by a member of the Automatic Aid System are available, shared, and operated as if the asset is the property of the entire system and not just belonging to a single community/district. • No liability exists if a community is not able to provide the requested assistance due to other calls or being unavailable due to training, public education, community events, etc. • Operation and staffing of specialty response teams (examples): o Hazardous Materials o Trench Rescue o Structural Collapse Rescue o Confined Space Rescue o High-angle Rescue o Dive/Underwater Rescue o Swift Water Rescue o Mountain Search and Rescue o Fire Cause and Origin Investigation • Shared specialized unit response: o Command Team o Rehab o Brush Fire Response o Water Tenders Hallmarks of the system are shared standard operating procedures, training and 4-person staffing. All participants of the automatic aid system agree to operate at emergency incidents utilizing the same protocol and procedures. To accomplish this, they also agree to provide the same base level (academy) training to all firefighters. Likewise, incumbent firefighters are required to attend continuing education including specialized training based on their rank and operational assignments (e.g., engine company, ladder company, safety officer, command officer, etc.). These two factors allow the various participants to operate seamlessly as one large fire response agency compared to individual jurisdictions who only come together during times of emergency and are then forced to merge operations spontaneously. In addition to coordinated standard operating procedures and training, a staffing standard of 4-person companies is maintained. This staffing level not only meets national standards (NFPA 1710), but also McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 24 ensures that the same number of firefighters will arrive on-scene and be able to perform standardized functions regardless of jurisdiction. This staffing level applies to all engine and ladder companies. Another major aspect of the system is the elimination of duplicate services. Since equipment and tools are shared as part of the specialty team response model, it fosters the purchase and maintenance of specialty assets and equipment that would likely be prohibitive in cost or frequency of use for any one jurisdiction. Difference Between Automatic Aid and Mutual Aid Automatic Aid Automatic aid occurs when departments/districts agree prior to an emergency incident to share resources as part of the original/first dispatch to a 9-1-1 call for help. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) defines automatic aid as follows: Automatic aid is established through a written intergovernmental agreement that provides for the simultaneous dispatch of a predetermined response of personnel and equipment to a neighboring jurisdiction upon receipt of an alarm and is included as part of a communication center’s dispatch protocols. As an example, if Fountain Hills was operating as part of the Regional Automatic Aid System for a reported structure fire, Fountain Hills would respond with equipment from both fire stations along with equipment from Scottsdale (or the nearest auto-aid partner) to establish a base-level response. A typical base level response (single-family dwelling) within the automatic aid system is three engine companies and one ladder company (commonly known as a 3 and 1). This automatic “front loading” of response equipment and staffing is extremely important in today’s fire environment since fires progress much quicker than in years past, due to the combustibility of the products burning (i.e., plastics/composites/laminates/foams compared to natural products). This faster-moving fire environment requires greater assets early in an incident to quickly gain control and minimize loss. Automatic aid is also preplanned to include multiple alarms thereby allowing an incident commander to simply elevate the response (i.e., 2nd Alarm, 3rd Alarm, 4th Alarm, etc.). This preplanning is efficient and greatly assists the incident commander in his/her decision-making process. Lastly, automatic aid response is based on the closest asset to the emergency incident regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. Mutual Aid Mutual aid is not automatic. Mutual aid is requested on an ad hoc basis by the local incident commander. Using the mutual aid model, the Fountain Hills incident commander would arrive on scene, determine that assistance is needed, determine which department/district can best assist, then have Rural Metro McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 25 Dispatch contact the department/district to see if they are able to respond. Mutual aid, even in the best situations, takes time to put into operation. Though mutual aid partners may regularly train together, in the Rural Metro model, members are trained separately from the Auto Aid System’s regular training program. There is also no commonality of training and operational procedures between Rural Metro, Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation Fire Department, Salt River Fire Department, or partners in the Regional Automatic Aid System. Applicability of Automatic Aid to National Standards National standards exist that can be used by Fountain Hills to help in decision making related to management of the organization. NFPA standards are not mandatory unless they have been adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Arizona State Statutes, or one of Arizona’s regulatory agencies/bodies. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is a global, non-profit organization that promotes safety standards, education, training, research, and advocacy on fire and electrical-related hazards. Established in 1896 as a way to standardize the use of fire sprinkler systems, the NFPA’s scope grew to include building design, rescue response, electrical codes, and other safety concerns. NFPA publishes more than 300 consensus standards intended to minimize the possibility and effects of fire and other risks. NFPA standards are administered by more than 250 technical committees comprising approximately 8,000 volunteers. NFPA standards are adopted and used throughout the world. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) uses consensus standard rule making. Consensus standards are developed through the cooperation of all parties who have an interest in participating in the development and/or use of the standards. Consensus requires that all views and objections be considered and that an effort be made toward their resolution. Committees are composed of industry representatives, fire service representatives, and other affected parties who all work together to agree on the final rule. NFPA standard revision dates work on a three-to-five-year review cycle. NFPA standards are used primarily by emergency response agencies to established benchmarks of professional performance. In almost any legal proceeding, NFPA is utilized as the standard for determining performance criteria of a fire response organization. NFPA 1710 NFPA has adopted two (2) standards addressing fire department organization and operation: NFPA 1710 – Organization and Development of Fire Suppression, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments – and a sister standard NFPA 1720 – Organization and Development of Fire Suppression, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Volunteer/Paid-On-Call Fire Departments. NFPA 1710 is applicable to Fountain Hills. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 26 Chapter 5 of NFPA 1710 provides specific details on fire department service capabilities, staffing, deployment, and response times. It includes benchmarks for structural fire suppression, EMS, aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF), special operations, marine rescue and firefighting (MRFF), and wildland. Structural fire suppression standards are broken down based on the type of occupancy and the square footage: • Single-family dwelling (2000 ft2) • Open air strip shopping (13,000 – 196,000 ft2) • Apartment (1200 ft2 per unit constructed in a 3-story or garden apartment configuration) • High-rise (the highest floor is 75’ above grade) Different deployment models are assigned for each of the above occupancies based on their level of risk and likely operational needs. Staffing numbers are then assigned along with time standards, beginning with call initiation, until all units have arrived on scene. The below charts detail the NFPA 1710 task/role needs, along with staffing requirements, for fires in structures applicable to the Town of Fountain Hills. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 27 Table 1 : Task and Staffing Standards - Single Family Residential Structure Fire Single-family dwelling (2000 ft2) Task/Role Staff Number Needed Dedicated incident commander 1 Pump operator with a dedicated water supply 1 Ability to establish and operate 2-handlines (attack and backup) 4 One support member for each attack and backup line to assist in stretching of hose lines, utility control, and forcible entry as necessary 2 Provision of at least one victim search and rescue team 2 Provision of at least one team to raise ground ladders and perform ventilation 2 If an aerial device is used in operations, one member is required to function as the aerial operator to maintain primary control of the aerial device at all times. 1 At a minimum, an initial rapid intervention crew (IRIC) assembled from the initial attack crew and, as the initial alarm response arrives, a full and sustained rapid intervention crew (RIC) established. (OSHA Respiratory Protection Standard; 29 CFR § 1910.134): 4 Total staffing numbers required for compliance 16 *17 if aerial ladder is being used *When an incident escalates beyond an initial full alarm assignment, or when significant risk is present to the member due to the magnitude of the incident, the incident commander shall request an EMS crew consisting of a minimum of two members to provide treatment and transport for injured members and civilians. In addition to staffing numbers based on tasks/roles, NFPA has also established response time parameters along with performance percentage indicators. Table 2: Response Time Standards - First Alarm Response Time Standards – First Alarm Assignment Unit(s) Time from Dispatch to Arrival Performance Standard First Engine Company 240 sec. (4 minutes) 90% of the time Second Engine Company 360 sec. (6 minutes) 90% of the time Full Initial Alarm Assignment (3 and 1) 480 sec. (8 minutes) 90% of the time McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 28 Table 3: Task and Staffing Standards - Strip Shopping Center & Apartment Building Open air strip shopping (13,000 – 196,000 ft2) and Apartment (1200 ft2 per unit constructed in a 3-story or garden apartment configuration) Task/Role Staff Number Needed Establishment of incident command outside the hazard area for the overall coordination, direction, and safety of the initial full alarm assignment. This number includes the incident commander and a safety officer. 2 Establishment of two uninterrupted water supplies with each supply line maintained by an operator. 2 Establishment of an effective water flow application rate of 500 gallons per minute (GPM) from three handlines, each of which has a minimum flow rate of 150 GPM. 6 One support member for each attack and backup line to assist in stretching of hose lines, utility control, and forcible entry as necessary 3 Provision of at least two victim search and rescue teams 4 Establishment of an initial medical care component capable of providing immediate on-scene emergency medical support and transport that provides rapid access to civilians or firefighters potentially needing medical treatment. 2 Provision of at least two teams to raise ground ladders and perform ventilation 4 If an aerial device is used in operations, one member is required to function as the aerial operator to maintain primary control of the aerial device at all times. 1 At a minimum, an initial rapid intervention crew (IRIC) assembled from the initial attack crew and, as the initial alarm response arrives, a full and sustained rapid intervention crew (RIC) established. (OSHA Respiratory Protection Standard; 29 CFR § 1910.134): 4 Total staffing numbers required for compliance 27 *28 if aerial ladder is being used McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 29 Table 4: Response Time Standards - First Alarm at Strip Shopping Centers and Apartments Response Time Standards – First Alarm Assignment Unit(s) Time from Dispatch to Arrival Performance Standard First Engine Company 240 sec. (4 minutes) 90% of the time Second Engine Company 360 sec. (6 minutes) 90% of the time Full Initial Alarm Assignment 610 sec. (10 minutes and 10 seconds) 90% of the time Rural Metro provides monthly reports to Fountain Hills. These reports include average monthly call response times as well as information on response times from the individual fire stations. These response times reflect all emergency calls for service. Data is not available to allow a breakdown focused specifically on structural fire responses, therefore, a true comparative analysis is impossible. The data is also focused on “first arriving” and does not include data for the “second company” or arrival of a “full initial alarm assignment.” The contract between the Town of Fountain Hills and Rural Metro establishes an average 5-minutes or less response time for the first arriving unit. Although not specifically stated, it is assumed that this standard is 300 seconds or less. The agreement also references an 8-minute response area that is impacted by fire station location. Per the agreement, this response standard (in both cases) is to be met 90% of the time. Exceptions exist and are noted within the contract. These are primarily due to concerns with severe weather, high call volume, disasters, etc. Response data for the past 6-years is provided below: Figure 4: Fountain Hills Average Response Times McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 30 Figure 5: 5-Minute Time Zone Compliance Figure 6: 8-Minute Time Zone Compliance Although not meeting NFPA 1710, Rural Metro is in full compliance with the contract established with the Town of Fountain Hills. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 31 NFPA 1221 Several standard-setting bodies exist within the emergency services communication field. • APCO – Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials • ANSI – American National Standards Institute • NENA – National Emergency Number Association • NFPA – National Fire Protection Association (NFPA 1221 - Standard for the Installation, Maintenance, and Use of Emergency Services Communications Systems) Although each have their specific areas of focus, all agree on a standard template related to call processing. This is important since NFPA 1710, as indicated in the charts above, establishes several benchmarks for response times that have a direct tie to quality customer service. These benchmarks only work if call processing times are held to a strict standard of emergency responder notification. Table 5: Emergency Call Processing Standards Emergency Call Processing Standards PSAP Function Process Time Standard Performance Criteria 9-1-1 Calls Answered ≤15 Seconds 90% of the time ≤20 Seconds 95% of the time Time to Dispatch ≤60 Seconds 90% of the time ≤90 Seconds 95% of the time Table 6: Emergency Call Processing Flowchart Emergency Call Processing Flowchart Event (Something happened requiring emergency assistance) Call Initiated (Call placed to 9-1-1 requesting help) Call Rings at PSAP Call Answered Call Processing (Determining the nature of the emergency & call location) Call Entry (Entering call information into CAD) Call Dispatch (Emergency responders notified of the call) 15 - Seconds 60 - Seconds Fountain Hills fire assets are dispatched by Rural Metro communications. Due to the required call transfer from the public safety answering point (PSAP) to Rural Metro, an automatic delay is currently built into the system. Rural Metro, within the contractual agreement with Fountain Hills (ARTICLE 1: Section 1.4, Subsection B), states that the communication center dispatch times will meet the above criteria. Although requested through the Fire Chief, no computer aided dispatch data related to call processing was provided. Additionally, no data was available to indicate the response time of “second companies” as well as mutual aid assets. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 32 Current Fountain Hills Model When comparing the current Fountain Hills response model against national standards (since no computer aided dispatch data was available), the consultants had to rely on mapping programs to estimate mutual aid response times. To conduct this analysis, the closest fire stations were identified and then mapped using the Fountain Hills Town Hall as the destination address (16705 E. Avenue of the Fountains, Fountain Hills, AZ 85268). Each of these numbers are shown as “drive time” numbers and not “response” numbers which may be slightly faster. In Table 7, stations colored “Gold” operate as part of the Regional Automatic Aid System. Those in “Gray” are mutual aid, and those in “lime green” are the nearest Rural Metro stations out of town. Since Rural Metro is not part of the Regional Automatic Aid System and operates their own dispatch center, any non-Rural Metro assets responding should be considered mutual aid. Since mutual aid requires Rural Metro to contact the dispatch center for the requested mutual aid asset, even under best conditions, a 3–5 minute delay can be expected and should be added to the overall response time. When comparing NFPA 1710 for a Single-family dwelling (2000 ft2) with a total assignment response time of 480 sec. (8 minutes) against the numbers indicated below, Fountain Hills does not meet the standard related to response times. When looking at staffing levels and considering the eight (8) on-duty Fountain Hills firefighters, plus the on-call Fountain Hills chief officer, plus the three (3) firefighters [sometimes dropping to 2-firefighters to reduce overtime] assigned to Rural Metro Station 826, the total number of responding personnel are four to five (4 - 5) short of meeting NFPA 1710. Since Scottsdale has ceased mutual aid partnerships with Rural Metro, the shortfall in staffing will need to be covered by either Fort McDowell, Rio Verde and/or Salt River. Rural Metro Station 821 could respond with staffing and equipment, but their turnout time plus drive time from Carefree makes them more than 40-minutes away. Considering NPFA 1710 related to open air strip shopping centers or apartments the current Fountain Hills Rural Metro model cannot meet the established national standard. Rural Metro was able to provide a map (Figure 6) detailing 5-minute response zones from the individual Fountain Hills fire stations. Although helpful, the map does not provide information related to asset response as required by NFPA 1710. It does show the strengths and weaknesses related to fire station locations within the Town. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 33 Table 7: Mutual Aid Partners - Station Location and Travel Distances Mutual Aid Partners: Station Location and Travel Distances To Fountain Hills Town Hall Fire Station Miles Minutes Fort McDowell 4.5 9 Scottsdale Station 607 6.1 11 Scottsdale Station 606 9 14 Rio Verde 11 17 Salt River Station 294 13.9 18 Scottsdale Station 604 11.2 18 Scottsdale Station 608 10.8 19 Salt River Station 292 13.4 19 Rural Metro Station 826 (Scottsdale) 15.6 22 Salt River Station 291 15.9 22 Salt River Station 293 15.8 23 Rural Metro Station 821 (Carefree) 29.4 39 _____ = Regional Automatic Aid System _____ = mutual aid _____ = nearest Rural Metro stations out of town Impact of Automatic Aid Based on current fire station locations, should the Town join the Regional Automatic Aid System, not all addresses within the Town of Fountain Hills will meet the NFPA 1710 standard for response times. To fully comply with NFPA 1710 a third fire station will be needed. Membership in the system would however speed the number of firefighters on-scene. Operations would also be enhanced by the increased training standards and joint operations procedures. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 34 Figure 7: Fountain Hills Response Zones per Fire Station McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 35 Central Arizona Life Safety System Response Council Should the Town of Fountain Hills elect to cancel services currently provided by Rural Metro and enter the auto-aid system, the Town will need to petition the Central Arizona Life Safety Response Council for admission. The Life Safety Council consists of all fire chiefs representing departments/districts who are part of the Regional Automatic Aid System. This group meets regularly and is responsible for the coordination of operational procedures and training. Within the group is the Executive Life Safety Council who provides direct system oversight and reviews all requests for expansion of jurisdictional boundaries greater than five square miles as well as applications for inclusion in the Automatic Aid System. Each proposal is assessed against system standards (i.e., communications/dispatch, staffing, minimum firefighter training standards). Each application is also evaluated to determine both the positive and negative impacts of inclusion in the system. In essence, applicants need to enhance the services provide by the system. Key requirements for consideration by the Executive Life Safety Council are as follows (see Appendix B: Intergovernmental Agreement for the Regional Metropolitan Phoenix Fire Service Automatic Aid): Communication and Dispatch All participants must be part of the Phoenix Fire Regional Dispatch System or the Mesa Fire Regional Dispatch System. All participants must also be a member of either the Phoenix Regional Wireless Cooperative (PRWC) or the Topaz Regional Wireless Cooperative (TRWC). Departments/Districts that enter the system that are not members of PRWC or TRWC shall have an active plan to become members within one (1) year of entry. For a participant(s) that does not meet this requirement, any party can request a vote of the Central Life Safety Response System Council for a determination as to whether the participant(s) not meeting this requirement will remain eligible for automatic aid response, or if the participant(s) will then default to a mutual aid response. These Regional Dispatch Systems will use a Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system that automatically selects the closest, most appropriate participants’ unit(s) for dispatch. The CAD system shall be a centralized, totally integrated unit dispatch/status keeping system. Staffing Levels Full staffing as described in NFPA 1710 on engines and ladders provides the most efficient and effective personnel safety and service delivery to the public. System participants recognize the importance of service delivery and personnel safety issues. The minimum daily staffing level for all engines and ladders shall be four (4) members which is “full staffing” under NFPA 1710. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 36 Minimum Firefighter Training Standard To ensure safety, baseline knowledge and a consistent approach to performing tactical operations, all participants agree to require that all emergency response employees receive initial firefighter recruit training through a recognized regional fire training academy or through an alternative method, as approved by the Life Safety Council, which meets the published curriculum. The four- currently recognized regional fire training academies are Phoenix, Mesa, Glendale, and Chandler. Regional Dispatch Centers As required by the Regional Automatic Aid System Agreement, all member agencies must be part of the Phoenix Fire Regional Dispatch System or the Mesa Fire Regional Dispatch System. Members must also be part of the Phoenix Regional Wireless Cooperative (PRWC) or the Topaz Regional Wireless Cooperative (TRWC). Should the Town move away from Rural Metro, a decision will need to be made related to which regional dispatch center to affiliate. Both regional dispatch centers operate using real time – interactive computer aided dispatch (CAD) systems that share data between the two centers. One center can serve as a backup center should the other loose capability. The centers also utilize Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) equipment to track the location of apparatus as well as Geographic Information System (GIS) to discern the location of the emergency allowing CAD to match the closest and most appropriate units for response to the incident. This is done regardless of geographical community boundaries. The two centers generally divide the Valley by Highway 101. Those to the west operate through Phoenix and those to the east operate through Mesa. Members are divided as follows: Phoenix Fire Regional Dispatch/Phoenix Regional Wireless Consortium (PRWC) • Arizona Fire and Medical Authority • City of Scottsdale • Buckeye Valley Fire District • City of Surprise • City of Avondale • City of Tempe • City of Buckeye • City of Tolleson • City of Chandler • Daisy Mountain Fire Department • City of El Mirage • Harquhala Fire District • City of Glendale • Sun City Fire and Medical Dept. • City of Goodyear • Town of Guadalupe • City of Maricopa • Town of Paradise Valley • City of Peoria • Town of Wickenburg • City of Phoenix McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 37 Mesa Fire Regional Dispatch/ Mesa Regional Wireless Cooperative (TOPAZ) • City of Apache Junction • City of Mesa • Rio Verde Fire District • Superstition Fire and Medical District (formerly Apache Junction Fire District) • Town of Gilbert • Town of Queen Creek Estimated Startup Costs Although there is slight variation in costs between Phoenix Regional Dispatch and Mesa Regional Dispatch, the most recent and comprehensive cost estimates for startup and annual fees comes from numbers provided to the Town of Cave Creek, AZ. The Cave Creek numbers were provided in July 2020 by the Phoenix Regional Dispatch Center. If the Town of Fountain Hills decides to join the Mesa system, the cost projections as noted will likely be somewhat less. In estimating startup and annual costs, the consultants added a 3% annual multiplier to reflect cost increases in the years since the projection was provided to Cave Creek. The numbers also reflect a current (rounded up) Fountain Hills’ call volume as well as the number of apparatus operated by Fountain Hills per the current Rural Metro contract. The projections account for the two current fire stations. Should the Town of Fountain Hills elect to add a third fire station, using today’s numbers, the overall cost will increase by roughly $18,550 annually with a startup cost to add the new facility of $132,713. This calculation includes an additional computer configuration for the added fire apparatus responding from the new fire station. See Figure 8. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 38 Figure 8: Projected Dispatch Costs Startup Costs Description Qty Unit Cost Total Inflationary Multiplier Projected Costs - Fountain Hills Generation II Fire Station Dispatch Package 2 $90,000.00 $180,000.00 3%$190,962.00 Installation - Generation II Fire Station Dispatch Package (350 hours per fire station at $70/hr labor fee) 2 $24,500.00 $49,000.00 3%$51,984.10 Synthesized Voice System 2 $695.00 $1,390.00 3%$1,474.65 Mobile Computer Terminals (MCT)8 $5,885.71 $47,085.68 3%$49,953.20 AirMobile MCT Update System 2 $3,500.00 $7,000.00 3%$7,426.30 WAN Network Equipment for Primary Site 1 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 3%$6,895.85 Test (4 hours per system @ $70/hr labor fee)3 $280.00 $840.00 3%$891.16 PCMSS New License / Station 0 $200.00 $0.00 3%$0.00 Contingency 0 $100.00 $0.00 3%$0.00 Data Circuit Installation for ringdowns / Station 2 $340.00 $680.00 3%$721.41 Data Circuit Installation for primary site 1 $340.00 $340.00 3%$360.71 $310,669.37 Annual Costs Fire Dispatch Fee 4300 $24.46 $105,178.00 3%$111,583.34 $111,583.34 Annual General Maintenance Service Fees Station Alerting Package Maintenance Fee 2 $9,300.00 $18,600.00 3%$19,732.74 MCT Maintenance Fee 8 $4,100.00 $32,800.00 3%$34,797.52 AirMobile Maintenance Fee 2 $4,100.00 $8,200.00 3%$8,699.38 $63,229.64 Annual Network System Fees WAN/LAN System Fee 1 $17,400.00 $17,400.00 3%$18,459.66 Add'l PCMSS License 0 $200.00 3%$0.00 $18,459.66 Annual CAD System Fees CAD Modernization Service Fee 4300 $5.00 $21,500.00 3%$22,809.35 CAD Maintenance Service Fee 4300 $1.00 $4,300.00 3%$4,561.87 $27,371.22 Annual GIS & Data Analytics Fee 4300 $0.00 $0.00 3%$0.00 $0.00 $220,643.86 Subtotal: Total Annual Costs Total Startup Costs Fountain Hills Regional Dispatch System Subtotal: Subtotal: Subtotal: Subtotal: Projected Costs McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 39 Staffing Options and Costs Status Quo This option continues the contractual service agreement with Rural Metro. Under this model, the Town owns the fire stations, apparatus (not the ambulances), and all loose equipment including the Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA), cardiac monitors, and extrication equipment. Rural Metro provides the personnel as well all structural and wildland personal protective equipment (PPE). Historically, the contract includes an annual 3% inflationary multiplier, thereby allowing the Town to accurately project/budget future costs for fire protection. Under this option, the Town is not eligible for membership in the Regional Automatic Aid Program. The Central Arizona Life Safety System Response Council has clearly and repeatedly blocked Rural Metro from inclusion and seemingly has no appetite to modify this policy. Without inclusion in the system, Fountain Hills does not meet the national standard for response times to structural fire incidents as well as staffing deployment. Additionally, the town of Scottsdale has ended their mutual aid agreement with Rural Metro, which has a potentially negative impact on the services provided within Fountain Hills. Of greatest concern is the wildland urban interface that exists where homes are built into the desert landscape. This land use configuration has the strong potential for large wildland fires that would require significant personnel and equipment to maintain control, with the likelihood of significant property damage/loss. The use of regional teams to provide command, water tender response, and brush fire apparatus would be beneficial and likely imperative during these type incidents. Another concern of not being part of the automatic aid system is the lack of specialty team response capabilities. Of specific concern is the need for hazardous materials mitigation, trench and confined space rescue, and mountain search and rescue. Conversely, under the existing model the Town historically has a very low fire dollar loss value, and Rural Metro is in full compliance related to their agreed-upon response time standards established in the contract with the Town. The firefighters and department leadership assigned to the Town appear to be dedicated and committed to providing the best services possible. The overarching concern noted through this study is the long-term stability of Rural Metro. Over the past 40-years, communities/districts have discontinued contractual services with Rural Metro and moved to a municipal/district-based fire protection model. This has significantly reduced Rural Metro’s market share of available contract options. Included in this concern is the fact that Fountain Hills is one of the few remaining Master Contract communities and should the Town of Carefree elect to discontinue services with Rural Metro, Fountain Hills will be the last remaining municipal contract. It can be surmised, based McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 40 on an evaluation of Rural Metro’s current clients, that the master contract model is not their business priority since new master contracts are not being added. A significant concern exists in that Rural Metro could give notice to the Town that they are terminating their agreement for convenience. Fountain Hills would then have two years to develop and implement a plan for fire protection. Based on this concern, it is strongly recommended that the Town develop a contingency plan for the possibility that Rural Metro might exercise their right to end their contractual relationship. Assuming all things remain consistent with the application of a 3% inflationary multiplier for the Rural Metro contract as well as a 3% multiplier against all other line items, a 10-Year fire service budget project is shown in the following chart. Figure 9: Status Quo Budget Projection Create own Fire Department Under this option the Town of Fountain Hills would create and operate a municipally owned fire department. Two distinct but similar options exist. • Option #1: Standalone Fire Department that DOES NOT MEET the Regional Automatic Aid Standard • Option #2: Standalone Fire Department that MEETS the Regional Automatic Aid Standard In both cases, captains, engineers, and firefighter/paramedics would work a 24-hr. on-duty shift followed by 48-hours off-duty. The fire chief, fire marshal, administrative assistant and training officer would work a typical 40-hour week. Additionally, under either of these models the Town will need to contract with a physician willing to provide medical direction and oversight to the department’s EMT and Paramedic health care providers. This is typically paid through an annual stipend process. Depending on the provider, costs could range between $0 - $70,000 annually. This number is not included in either of the total cost estimates since it is very dynamic depending on the medical institution the Town decides to partner with. Option #1: Standalone Fire Department that does not meets the Regional Automatic Aid Standard Should the Town of Fountain Hills decide to create and operate a municipal fire department, the option still exists as to whether this new department would be part of the Regional Automatic Aid System. The benefits of joining the system are many; however, there is a significant increase in costs associated with joining the system. Additionally, since Rural Metro would no longer provide dispatching services, the town would need to join one of the two regional dispatch centers. FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32 FY 32-33 $4,319,678.44 $4,449,268.79 $4,582,746.86 $4,720,229.26 $4,861,836.14 $5,007,691.22 $5,157,921.96 $5,312,659.62 $5,472,039.41 $5,636,200.59 10-Yr. Budget Project Status Quo McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 41 Under Option #1 several staff changes will be required. Since there is no longer a “backfill pool” the department will need to increase staffing per shift to cover paid-time-off (PTO). Fountain Hills offers sick, vacation, holiday, and personal leave to their full-time employees. Based on this, a typical firefighter working a 24-hour-on/48-hour-off schedule is assigned to cover 120 shift days per year. When you apply PTO along with work reduction days covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), an individual firefighter will be on-duty about 100 days per year. To cover these PTO vacancies without creating automatic overtime while still maintaining a staffing level of eight (8) firefighters per shift (3-per engine company and 2-per ladder company), the department will need to staff each 24-shift with two additional full-time employees. This translates into six (6) additional new hire firefighters. In addition to the new full-time firefighters, the department will require administrative support. It is recommended that a full-time administrative assistant be added to assist in records management and the processing and tracking of data. Additional Information Technology and Human Resource support will likely also be needed. Included in cost projections is the salary and benefits for a Human Resource Generalist and an Information Technology Specialist. Since Rural Metro will no longer be responsible for staff training, it is recommended that a full-time training officer be hired to work a 40-hour week. This position will be responsible for daily shift training/drills, EMS continuing education, succession planning/staff development and ongoing employee safety. This position will ensure mandatory training and department compliance with all required standards as established by OSHA or similar such regulatory bodies. Department Employees Under Option #1 are as follows: Figure 10: Department Employee Count - Option #1 Standalone Department: DOES NOT MEET Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Fire Chief 1 Fire Marshal 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Training Officer 1 Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 18 * Total full-time employees – all categories: 34 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 42 Figure 11: Annual Budget for Option #1 Note: Included in the section titled “Other Personnel and Related Administrative Costs” is the projected expenses for recruit training at a regional fire academy. If incumbent Rural Metro firefighters were hired and sent to a “bridge academy,” the cost per student would be less, thereby realizing a savings in this category. Option #2: Standalone Fire Department that MEETS the Regional Automatic Aid Standard Should the Town of Fountain Hills decide to create and operate a municipal fire department that meets the standards of the Regional Automatic Aid System, additional staffing numbers will be required. Under Option #2 minimum staffing per engine and ladder company needs to be four (4) firefighters per unit. Instead of fully staffing both engine companies and the ladder company with four (4) firefighters as part of the initial transition to a municipal department, the recommendation is to staff both engines with the required 4-firefighters and then operate the ladder as a “jump company.” Under the “jump company” model, firefighters would cross-staff the engine and ladder responding with whichever piece of equipment is needed based on the type of call. The automatic aid system would then fill the needed apparatus (i.e., engine or ladder company) with a neighboring unit to ensure minimum response matrices are met. Under Option #2 six (6) additional firefighters (in addition to those recommended in Option #1) will be needed. The Town should be cognizant that increasing from 30 shift firefighters to 37 full-time firefighters will likely require three (3) additional full-time firefighters be hired to cover leave time if the town wants to avoid paying “some” backfill overtime. Avoidance of backfill overtime will be important for work life balance and will likely reduce employee turnover. If the Town does not want to hire three (3) additional firefighters at startup, it should strategically plan to add the three (3) firefighters in the future since tenure will likely increase leave time benefits requiring more backfill coverage. The Town should also ensure that the overtime budget realistically covers benefited time off. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 43 Figure 12 details the number of department employees within each category, excluding the three (3) additional backfill firefighters. Figure 12: Department Employee Count Option #2 Standalone Department: MEETS Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Fire Chief 1 Fire Marshal 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Training Officer 1 Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 24 * Total full-time employees – all categories: 40 Figure 13: Annual Budget for Option #2 Note: Included in the section titled “Other Personnel and Related Administrative Costs” is the projected expenses for recruit training at a regional fire academy. If incumbent Rural Metro firefighters were hired and sent to a “bridge academy,” the cost per student would be less, thereby realizing a savings in this category. In both Option #1 and Option #2, the Town’s personnel policies will need to be modified to accommodate 24-hour employees, including time off provisions. Additionally, modifications will need to be made related to the handling of firefighters working holidays when the rest of the town’s employees are off work. Lastly, personnel policies will need to address FLSA work periods and Kelly Days/FLSA work reduction days. Should the Town decide to pursue Option #2, it is strongly recommended that a consultant knowledgeable in the Regional Automatic Aid System be hired to help the town prepare its application and assist with planned implementation. The change in dispatching protocols, standard operating guidelines, and the McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 44 needed upgrade in base training is complicated, and the town would benefit from the expertise of someone familiar with the process. Several local consultants exist giving the Town various options. Vehicle/Equipment/Maintenance Costs – Option #1 and #2 The Town of Fountain Hills, per the agreement with Rural Metro, is responsible for the purchase and maintenance costs of apparatus, tools, and equipment. Based on conversations with the Rural Metro assigned Fire Chief, the consultants understand that the Town maintains a vehicle replacement sinking fund (i.e., saving account) used for the purchase of new apparatus. Sinking funds are an incredibly wise financial management tool when applied to the purchase of fire apparatus and some specific equipment. Currently, Rural Metro (per their agreement) conducts the maintenance and repairs of equipment at a cost plus 10% pricing model. Then they invoice the Town monthly. A review of costs are as follows: Figure 14: Maintenance Costs Throughout this report, cost projections include maintaining these fees at the historical averages shown. Since Rural Metro will no longer provide maintenance services, the Town will need to find a provider who can do this work. Intergovernmental Agreement Two options exist related to an interlocal agreement with the City of Scottsdale. For tracking and ease of reading, these options will be labeled as: • Option #3: Standalone Fire Department with Scottsdale providing contractual staffing • Option #4: Scottsdale providing all fire department services Option #3: Standalone Fire Department with Scottsdale providing contractual staffing In this scenario, the Scottsdale Fire Department will basically mimic the Rural Metro contract except that it will meet the standards of the Regional Automatic Aid. Scottsdale is unwilling to provide contract services that do not meet the Automatic Aid standard. In a memo sent to the Town of Carefree on July 21, 2021, Scottsdale provided an “approximate” staffing cost of $136,573 per firefighter. This is an “all in” number which includes benefits and pension. It uses an average calculation rather than one specific to rank. Current Fiscal Year FY 20-21 FY 19-20 FY 18-19 Vehicle Maintenance/Repair 25,996.72 39,682.34 38,336.15 31,406.69 Equipment Maintenance/Repair 4,793.14 4,370.29 13,202.25 11,030.98 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 45 Figure 15: Personnel Option #3 (All employees belong to Scottsdale) Contractual Staffing from Scottsdale: Meeting Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Division Chief (Acting as “Fire Chief” for the town 1 Fire Marshal 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 24 * Total full-time Fountain Hills employees – all categories: 0 Figure 16: Annual Budget for Option #3 Option #4: Scottsdale providing all fire department services In this scenario, the Scottsdale Fire Department will simply merge the two Fountain Hills fire stations and companies into their organization making them part of the Scottsdale Fire Department. Scottsdale is unwilling to provide contract services that do not meet the Automatic Aid standard. In this case, no administrative oversight is needed since the Scottsdale Fire Chief and Executive Team will ultimately be responsible for operation of the entire department, and the Town of Fountain Hills will need to pay nothing other than an invoice as submitted from Scottsdale each year. The budget for this Option is expected to be similar to the one for Option #3 with a reduction in salaries for the Division Chief (Acting as “Fire Chief” for the town), Fire Marshal, Administrative Assistant, HR Generalist, and IT Specialist. A total of $476,885 in reduced dollars is anticipated from what is shown in Option #3. Fiscal Year FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32 FY 32-33 Personnel Costs $5,189,774.00 $5,345,467.22 $5,505,831.24 $5,671,006.17 $5,841,136.36 $6,016,370.45 $6,196,861.56 $6,382,767.41 $6,574,250.43 $6,771,477.95 Dispatching $221,135.34 $227,769.40 $234,602.48 $241,640.56 $248,889.77 $256,356.47 $264,047.16 $271,968.58 $280,127.63 $288,531.46 Operational Costs $371,332.00 $382,471.96 $393,946.12 $405,764.50 $417,937.44 $430,475.56 $443,389.83 $456,691.52 $470,392.27 $484,504.04 Structural PPE Initial Purchase $163,800.00 Structural PPE Annual Replacement $33,768.00 $35,118.72 $36,523.47 $37,984.41 $39,503.78 $41,083.94 $42,727.29 $44,436.38 $46,213.84 Hybrid PPE (Rescue/EMS/Wildland) Initial Purchase $61,425.00 Hybrid PPE (Rescue/EMS/Wildland) Annual Replacement 12,663.00 13,169.52 13,696.30 14,244.15 14,813.92 15,406.48 16,022.73 16,663.64 17,330.19 $6,007,466.34 $6,002,139.58 $6,182,668.08 $6,368,631.00 $6,560,192.13 $6,757,520.18 $6,960,788.96 $7,170,177.53 $7,385,870.36 $7,608,057.47 IGA with Scottsdale - Option 3 10-Yr. Budget Project Grand Totals McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 46 Figure 17: Personnel Option #4 (All employees belong to Scottsdale) IGA with Scottsdale for full FD Services: Meeting Regional Auto Aid Standard Rank Number in Category Captain 6 Engineer 6 Firefighter/Paramedic 24 * Total full-time Fountain Hills employees – all categories: 0 Consolidate into Rio Verde Fire District In this scenario, the Town of Fountain Hills would petition the State to allow them to join the Rio Verde Fire District. The Town would then have no further control over the fire department, and it would be merged into the operations of Rio Verde. Rio Verde is unwilling to provide contract services that do not meet the Automatic Aid standard. Request for Proposal (RFP) The Town of Fountain Hills could do a Request for Proposals looking for a different contractor other than Rural Metro. The financials of this option are unknown but assumed to be similar or less than those of Rural Metro. The lead consultant is aware of three possible contractors. Others may exist but are not readily known. Falck Falck is an international firm headquartered in Denmark. It was created by Sophus Falck in 1906 based on his experiences in the Great Christiansborg Castle fire. Falck is a leader in industrial fire and rescue services at high-risk facilities and critical infrastructure facilities in Spain, the UK, the Netherlands and Germany. Falck provides municipality fire and rescue services throughout Denmark. Falck operates a US headquarters in Orange, CA providing the following services: • Falck Mobile Health/Care Ambulance Service operates more than 250 ambulances in Los Angeles County and Orange County in California. • Falck Northern California provides advanced emergency medical services (EMS) to residents and visitors to Alameda County. • Falck Northwest provides ambulance services in the Puget Sound area. In July 2015 they began servicing Salem Oregon by providing BLS and ALS support to the Salem Fire Department. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 47 • Falck Rocky Mountain is the exclusive emergency ambulance provider for the City of Aurora, Colorado. Falck current holds no contracts for fire suppression services in the United States. Metro Paramedic Services Metro Paramedic Services is a division of Superior Ambulance Service headquartered in Elmhurst, IL. Superior Ambulance Service began operations in 1959, and they established Metro Paramedic Services, Inc. in 1984. Metro Paramedic Services, Inc. offers complete, turnkey, custom designed options for each client. The company provides firefighters and paramedics to communities in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Paramedic Services of Illinois (PSI) Paramedic Services of Illinois, Inc. has been providing EMS & Firefighter Personnel since 1975. PSI is headquartered in Itasca, IL. PSI lists their contractual strengths as the following: • A leading provider of contractual paramedics/firefighters • Cost Effective • Customized service agreements • No hiring costs, including background checks and pre-employment physicals • No employee salaries, benefits or pension expenses • No education or training expense • No staffing or disciplinary considerations • No worker’s compensation or disability claims • No employment liability issues • Limited professional liability exposure to the community • No miscellaneous day to day concerns or hidden expenses PSI provides services to thirty-six Illinois communities ranging from EMS only to full fire department staffing. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 48 Human Resources and Internal Considerations Because staffing options include the Town creating its own fire department, additional information is provided for human resources and other internal considerations. Employees will expect total compensation to be competitive for the skills, education, and responsibilities of the position. Since the Town is in close proximity to communities and organizations that lead the market’s wages, in order to have successful recruitment efforts and retention, the Town needs to be highly competitive to be an employer of choice. Similarly, the organization should ensure internal services (Administration, Human Resources, Finance, Information Technology, Legal etc.) are able to support a 24/7 public safety department. Human Resources will be critical to ensure employer compliance requirements, recruitment/retention, total compensation, organizational development, and employee relations. The following are two (2) areas that should be considered if services are brought in-house. Internal Services Human Resources The Town’s Administrative Services Director is currently responsible for all human resources, risk management and safety, and payroll for the Town, in addition to leadership over staff who coordinate procurements and information technology services. There is also support from the Finance Department with the payroll process. The Town utilizes an applicant tracking system (ATS) for receiving applications and has a third-party vendor to process paychecks from the payroll files created by the Town. All other processes are manual. Currently in the United States, the median HR-to-employee ratio is 1.4 HR staff to 100 employees served. This ratio, however, may fluctuate based upon standardized processes, software capabilities, and outsourcing various HR functions. It must be stressed that HR functions across organizations differ in terms of centralized/decentralized recruitment processes, involvement with payroll, workers compensation, training, labor relations, etc. Therefore, comparative information will not necessarily reflect identical HR services, but is simply a tool to assist with staffing planning. The Town currently has an estimated 80 full-time, part-time, or seasonal employees. Although there is a perception that a greater amount of HR work may be needed to support full-time employees versus part- time employees, this is not normally the case, so both categories of employees are combined in total employee count. Given there are 80 employees working for the Town, the current HR to employee ratio is approximately 1:80, assuming the Administrative Services Director spends 100% of his time on human resources functions – which he does not. With the integration of a 24/7 public safety department, 34-38 new positions will need to be added to the Town, and one (1) full-time Human Resource Generalist position will be needed. This recommended position has been included in the associated costs to ensure the Town has sufficient capacity in this area. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 49 Other costs to further support Human Resources have also been included such as recruitment expenses, skills testing, post-offer testing, annual testing, uniforms and equipment costs, employee assistance program enhancements for public safety, FLSA training, payroll administration increases, service agreements for onboarding and performance management systems, and professional services costs for salary structure development, policy manual updates, and miscellaneous legal fees that arise. Information Technology The Town currently employs one full-time Chief Technology Administrator as well as a part-time IT Support Specialist. Because of the current workload (without adding a town-owned fire department), the part-time position should be increased to 40-hours per week. With the option to bring the fire department in-house, the Town will need to purchase and manage a fire and EMS reporting software. This will include interface of that software with the regional dispatch center, support software, and end user support. This will require an additional full-time IT position to support the existing Chief Technology Administrator and Support Specialist. The cost of these recommendations has been included with the staffing cost projections. Nominal software costs were also included, although this amount will largely be driven by the software system selected and is often based on the number of calls for service. The Town currently owns the technology hardware, so no additional hardware costs were included. Personnel Costs Personnel costs in the staffing options to add in-house fire department employees include wages, health, dental, vision, pension (see section below), life and disability, Medicare, unemployment tax costs, and social security for civilians only. Social Security was excluded for all firefighter positions on the basis they will be covered under a public retirement system. All wages, benefits, and insurances have been trended 5% each year, based on current market conditions and historical insurance trends. Pension The Town currently offers a 401(a)-retirement plan with an 11% matching contribution for eligible employees. The Town does not participate in the Arizona Retirement System (ARS) and does not currently have any positions that would qualify for Arizona’s Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS), although bringing the fire department in-house would be a qualifier. A review of the retirement systems of the neighboring communities revealed that they participate in the PSPRS. This is significant, because if Fountain Hills does not offer the PSPRS benefit, they may lack a major recruitment and retention tool. The lure of this benefit from its comparable market will likely create turnover when there are openings in those departments. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 50 It should be noted that turnover can be calculated as Total Payout Cost + Recruitment Cost + Replacement Compensation/Benefit Cost + Training Cost. Turnover Costs will typically calculate around 1.5 times the cost of the original position, so the Town would be able to analyze the cost of the PSPRS against the cost of turnover to the organization if it chooses an alternative pension option. The PSPRS is the pension benefit included in the staffing costing. Costs also include actuarial fees to join the PSPRS and fees associated with creating and maintaining the Town’s PSPRS Local Board and related legal fees. Workers Compensation Worker’s compensation will increase, simply because of the nature of the work performed by employees. It should be noted that in discussions with the Arizona Municipal Risk Retention Pool (AMRRP) the Town’s current experience with low workers compensation claims will change, and the Town should expect an increase in overall claims, which will require additional case management time from Town Administration. In addition, in 2021, the State of Arizona passed Senate Bill 1451, which removed the requirement that firefighters had to prove certain diagnoses were caused by their line of work, otherwise known as a Presumptive Cancer Law. Presumptive cancer laws will automatically treat certain diagnoses as occupational illnesses from line of duty, even after the employee has left employment. Although the AMRRP has been planning for these claims, the impact to financials was simply not provided. The Town will want to take an active approach to wellness, annual testing, and risk management services. Worker’s compensation has been trended in the costing at 5% each year. Overtime The staffing options section covers the recommendation for additional full-time firefighters needed to cover scheduled time off in lieu of relying strictly on overtime. Overtime will always occur with 24/7 operations, whether for unexpected call outs, turnover, training, and hold overs due to emergency operations. However, overtime is not a best practice solution to staffing. Time away from work allows employees to “recharge” and directly correlates to productivity, work/life balance, focus, and health, so ongoing overtime could result in burnout, performance concerns, fatigue, etc. Overtime has been included in the personnel costs provided. Should the Town bring the services in-house, the Town is recommended to monitor actual overtime annually and develop an average trend of usage to adjust budgets prospectively, based on historical usage. Accrued and Unused Paid Time Government accounting guidelines indicate that accrued and unused liabilities be funded so the organization will have funding to pay these liabilities whenever used, including at time of termination. Should the Town bring the department in-house, sick and vacation liabilities will need to be added to the current liabilities. An estimate has been added to the costs, which may need revision after time-off policies are developed for 24/7 operations. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 51 Appendix A – Data Request Financial Analysis- Fire Department Operations Data Request December 10, 2021 To: David Pock, Finance Director Town of Fountain Hills 16705 E. Avenue of the Fountains, Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 From: Craig A. Haigh, Senior Consultant McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. In preparation for work on the financial analysis of the fire department, McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. will require data points on a multitude of topics to accurately analyze and answer the following questions: 1. Conduct a comprehensive cost analysis of a Town of Fountain Hills municipal fire department compared to current contracted Rural Metro operations. This needs to include current and historical costs associated with fire department operations. 2. Propose a complete cost structure of a Fountain Hills municipal fire department to include all tasks to create a fire department from inception to operation and projections for future costs. Areas of analysis should include, but not be limited to: a. Recruitment costs b. Personnel costs (including dispatch) c. Insurance costs (liability, worker’s compensation, etc.) d. Vehicle/Equipment/Maintenance costs e. Cost of joining TOPAZ communication system f. Training costs g. Retirement costs (health insurance, retirement, etc.) The data points requested are those we anticipate needing to complete the study. There will likely be additional points of data requested as information is uncovered during our work. If the Town feels that a particular data point or document has not been requested and will be needed, please feel free to provide this information as well. A study of this nature will only be as strong as the data/information we are able to obtain and review. Producing a usable and McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 52 accurate study will require insight and input from both our consulting team as well as leadership of the Town of Fountain Hills. Data Delivery Directions • The data submitted will be utilized to determine recommendations. As best possible, please ensure that the data is correct. As we work through the project, if you uncover an error or omission, please let us know. New data submitted after the draft report is presented will not be utilized. • Whenever possible, please put the data in an electronic format. The sendit.fh.az.gov system will work fantastically, and we appreciate you providing this for our use. • In most cases, we request three (3) years of historical records. Please provide data as appropriate for 2019, 2020, 2021. If, by your analysis, it makes sense for us to look at an additional year (2018) due to the unusual nature of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, please feel free to share this data as well. • Before doing any “hand counts,” please reach out so we can discuss. Data Request Documents General Information • Overview of the department • Overview of the area protected o Town o Rural District o Contracted Services (wildland response (state and/or national), special services, etc.) Response District • Map of Coverage Area • Map of contiguous surrounding area showing neighboring department station/facility locations Governance • List of Elected Officials • List of town leadership including an organizational chart • Fire/EMS Leadership o Organizational Chart o Job requirements: ▪ Administrative ▪ Supervisory ▪ Operational o Fiscal responsibilities o HR responsibilities McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 53 Personnel Management/Human Resources • Current roster of fire department staff (sworn and non-sworn) • Fire Department Personnel (If known) o Hire date o Age or date of birth • Fire Department organizational chart o # of Career o # of Paid On Call o # of Part-time (Paid On Premise) o # of Volunteers o # of Other Employees (Include civilian) o Rank Structure (Number of employees in each category) • Fire Department: Minimum/Maximum Staffing o Minimum staffing = o Maximum staffing = o Number of days at maximum daily staffing (show for each study period year) o Number of days at minimum daily staffing (show for each study period year) • Current salary of each employee (name, rank, salary) • FLSA pay cycle • Spreadsheet with the benefit breakout (If known – we understand that this may not be available to the Town due to the contractual relationship with Rural Metro. o Health o Retirement o Taxes o Overtime by employee – past 3-yrs. (if known) o Etc. • Labor agreements – Already Received • Town of Fountain Hills Police & Fire Commission or Civil Service Regulations – if applicable • Town’s Insurance liability/worker’s comp policy • Town’s benefit summary/true benefit cost • Town’s current salary schedule and classification listing for all employees • Retirement system actuarial report (if exists) • Town’s employee handbook The Department • Department Rules and Regulations • Department Standard Operating Procedures • Department Standing Medical Orders o Medical Control o Medical Director: Name and contact information McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 54 Dispatch (PSAP) • Who provides dispatch? • Location (address of dispatch center) • Cost • Dispatch data – time from receiving call to FD notification • Who answers 9-1-1 calls? • Who answers cellular 9-1-1 calls? • Number of employees • Number of shifts • Staffing per shift (minimum & maximum) • Emergency Medical Dispatching Program o Program Utilized o Medical direction oversight/medical director • Dispatcher/Call Taker Certifications Apparatus & Equipment • Type of Apparatus (engines, trucks, ambulances, ladder tenders, utilities, command, etc.) • Apparatus department ID number • Pump & Tank size (if applicable) • Mileage • Engine Hour Reading (if appropriate) • Manufacturer • Manufacturer date • Replacement Schedule (sinking fund if one exists) • Apparatus maintenance records o Internal o External • Special Teams Apparatus Training • Training Records (Last 3 years) for each member • Special Teams – certifications • All current employees’ certification level Fiscal • Current year financials • Past three years’ budgets • Operating – include all revenue and expenses • Capital – include all revenue and expenses • Town financial policies and procedures McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 55 • Purchasing policies • Equipment or capital reserve fund ledger Revenue • List of fire department grants applied for and/or received for past 3-yrs. • List 2% fire dues received for past 3-yrs. (if applicable) • List and explain any other department revenue received o Inspection fees o Permit fees o EMS service fees o Emergency response fees o False alarm fees o Etc. Other relevant Information • Last fire department analysis (conducted by Town) – Already Received • Any additional information deemed important or helpful McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 56 Appendix B – Regional Automatic Aid Agreement INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE REGIONAL METROPOLITAN PHOENIX FIRE SERVICE AUTOMATIC AID THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into by and between the Cities, Towns, Fire Districts, and governmental jurisdictions (hereinafter collectively referred to either as “Participants,” or “Parties,” and sometimes referred to individually as “Participant” or “Party”), to provide for automatic assistance for fires and other types of emergency incidents as described under the terms of this Agreement (the “Automatic Aid System”). The initial Participants are listed in Attachment A to this Agreement, which Attachment shall be amended upon the addition of new members as set forth herein. RECITALS WHEREAS, agreements for automatic assistance in fire protection and response to other emergencies have existed between specific municipalities and governmental jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Automatic Aid System has been in existence since 1976 to provide the highest levels of service in conjunction with the most effective use of local fire department/district resources working collaboratively through intergovernmental cooperation; and WHEREAS, the Participants in the Automatic Aid System seek to provide the most efficient, safe, and effective fire-rescue-emergency medical services to their respective communities; and WHEREAS, the safety of the employees of each Participant is paramount; and WHEREAS, this Agreement shall encourage the development of cooperative procedures and protocols, including, but not limited to, the possibility of joint purchasing, coordination of communications, training, health and safety, fire prevention, public education, fire investigations and other activities that will enhance each Participant’s ability to fulfill its mission; and WHEREAS, the Participants are committed to demonstrate public equity through reasonable commitment and distribution of resources within their jurisdictions to ensure that no Participant unfairly benefits at the expense of other Participants and that jurisdictional equity and autonomy is maintained; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Participants to continue and improve the nature and coordination of emergency assistance to incidents that threaten loss of life or property within the geographic boundaries of their respective jurisdictions; and McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 57 WHEREAS, it is further the determination of each of the Participants that the decision to enter into this Agreement constitutes a fundamental governmental policy of the Parties hereto and, by entering this Agreement each Participant has made the determination that the policies and procedures set forth in this Agreement constitute the proper use of the resources available with respect to the provision of governmental services and the utilization of existing resources of each of the Parties hereto, including the use of equipment and personnel; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Participants to initiate and/or renew their support for an Automatic Aid System for fire department/district services. AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing introduction and recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, the following mutual covenants and conditions, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 - PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY 1.1 Purpose. All Parties to this Agreement agree that its purpose is to provide a highly efficient, effective and mutually beneficial relationship among multiple regional jurisdictions to provide for the overall public safety of the region through an Automatic Aid System. This Agreement will continue to allow for an automatic response of the closest, most appropriate fire department/district resources. 1.2 Authority. The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to the Intergovernmental Agreement Statute, Section 11-952, Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) 1.3 Effect on Prior Agreements. The Parties further understand that this Agreement supersedes any previous automatic aid agreements between any of the Parties hereto. ARTICLE 2–AUTOMATIC AID ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS To be eligible to participate in the Automatic Aid System, a Participant shall meet the standards and requirements set forth in this Article at all times during the Term of this Agreement. Any Participant failing to meet these eligibility standards and requirements is subject to removal from the Automatic Aid System as prescribed herein. 2.1 Allocation of Resources. It is agreed that the scope of this Agreement includes automatic assistance in responding to fires, medical emergencies, hazardous materials incidents, rescue and extrication situations and other types of emergency incidents that are within the standard scope of services provided by fire departments/districts in the Automatic Aid System. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 58 A. Standard Automatic Dispatch. The Participants executing this Agreement agree to dispatch their respective assigned fire department/district units on an automatic basis. The Computer Aided Dispatch and Automatic Vehicle Locator system will automatically determine the closest available, most appropriate unit(s) regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. Each jurisdiction agrees that such unit(s) will respond. B. Specialized Unit Dispatch. Participants agree the assignment of a specialized unit to an incident relies on predefined response levels (as predefined by Volume II Standard Operating Procedure Phoenix Fire Department) to specific types of incidents, the closest specialized unit to the call, and/or any special call for resources that may be made by an incident commander and is not pre- programmed in the CAD system. This includes, but is not limited to, hazardous materials support, technical rescue support, loss control, rehab, command, utility, brush, and water tenders. Members assigned to a specialized unit will be required to complete all initial training and continuing education requirements of the specialty. The current recognized regional Special Operations training program is the Phoenix Fire Department Special Operations training program. The inclusion of other recognized training programs will be approved by the Life Safety Council. 2.2 Standard Service Requirements. Participants in this Agreement agree to the following standard service requirements as the primary response system elements: A. Communications and Dispatch. All Participants must be part of the Phoenix Fire Regional Dispatch System or the Mesa Fire Regional Dispatch System. All Participants must also be a member of either the Phoenix Regional Wireless Cooperative (“PRWC”) or the Topaz Regional Wireless Cooperative (“TRWC”). Departments/Districts that enter the system that are not members of PRWC or TRWC shall have an active plan to become members within one (1) year of entry. For a Participant(s) that does not meet this requirement, any Party can request a vote of the Central Life Safety Response System Council for a determination as to whether the Participant(s) not meeting this requirement will remain eligible for automatic aid response, or if that Participant(s) will then default to a mutual aid response. These Regional Dispatch Systems will use a Computer Aided Dispatch (“CAD”) system that automatically selects the closest, most appropriate Participants’ unit(s) for dispatch. The CAD system shall be a centralized, totally integrated unit dispatch/status keeping system. (1) The CAD system will allow the most appropriate emergency response unit closest to an emergency to be dispatched automatically– regardless of the jurisdiction where the emergency occurs or the jurisdictional affiliation of the response unit. The CAD system utilizes Automatic Vehicle Location (“AVL”) equipment to discern the location of emergency response units and a computerized Geographic Information System (“GIS”) to discern the location of the emergency call. The AVL and GIS systems allow the CAD system to match the closest response unit to the emergency and recommend it for dispatch within the Automatic Aid System boundaries. Each Automatic Aid System McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 59 Participant shall ensure that its respective emergency response apparatus and vehicles are equipped with AVLs. (2) The Regional Dispatch System relies on a consistent and preplanned system of communications. Communications support for Participants includes a comprehensive radio system with multiple tactical radio frequencies. Participants are required to provide for their individual needs to ensure consistent, interoperable and safe communications not only within their jurisdictional areas, but within the entire Automatic Aid System. (3) If the Life Safety Council decides at any time that additional communications infrastructure is necessary to meet the operational requirements of the Automatic Aid System, each Participant will be responsible for all costs, authorizations and/or agreements to maintain interoperable communications within its jurisdictional boundaries. B. Command Procedures. All Participants will use standard command procedures. A standardized Incident Management System (“IMS”) provides for efficient management of the emergency and for the safety of firefighters through the use of standard terminology, reporting relationships, and support structures. The IMS and associated standard operating procedures adopted for use by all Automatic Aid Participants is the Phoenix Fire Department’s Standard Operating Procedures in the Phoenix Volume II Manual (which can be obtained by sending an e-mail to firechief.pfd@phoenix.gov), or the Mesa Fire and Medical Department Standard Operating Procedures 200 Series available at fireinfo@mesaaz.gov. C. Incident Management and Minimum Company Standards. Participants shall use the same set of procedures for Incident Management and Minimum Company Standards according to Volume II, Standard Operating Procedures Phoenix Fire Department (basic evolutions used by the fire service) or the Mesa Fire and Medical Department Standard Operations Procedures 200 Series. It is required that Command Officers that function in an Operational response capacity, attend at least 50% of the Command Officer training curriculum offered at the Phoenix Fire Department Command Training Center, or as determined by the Central Arizona Life Safety Response System Council. Participants that do not meet this requirement are subject to removal from the Automatic Aid System, as determined and voted on by the Central Arizona Life Safety Response System Council. D. Incident Safety Officer. To ensure safety, all Participants agree that their standard operating procedures and command procedures shall match those adopted by the Life Safety Council. To do this, Participants shall use an Incident Safety Officer System (“ISOS”) that will follow NFPA Standard 1521. E. Compatible Equipment. To ensure compatibility of equipment, McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 60 Participants shall maintain an inventory of equipment (based on National Fire Protection Association (“NFPA”) standards), including hoses, couplings, pump capacity, communications equipment, and will maintain the minimum standard amount of equipment on each type of apparatus (as recommended by all applicable NFPA standards). F. Standardized Numbering and Terminology. Participants shall utilize the Valley- wide apparatus numbering system and standardized terminology for apparatus and fire stations as established and maintained by the Life Safety Council. G. Standardized Response Criteria. Participants shall use standardized response criteria (i.e., pre- established type and number of apparatus that will be automatically dispatched based on type of call as per standard NFPA and International Organization for Standardization (“ISO”) recommendations). The CAD system can tailor the response to specific types of incidents by jurisdiction, or part of a jurisdiction, upon request by the jurisdiction needing the tailored response. This includes the capability to automatically dispatch selected specialty units. H. Staffing Levels. Full staffing as described in NFPA 1710 on engines and ladders provides the most efficient and effective personnel safety and service delivery to the public. System Participants recognize the importance of service delivery and personnel safety issues. The minimum daily staffing level for all engines and ladders shall be four (4) members which is “full staffing” under NFPA 1710. • Temporary Reduction in Staffing. Full staffing may be temporarily reduced to three (3) trained personnel for up to a total of 8 hours in any 24- hour shift period. Departments/Districts that enter the system with a staffing level of three (3) members on any engine and/or ladder shall have an active plan to accomplish full staffing within one (1) year of entry. For a Participant(s) that does not meet this requirement, any Party can request a vote of the Central Life Safety Response System Council for a determination as to whether the Participant(s) not meeting this requirement will remain eligible for automatic aid response, or if that Participant(s) will then default to a mutual aid response. • Other Reductions in Staffing; Changes to Deployment Model. Any Participants that have reached full staffing, that then subsequently reduce staffing below full staffing, or make significant changes to their deployment model, shall be subject to removal from the Automatic Aid System, as determined and voted on by the Central Arizona Life Safety Response System Council. I. Minimum Firefighter Training Standards. To ensure safety, baseline knowledge and a consistent approach to performing tactical operations, all participants agree to require that all emergency response employees receive initial firefighter recruit training through a recognized regional fire training academy or through an alternative McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 61 method, as approved by the Life Safety Council, which meets the published curriculum. The four currently recognized regional fire training academies are Phoenix, Mesa, Glendale and Chandler. 2.3 Reciprocity; No Guaranty of Perfect Equity. Participants agree that automatic aid is reciprocal. While this does not ensure that a Participant’s jurisdiction will receive the exact amount of assistance it gives, it does mean that all Participants will provide assistance outside their jurisdictional boundaries and that the level of service delivered, and decisions made within the Automatic Aid System will be mutually beneficial to all Participants in the system and will maintain general equity among all Participants to the greatest degree possible. 2.4 Ownership of Property and Equipment. Each Participant shall retain ownership of any equipment or property it brings to the performance of this Agreement and shall retain ultimate control of its employees. 2.5 No Reimbursement for Services. Except as specifically agreed to by the Parties involved in a specific incident, none of the involved Parties shall be reimbursed by any of the others for any costs incurred in responding pursuant to this Agreement. In the event of formally declared disasters, however, Participants may directly apply for reimbursements from County, State and/or Federal agencies as appropriate. ARTICLE 3–LIFE SAFETY COUNCIL; VOTING 3.1 Life Safety Council. The Participants shall be jointly responsible for administering this Agreement through the Central Arizona Life Safety Response System Council (the “Life Safety Council”). The purpose of the Life Safety Council is to ensure the effective and efficient operation of the Automatic Aid System. Each Participant is a member of the Life Safety Council and is expected to participate in scheduled meetings. A. Composition. The Fire Chief from each Participant shall serve as the official representative to the Life Safety Council from that jurisdiction. The Fire Chief may appoint an alternate to attend Life Safety Council meetings. B. Responsibilities. The responsibilities of the Life Safety Council shall be as follows: (1) Evaluate requests to participate in this Automatic Aid Agreement from other fire departments/districts that are dispatched by the Phoenix Dispatch Center or Mesa Dispatch Center. Requests for participation will be evaluated to ensure compliance with the Automatic Aid Eligibility Standards and Requirements prescribed herein and to determine impact upon existing Participants. (2) Evaluate proposed modifications to a Participant’s service delivery model for compliance with the criteria established herein and for impact on other Participants. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 62 (3) Establish such technical committees or working groups as may be necessary for the efficient and effective operation of the Automatic Aid System. (4) Develop, approve or modify such technical documents as may be necessary for the efficient and effective operation of the Automatic Aid System. (5) Develop, within the first year of this Agreement, Life Safety Council bylaws establishing Life Safety Council procedure, such as and without limitation, notice of meetings, the taking of meeting minutes, the distribution of minutes, etc. (6) Evaluate and consider for adoption national benchmarks as may be appropriate for implementation within the Automatic Aid System. (7) Develop, approve or modify alternative response models as appropriate based on the area served by the Participants (i.e. urban, suburban, rural), which may be subsequently implemented by Participants. (8) Establish methods for service measurement, provided that: (a) “Time of dispatch” will be measured from the point in time at which the Dispatch and Deployment Center has notified the station, or the responding unit out of the station, of the call through the station alert system, radio, or Mobile Computer Terminal (“MCT”). (b) “Response time” will be measured from the Time of Dispatch to the time of arrival on-scene. (9) Vote on all actions that will significantly or materially impact or change the responsibilities of the Life Safety Council and/or the automatic aid eligibility standards and requirements for the Participants’, as prescribed in this Agreement, utilizing the voting process set forth below. 3.2 Voting Process. For matters pertaining to this Agreement that require voting by the Life Safety Council, the voting process shall incorporate tiered voting. The initial vote (Tier 1) will utilize a single, non-weighted vote per Participant. After the initial vote has been conducted, any Participant shall have the right to request a second vote that will utilize weighted voting (Tier 2). For the weighted vote, each individual Participant’s vote will be formed by assigning a percentage to that Participant. The percentage to be assigned will be calculated based upon that individual Participant’s total calls for service within that Participant’s geographical boundaries, compared to the total number of calls for service within the geographical boundaries of all Participants to this Agreement combined (see Attachment B). This calculation will be based on the reported call volumes as determined by the Regional Computer Aided Dispatch centers. Any members’ voting weight exceeding forty percent (40%) shall be reduced and will be weighted to no more and to no less than 40%. Such McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 63 reduction shall not affect the weighted vote of any other member. The percentages assigned to Participants will be reviewed, recalculated and reassigned every five (5) years at the time this Agreement is renewed. 3.3 Passage. In order to pass, all matters to be voted on by the Life Safety Council will require a simple majority vote for Tier 1 voting, and for Tier 2 voting, a majority vote of at least fifty-one (51) percent is required. ARTICLE 4–SERVICE AREA CHANGES 4.1 Service Area Changes. Certain changes to a Participant’s operations within its service area have the potential to negatively affect its neighboring Participants and ultimately negatively affect the Automatic Aid System in its entirety. The occurrence of the following events is subject to review by the Life Safety Council. A. Reduction in Service Levels. If at any time while this Agreement is in effect, an Automatic Aid System Participant desires to, close a fire station and/or increase its geographical/jurisdictional boundaries to include an area more than five (5) square miles, or reduce its level of fire, medical or emergency services provided within its municipal or jurisdictional boundaries, the Automatic Aid System Participant desiring to initiate the change and prior to initiating the change, will give a minimum of 120 day notice to all Parties for a 30 day review period for any potential impacts to the system. This notice shall include a proposed plan on how the notifying party will maintain the requirements and standards set forth in Article 2 of this Agreement. If after review, it is determined by any Participant that the change will result in a change to the response order of another jurisdiction’s primary response units or any other negative impact to any jurisdiction or to the system as a whole, any Party can request a vote of the Central Life Safety Response System Council for a determination as to whether the proposed newly modified area will remain eligible for automatic aid response or if the proposed newly modified area will then default to a mutual aid response. The Council will utilize the voting process set forth in this Agreement. ARTICLE 5–MUTUAL AID AND OTHER AGREEMENTS 5.1 Mutual Aid Areas. Calls to response areas outside of the jurisdictional boundaries of the Participants in the Automatic Aid System will be considered mutual aid when such written agreements between relevant parties exist or when a Participant has been defaulted from the Automatic Aid System and deemed a Mutual Aid Member (as set forth in Article 4, Service Area Changes). Requests for and responses to mutual aid will be at the sole discretion of the parties involved. Any response to a mutual aid jurisdiction by a Participant will not bind any other Participant to respond. Under these circumstances, a mutual aid request may require approval by the highest ranking on-duty fire officer of the Participant asked to provide the resources. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 64 5.2 Other Agreements. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit the ability of any or all the Parties from continuing to perform under existing agreements (other than any previous automatic aid agreements between any of the Parties, hereto, which upon execution of this Agreement are superseded), entering into future agreements, or agreeing to participate in more specific contracts for services, mutual assistance or automatic response(s) or prohibit any of the Parties from providing emergency assistance to another jurisdiction that is not a Participant in this Agreement. Such agreements will not be binding on or commit any other Participants to provide automatic aid or mutual aid to the other jurisdiction; such other future agreements also do not extend any rights associated with this Agreement to any other entity that is not a Party. ARTICLE 6–TERM OF THE AGREEMENT 6.1 Term; Renewal. This Agreement shall be recorded by each Party with the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office, shall commence on December 19, 2017, regardless of the date of recordation, and shall continue in force through December 19, 2022, or until terminated by formal act of the Parties. This Agreement shall automatically renew for successive five-year terms, unless terminated earlier by formal act of the Parties. 6.2 Termination. If an individual Party wishes to terminate its participation in this Agreement, it shall provide all Participants 120 days’ formal notice, in writing, of intention to terminate. That terminating party’s termination will then be effective on the 121st day after notice has been provided, unless the notice to terminate has been withdrawn. ARTICLE 7–GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 7.1 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. No term or provision of this Agreement is intended to, or shall, create any rights in any person, firm, corporation or other entity not a party hereto, and no such person or entity shall have any cause of action hereunder. 7.2 Workers’ Compensation. The Parties agree that it is the responsibility of each Party to ensure that its employees are notified in accordance with the provision of Arizona Workers’ Compensation Law, specifically, A.R.S. § 23-1022, or any amendment thereto, and that all such notices, as required by such laws, shall be posted accordingly. That by signing this Agreement and to ensure compliance with the notice posting requirements, each Party grants consent to all other Parties to inspect that Party’s respective premises and work places upon request of any of the other Parties. However, nothing in this Agreement should be construed as imposing a duty to inspect another Party’s respective premises and work places, and this agreement does not create a joint or employer/employee relationship between a Party and another Party’s employees. McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 65 7.3 Immigration Requirements. The Parties will comply with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (“IRCA”) and will permit inspection of its personnel records to verify such compliance. To the extent applicable under A.R.S. § 41-4401, each Party warrants compliance with all federal immigration laws and regulations that relate to its employees and compliance with the Everify requirements under A.R.S. § 23-214(A). Each Party has the right to inspect the papers of the other Parties participating in this Agreement to ensure compliance with this paragraph. A Party’s breach of the above-mentioned warranty shall be deemed a material breach of the Agreement and may result in the termination of the Agreement by the Life Safety Council under the terms of this Agreement. 7.4 No Joint Venture. No term or provision in this Agreement is intended to create a partnership, joint venture or agency arrangement between any of the Parties. 7.5 Notices. Any notice to be provided to a Party or Parties to this Agreement shall be satisfied be sending a written letter by U.S. mail, certified, return receipt to the current fire chief of each respective Participant. Notice shall be deemed effective five days after mailing. 7.6 Cancelation for Conflicts of Interest. This Agreement is subject to cancellation pursuant to the provisions of A.R.S. § 38-511. 7.7 No Israel Boycott. In accordance with ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 35-393.01, by entering into this Agreement, each Participant certifies that it is not currently engaged in, and agrees that for the duration of this Agreement to not engage in a boycott of Israel. IN WITNESS HEREOF, this Agreement is executed as provided below. Further, in signing this Agreement, the signatories below affirm and attest that they are authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of their respective Party. CITY OF PHOENIX, a municipal corporation ED ZUERCHER, City Manager Kara Kalkbrenner DATE Fire Chief ATTEST: Phoenix City Clerk McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 66 CERTIFICATION BY LEGAL COUNSEL In accordance with the requirements of ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 11-952(D), the undersigned Attorney acknowledges that (i) he/she has reviewed the above agreement on behalf of his/her client and (ii) as to only his/her client, has determined that the Agreement is in proper form and is within the powers and authority granted under the laws of the State of Arizona. City Attorney for Phoenix [SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON FOLLOWING PAGES] [INSERT INDIVIDUAL SIGNATURE PAGES FOR ALL PARTICIPANTS] McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 67 ATTACHMENT A PARTICIPANT DATE APPROVED 1 Avondale Fire and Medical December 15, 2017 2 Arizona Fire and Medical Authority January 16, 2018 3 Buckeye Fire and Medical December 15, 2017 4 Buckeye Valley Fire District December 11, 2017 5 Chandler Fire, Health & Medical December 15, 2017 6 Daisy Mountain Fire and Medical January 16, 2018 7 El Mirage Fire Department December 15, 2017 8 Glendale Fire Department January 16, 2018 9 Gilbert Fire Department January 16, 2018 10 Goodyear Fire Department January 16, 2018 11 Guadalupe Fire Department January 16, 2018 12 Maricopa Fire Department January 16, 2018 13 Mesa Fire and Medical December 11, 2017 14 Peoria Fire and Medical December 11, 2017 15 Phoenix Fire Department Initial Member 16 Queen Creek Fire Department December 15, 2017 17 Scottsdale Fire Department December 11, 2017 18 Sun City Fire Department January 16, 2018 19 Superstition Fire and Medical December 11, 2017 20 Surprise Fire and Medical December 11, 2017 21 Tempe Fire and Medical December 11, 2017 22 Tolleson Fire Department January 16, 2018 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 68 ATTACHMENT B VOTING PROCESS and WEIGHTED VOTE PERCENTAGE For matters pertaining to this Agreement that require voting by the Life Safety Council, the voting process shall incorporate tiered voting. The initial vote (Tier 1) will utilize a single, non-weighted vote per Participant. After the initial vote has been conducted, any Participant shall have the right to request a second vote that will utilize weighted voting (Tier 2). For the weighted vote, each individual Participant’s vote will be formed by assigning a percentage to that Participant. The percentage to be assigned will be calculated based upon that individual Participant’s total calls for service within that Participant’s geographical boundaries, compared to the total number of calls for service within the geographical boundaries of all Participants to this Agreement combined. This calculation will be based on the reported call volumes as determined by the Regional Computer Aided Dispatch centers. Any members’ voting weight exceeding forty percent (40%) shall be reduced and will be weighted to no more and to no less than 40%. Such reduction shall not affect the weighted vote of any other member. The percentages assigned to Participants will be reviewed, recalculated and reassigned every five (5) years at the time this Agreement is renewed. Jurisdiction Incident Totals Weight Vote Yes No Avondale Fire and Medical 8,243 2% Arizona Fire and Medical Authority 13,373 3% Buckeye Fire and Medical 5,884 1% Buckeye Valley Fire District 1,559 1% Chandler Fire, Health & Medical 23,807 5% Daisy Mountain Fire and Medical 3,307 1% El Mirage Fire Department 2,843 1% Glendale Fire Department 31,114 6% Gilbert Fire Department 17,033 3% Goodyear Fire Department 8,021 2% Guadalupe Fire Department 1,133 1% Maricopa Fire Department 4,506 1% Mesa Fire and Medical 67,833 13% Peoria Fire and Medical 19,740 4% Phoenix Fire Department 213,825 40% Queen Creek Fire Department 3,195 1% Scottsdale Fire Department 33,957 7% Sun City Fire Department 11,659 2% Superstition Fire and Medical 3,836 1% Surprise Fire and Medical 14,315 3% Tempe Fire and Medical 25,702 5% Tolleson Fire Department 1,952 1% Total Calls For Service 516,837 McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 69 Appendix C – Summary of Fountain Hills Fire Department Startup Costs Startup Year Ca t e g o r y De s c r i p t i o n St a r t U p C o s t - D O E S NO T M e e t S t a n d a r d St a r t U p C o s t - M e e t s St a n d a r d Fir e D e p a r t m e n t W a g e s , B e n e f i t s , O T De p a r t m e n t B a s e W a g e s a n d B e n e f i t s 3,0 8 6 , 0 0 6 . 4 5 $ 3,5 3 9 , 3 1 2 . 8 9 $ Fir e D e p a r t m e n t W a g e s , B e n e f i t s , O T De p a r t m e n t O v e r t i m e 47 6 , 2 8 7 . 6 1 $ 55 2 , 4 6 1 . 9 7 $ Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n W a g e s a n d B e n e f i t s Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n B a s e W a g e s a n d B e n e f i t s 12 7 , 5 1 1 . 2 7 $ 12 7 , 5 1 1 . 2 7 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Re c r u i t m e n t E x p e n s e 30 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 30 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ex e c u t i v e R e c r u i t m e n t F e e s ( F i r e C h i e f s e a r c h ) 25 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 25 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ba s i c S k i l l s T e s t i n g 5, 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 5, 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ba c k g r o u n d C h e c k - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Po s t O f f e r T e s t i n g 41 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 $ 47 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Re g i o n a l A c a d e m y C o s t s 14 8 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ 17 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Un i f o r m s / E q u i p m e n t 30 6 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 $ 35 3 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Un i f o r m A n n u a l R e p l a c e m e n t C o s t - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s An n u a l P h y s i c a l T e s t i n g - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s EA P P r o g r a m E n h a n c e m e n t s f o r P u b l i c S a f e t y 3, 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ 3, 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Sic k a n d V a c a t i o n L i a b i l i t y F u n d i n g - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s FL S A T r a i n i n g 1, 8 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1, 8 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pa y c h e x s P a y r o l l 6, 2 3 7 . 0 0 $ 7, 1 8 2 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s On b o a r d i n g a n d P e r f o r m a n c e M a n a g e m e n t 15 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 15 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ac t u a r i a l R e v i e w F e e s t o j o i n P S P R S 2, 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2, 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s PS P R S L o c a l B o a r d P e r D i e m / L e g a l C o u n s e l F e e s 5, 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 5, 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Fir e / E M S R e p o r t i n g S o f t w a r e 25 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 25 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pr o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s - C o m p e n s a t i o n U p d a t e 20 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 20 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pr o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s - P o l i c y M a n u a l U p d a t e 15 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 15 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pr o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s - M i s c . L e g a l F e e s 10 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 10 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n , L i a b i l i t y , a n d E & O I n s u r a n c e A d j u s t m e n t s Ge n e r a l L i a b i l i t y 12 6 , 3 9 6 . 0 0 $ 12 6 , 3 9 6 . 0 0 $ Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n , L i a b i l i t y , a n d E & O I n s u r a n c e A d j u s t m e n t s Er r o r s & O m i s s i o n s ( p r o f e s s i o n a l l i a b i l i t y ) 5, 2 7 1 . 0 0 $ 5, 2 7 1 . 0 0 $ Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n , L i a b i l i t y , a n d E & O I n s u r a n c e A d j u s t m e n t s Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n 10 8 , 1 6 3 . 0 0 $ 12 2 , 7 9 8 . 0 0 $ Dis p a t c h i n g Dis p a t c h i n g t h r o u g h e i t h e r P h o e n i x o r M e s a 31 8 , 7 0 1 . 2 4 $ 31 8 , 7 0 1 . 2 4 $ Op e r a t i o n a l C o s t s Ba s e d o n c u r r e n t T o w n e x p e n s e s f o r F D s e r v i c e s 37 1 , 3 3 2 . 0 0 $ 37 1 , 3 3 2 . 0 0 $ St r u c t u r a l P P E - I n i t i a l P u r c h a s e Pu r c h a s e 3 3 s e t s / 3 9 s e t s 13 8 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 $ 16 3 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 $ St r u c t u r a l P P E - A n n u a l R e p l a c e m e n t Re p l a c e 6 s e t s p e r y e a r / 8 s e t s p e r y e a r - $ - $ Hy b r i d P P E ( R e s c u e / E M S / W i l d l a n d ) - I n i t i a l P u r c h a s e Pu r c h a s e 3 3 s e t s / 3 9 s e t s 51 , 9 7 5 . 0 0 $ 61 , 4 2 5 . 0 0 $ Hy b r i d P P E ( R e s c u e / E M S / W i l d l a n d ) - A n n u a l R e p l a c e m e n t Re p l a c e 6 s e t s p e r y e a r / 8 s e t s p e r y e a r - $ - $ 5,4 7 0 , 9 3 0 . 5 7 $ 6,1 2 5 , 8 9 1 . 3 7 $ Su m m a r y S p r e a d s h e e t - S t a r t u p Y e a r McGrath Consulting Group, Inc. Page 70 Subsequent Year Ca t e g o r y De s c r i p t i o n Su b s e q u e n t Y e a r - D O E S NO T M e e t S t a n d a r d Su b s e q u e n t - M e e t s St a n d a r d Fi r e D e p a r t m e n t W a g e s , B e n e f i t s , O T De p a r t m e n t B a s e W a g e s a n d B e n e f i t s 3, 2 4 0 , 3 0 6 . 7 7 $ 3, 7 1 6 , 2 7 8 . 5 3 $ Fi r e D e p a r t m e n t W a g e s , B e n e f i t s , O T De p a r t m e n t O v e r t i m e 50 0 , 1 0 1 . 9 9 $ 58 0 , 0 8 5 . 0 7 $ Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n W a g e s a n d B e n e f i t s Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n B a s e W a g e s a n d B e n e f i t s 13 3 , 8 8 6 . 8 3 $ 13 3 , 8 8 6 . 8 3 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Re c r u i t m e n t E x p e n s e 10 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ 12 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ex e c u t i v e R e c r u i t m e n t F e e s ( F i r e C h i e f s e a r c h ) - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ba s i c S k i l l s T e s t i n g 2, 6 2 5 . 0 0 $ 2, 6 2 5 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ba c k g r o u n d C h e c k - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Po s t O f f e r T e s t i n g 7, 8 7 5 . 0 0 $ 10 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Re g i o n a l A c a d e m y C o s t s 28 , 3 5 0 . 0 0 $ 37 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Un i f o r m s / E q u i p m e n t 58 , 5 9 0 . 0 0 $ 78 , 1 2 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Un i f o r m A n n u a l R e p l a c e m e n t C o s t 32 , 2 2 4 . 5 0 $ 37 , 1 0 7 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s An n u a l P h y s i c a l T e s t i n g 34 , 6 5 0 . 0 0 $ 39 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s EA P P r o g r a m E n h a n c e m e n t s f o r P u b l i c S a f e t y 3, 6 7 5 . 0 0 $ 3, 6 7 5 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Si c k a n d V a c a t i o n L i a b i l i t y F u n d i n g 11 3 , 2 0 9 . 7 3 $ 12 8 , 3 1 7 . 6 4 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s FL S A T r a i n i n g - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pa y c h e x s P a y r o l l 6, 5 4 8 . 8 5 $ 7, 5 4 1 . 1 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s On b o a r d i n g a n d P e r f o r m a n c e M a n a g e m e n t 15 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 $ 15 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Ac t u a r i a l R e v i e w F e e s t o j o i n P S P R S - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s PS P R S L o c a l B o a r d P e r D i e m / L e g a l C o u n s e l F e e s 5, 2 5 0 . 0 0 $ 5, 2 5 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Fi r e / E M S R e p o r t i n g S o f t w a r e 15 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 $ 15 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pr o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s - C o m p e n s a t i o n U p d a t e - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pr o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s - P o l i c y M a n u a l U p d a t e - $ - $ Ot h e r P e r s o n n e l a n d R e l a t e d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s Pr o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s - M i s c L e g a l F e e s - $ - $ Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n , L i a b i l i t y , a n d E & O I n s u r a n c e A d j u s t m e n t s Ge n e r a l L i a b i l i t y 13 2 , 7 1 5 . 8 0 $ 13 2 , 7 1 5 . 8 0 $ Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n , L i a b i l i t y , a n d E & O I n s u r a n c e A d j u s t m e n t s Er r o r s & O m i s s i o n s ( p r o f e s s i o n a l l i a b i l i t y ) 5, 5 3 4 . 5 5 $ 5, 5 3 4 . 5 5 $ Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n , L i a b i l i t y , a n d E & O I n s u r a n c e A d j u s t m e n t s Wo r k e r s C o m p e n s a t i o n 11 3 , 5 7 1 . 1 5 $ 12 8 , 9 3 7 . 9 0 $ Di s p a t c h i n g Dis p a t c h i n g t h r o u g h e i t h e r P h o e n i x o r M e s a 22 1 , 1 3 5 . 0 0 $ 22 1 , 1 3 5 . 0 0 $ Op e r a t i o n a l C o s t s Ba s e d o n c u r r e n t T o w n e x p e n s e s f o r F D s e r v i c e s 38 2 , 4 7 1 . 9 6 $ St r u c t u r a l P P E - I n i t i a l P u r c h a s e Pu r c h a s e 3 3 s e t s / 3 9 s e t s - $ - $ St r u c t u r a l P P E - A n n u a l R e p l a c e m e n t Re p l a c e 6 s e t s p e r y e a r / 8 s e t s p e r y e a r 25 , 3 6 8 . 0 0 $ 33 , 7 6 8 . 0 0 $ Hy b r i d P P E ( R e s c u e / E M S / W i l d l a n d ) - I n i t i a l P u r c h a s e Pu r c h a s e 3 3 s e t s / 3 9 s e t s - $ - $ Hy b r i d P P E ( R e s c u e / E M S / W i l d l a n d ) - A n n u a l R e p l a c e m e n t Re p l a c e 6 s e t s p e r y e a r / 8 s e t s p e r y e a r 9, 5 1 3 . 0 0 $ 12 , 6 6 3 . 0 0 $ 5, 0 9 9 , 6 0 3 . 1 3 $ 5, 3 5 9 , 9 4 0 . 4 3 $ Su m m a r y S p r e a d s h e e t - S u b s e q u e n t Y e a r