Transitional Fire Department Proposal: Reno/TMFPD/SFPD

8/2/2019 Transitional Fire Department Proposal: Reno/TMFPD/SFPD

1/9

Transitional Fire Depar

Funding/Staffing Ana


2/9

(All Entities): $5,811,085 See Appendix Amerg Fund/Medical) $1,667,198 See Appendix A

$4,143,887$,632,031 See Appendix A$1,511,856$2,734,734 See Appendix B700,000- 222,641$3,657,375

be Achieved: $2,145,519)How Funding Shortfall Can Be Achieved-Utilizing FY 11/12 and FY 12/13

Projections Provided$200,000) Current budget $250K - Still leaves $50K$575,000) Current budget $650K - Still leaves $75K and Reserve Balance of $5 8M$200,000) Current budget $250K - Still leaves $50K and Reserve Balance ??$500,000) Current budget $1.2M S till leaves $700K - Res erve balance $4 8M$272,236) Current General Fund Reserve balance of $6.0M+$250,000) Current budget $350K - Still leaves $100K$100,000) Current budget $250K - Still leaves $150K plus Balance from FY 11-12(50,000) Current budget $350K - Reserve balance of $3.8M + $1 6 GF Reserve$2,147,236) See Appendix C


3/9

$

Total Available Funding for Fire Services: $

30,000,0009,784,0346,027,05145,811,085

ositions Salaries & Benefi ts

Sub Total Reno Fire/TMFPD Fixed Costs:

9 Positions10 Positions + Fire MarshalUti l izing Existing FY 11-12 Adopted Fire BudgetUti lizing Existing FY 11-12 Adopted Fire BudgetUti lizing Existing FY 11-12 Adopted Fire BudgetUti lizing Existing FY 11-12 Adopted Fire BudgetUti lizing Existing FY 11-12 Adopted Fire BudgetUti lizing Existing FY 11-12 Adopted Fire BudgetUti lizing Existing FY 11-12 Adopted Fire Budget

950,9652,566,862350,000175,000825,000160,0001,927,4242,598,002125,0009,678,253

enefi ts

uppl ies - Operationsire Prevention

338,807250,000100,00050,00078,00026,250123,75024,000900,00045,95013,26038,928Sub Total Sierra FPD Fixed Costs: $,988,945 Per M. WalkerPer M. WalkerPer M. WalkerPer M. WalkerPer M. Walker15% of Reno/TM (Based on Staff %)15% of Reno/TM (Based on Staff %)15% of Reno/TM (Based on Staff %)Per M. WalkerPer M. WalkerPer M. WalkerPer M. WalkerTotal Fixed Costs: $1,667,198TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR BARGAINING UNIT STAFFING: $4,143,887

Inspector (1 Positions),632,031FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS STAFFING: $1,511,856


4/9

Transitional Fire Department - Appendix BFunding/Staffing AnalysisPersonnel Cost to Maintain Current Staffing Level

Salary &alary &Reno/TMFPDotalenefitenefit Cost

Position Classification:ositions Positions Positions Cost/PositionotalsCaptains5.002.007.00 $43,407 $ 9,608,269Operators2 00.0 01.00 $25,468 $ 7,653,548Firefighters21 006.0037.00 $12,941 $ 15,472,917

Totals:28.007.0065.0032,734,734


5/9

Transitional Fire Department - Appendix CFunding/Staffing AnalysisOther Available Funding Shortfall Options:TMFPD Capital Projects FundTMFPD Capital Projects Fund ReserveTMFPD Contingency @ 2% For Annual ExpendituresTMFPD General Fund Reserve - UnrestrictedTMFPD Emergency FundTMFPD Employee Payoffs for Sick/VacationTMFPD Fuels Management ProgramTMFPD Retiree Health PremiumsTMFPD Stabilization Fund ReserveTMFPD Worker's Compensation Fund AllocationTMFPD Coordinator PositionTMFPD Carryforward Savings from FY 11-12SFPD C apital Project FundSFPD C apital Project Fund ReserveSFPD General Fund Reserve

Unrestrictedestricted$50,000$,800,000$72,236$,000,000$50,000 $ 1,500,000 Current Balance$50,000$50,000$50,000 $ 6,800,000 Current Balance$50,200$,295,700 $ 4,800,000 Current Balance$20,000$50,000$50,000$ 2,000,000$ 18,988,136 $ 13,100,000otals:


6/9

Type 1 engine/equip I $510,000 $535,500$320,250 I $562,275$336,262ype 3 engine/equip305,000Type of Equipment010 cost011 cost +5%012 cost +5%-PI ANL: --: one Type 1 and one Type 3 engine with appropriate tools and equipment. Equipment specificationsprepared and out to bid no later than January 31, 2011 with the anticipated construction timeframe of365 days. Total payment due 2012.From our review, we believe the development of a consolidated governance model through theestablishment of a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) between the Reno Fire, The County, TMFPD and theSFPD would result in the ability to develop and regionalize a long-term fire station relocation plan withthe prime objective to site fire stations for more optimal response times to the region.Considerations for Governance , Stat ion D evelopment and Staff ing:

Area W ide Fire Station DistributionRecommendat ion S1.1Recom mend deve lopment of a Joint Pow ers Agreem ent (JPA) for a consolidated governance w ith the Cityof Reno, W ashoe C ounty, Truck ee Meadow s Fire Protection Distr ict and the Sierra Fire Protection Distr ict.Once a J PA is established, a comp rehensive f ire station location study s hould occur taking into account thejurisdictional param eters of the new o rganization. Analys is indicates that action w ill result in an oppo rtunityfor up to two fire companies that can be relocated to fi l l identif ied gap s of f ire protection services. In addit ion,we b elieve that this option will be the most pru dent, cost effective and efficient way to staff the newlyconstructed Arrow Creek Fire Staion.Alternative Option 1(not recommended)This option would assume that the Sierra Fire Protection District would remain independent and not enter intoa Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Reno and Truckee Meadows Fire Protection District. We believe that ifthis were the case, the SFPD would have significant challenges rising any additional funding to staff the new ArrowCreek Fire Station. Considerations for Option 1: Meet and negotiate with the fire labor group for a proposedchange in working conditions that would alter staffing on engine companies from 4 personnel to 3 personnel.Currently the Sierra Fire Protection District maintains three-4 person engine companies. By moving to 3 personengine companies, Sierra could then field four-3 person engine companies. This would then allow the Arrow Creekstation to be staffed with the differential pay for 3 additional fire captains and 3 additional fire engineers.Alternative Option 2 (not recommended)This option would assume that the Sierra Fire Protection District would remain independent and not enter intoa Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Reno and Truckee Meadows Fire Protection District. We believe thatif this were the case, the SFPD would have significant challenges raising any additional funding to staff the newArrow Creek Fire Station. Consideration for Option 2: SFPD enter into discussions with the District Health Boardand enter into a private/public partnership to allocate a REMSA ambulance to an existing and staffed fire station.Next would be to relocate the engine company from that station to staff the new Arrow Creek Station. Beyondthe addition of a private ambulance, SFPD could consider moving the Wild-land Fuels Crew to the Arrow creekstation to provide a minimal level of Wild-land fire protection during designated wild land fire season.Al te rnat ive Option 3 (not recommended, although should be implemented during the WAformation process)Renegotiate the inter local agreement for shared services that would include the Sierra Fire Protection District.This would require agreements with the local labor groups and possibly a leveling in wages and benefits andjob responsibilities between the current SFPD employees and the current wage and benefit structure andjob responsibilities of the Reno/TMFPD employees. This additional cost could be offset by the reduction inadministrative overhead and costs currently associated with the Sierra Fire Protection District. Infrastructureand assets would be handled in the same manner as in the current Inter-local agreement.


7/9

Shared Fire Services to RegionalizationSFPDCommitment to fundingPolicy changes to facilitate budgetOpen Arrowcreek and Bowers w/ 4Bring wag es to parityFlexible staffing m odelNo layoffs

RFD/TMFPDCommitment to fundingSAFER GrantContract for 18 months remainsGet param edic (ALS) level of serviceFlexible staff ing mod elNo layoffs

Combined RFD/TMFPD/SFPDSingle Fire ChiefMajor step Tow ard Re gionalizationNo Tax IncreasesClosest Apparatus Respon ds - Boundary Drop, No D uplication of Respo nseNo U ncovered Islands - Hidden Valley, Caughlin Ran chIncreased Level of S ervice Delivery - B igger Pool of Reso urces, Better Allocation of ResourcesImproved Leve l of EMS De livery - ILS to ALSShared C omm and/Admin Staff (OPS, Prevention, Maintenance, Logistics)Abil ity to Allocate Bu dget and Resou rcesMaintains 4-Person Companies NFPA 1710, NIST, SAFERSingle Policy and P roceduresSingle Dispatch CenterConso lidation of Volunteer S ervicesEqual Rep resentation of Local G overnme nt Entities


8/9

Questions and Answers

1. Will this plan provide for the same service level as the County option 3/5?a. Yes, in addition to Bower's, Arrowcreek and all stations staffed with 4 personnel.

2. Is this plan sustainable within current budget revenues?a Yes, with temporary reallocation of portions from existing fund line items.

3. Does this plan require expenditures of current fund balances?a No, reallocation of funds will suffice to bridge to the 14/15 fiscal year recovery

4. Why does SFPD need parity with RFD?a To provide immediate flexible staffing in compliance with district court rulings

5. Does this plan provide administration with flexible staffing?a Yes, it provides a financial cushion and system wide personnel management

6. Will County stations be browned out?a. Due to their location, time and distance from next closest station, it is highly unlikelyFurthermore, this plan provides funding for all 9 County companies at 4 personnel

7. Does this plan solve auto aid and mutual aid concerns between RFD, SFPD andTMFPD?a Yes, this plan eliminates the need for these agreements so the closest apparatus

responds, regardless of the original jurisdictional boundaries

8. Does this plan impact depth of resources?a Yes, this plan increases our primary response capabilities to all geographic areasserved in our system

9. Does this plan account for fluctuations in personnel cost or revenues?a Yes, personnel costs are fixed for 2 years and substantial monies remain availablesubject to policy adjustment (Appendix C).


9/9

10. What are other potential savings not identified in the plan?a. As evidenced by the savings enjoyed by the County and City over the past 11 years,

less duplication of services and redundancy of positions are expected to provideadditional savings

11. How will this plan impact the volunteers?a Include volunteers into the command structure with career personnel

12. What does including the volunteers to the department command structure provide?a. Volunteers will fit into the accountability system leading to a safer and more efficient

force Also, they will meet compliance with National training standards.

13. What is the road map to build this new system?a The Diamante Study (see Attachment), as approved by both governmental entities, hasreasonable, realistic and obtainable steps to regionalization

14. Can true regionalization be achieved under the current budgetary and contractualconstraints?a Yes, with a good faith effort by labor and management working in concert, we can

redesign our system for the best service to our community for years to come

Transitional Fire Department Proposal: Reno/TMFPD/SFPD

Documents

Transcript of Transitional Fire Department Proposal: Reno/TMFPD/SFPD