Countywide Fire Service Review

Countywide Fire Protection Service Review LAFCO of SANTA CLARA COUNTY April 2004 ADOPTED APRIL 7, 2004 By Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County LAFCO Commissioners Blanca Alvarado, County Representative Don Gage, County Representative Linda J. LeZotte, City of San Jose Representative Susan Vicklund Wilson, Public Representative Mary Lou Zoglin, City Representative Countywide Fire Protection Service Review Technical Advisory Committee Jeffrey L. Clet, Fire Chief, City of Gilroy Kevin C. Duggan, City Manager, City of Mountain View Benjamin F. Lopes, Fire Chief, Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District LAFCO Staff Neelima Palacherla, LAFCO Executive Officer Dunia Noel, LAFCO Analyst Emmanuel Abello, LAFCO Clerk Kathy Kretchmer, LAFCO Counsel TABLE OF CONTENTS April 2004 1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. LAFCO’S SERVICE REVIEW REQUIREMENTS 1 2. AGENCIES INCLUDED IN THIS SERVICE REVIEW 2 3. CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT 3 4. HOW THE REPORT WILL BE USED 3 (1) To Update Spheres of Influence (SOI) 3 (2) To Initiate or Consider Jurisdictional Boundary Changes 3 (3) To Consider Other Types of LAFCO Applications 4 (4) Other Uses 5 5. SERVICE REVIEW PROCESS 5 6. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT 6 7. SUMMARY OF KEY AREAS 7 2. OVERVIEW OF THE FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES SYSTEM IN 10 SANTA CLARA COUNTY 3. SUMMARY PROFILES OF THE FIRE AGENCIES IN SANTA CLARA 16 COUNTY City of Gilroy Fire Department 17 Los Altos Hills County Fire District 19 City of Milpitas Fire Department 21 Moffett Field Fire Department 23 City of Mountain View Fire Department 24 City of Palo Alto Fire Department 26 City of San Jose Fire Department 28 City of Santa Clara Fire Department 32 Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District 34 Saratoga Fire Protection District 37 South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District 40 City of Sunnyvale Public Safety Department 43 Volunteer Fire Companies 45 4. GROWTH AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS 47 1. POPULATION DATA AND PROJECTIONS FOR CITIES IN SANTA 47 CLARA COUNTY 2. POPULATION DATA FOR FIRE DISTRICTS IN SANTA CLARA 48 COUNTY (1) Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire) 50 (2) Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD) 52 (3) Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) 52 (4) South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District (South 53 County Fire) 3. POPULATION OF THE “UNDERSERVED AREA” 54 5. FUNDING MECHANISMS FOR FIRE SERVICES 55 1. BACKGROUND 55 2. REVENUE TERMS AND DEFINITIONS 56 3. FUND DESCRIPTION 59 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION 60 (1) Requirements for New Fees 61 (2) Requirements for New Taxes 61 (3) Requirements for New Assessments 62 (4) Property Taxes and Jurisdictional Change 62 5. THE EFFECTS OF THE ERAF PROPERTY TAX SHIFTS 63 6. REVENUE SOURCE AND AMOUNT FOR EACH SPECIAL DISTRICT 63 6. DEFINITION OF FIRE SERVICE GOALS 1. THERE IS EXTENSIVE DEBATE REGARDING THE MOST 66 APPROPRIATE APPROACH TO DEFINING SERVICE LEVELS IN THE FIRE SERVICE (1) Most Targets for Fire and EMS Service Delivery Are Based on 66 Research into Fire Behavior and Cardiac Survival (2) Extensive Research Has Been Conducted Regarding the 69 Impact of Response Times, Company Staffing and Other Factors on Service Delivery (3) The National Fire Protection Association Has Developed a Set 73 of Guidelines for Fire Service Deployment and Response Capabilities 2. ANALYSIS OF CURRENT SERVICE DELIVERY SHOWS POTENTIAL 75 ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT DEPLOYMENT (1) The Matrix Consulting Group Used a Computer Mapping Model to 76 Evaluate Response Capabilities of the Fire Department (2) Summary of Current Response Capabilities of Fire Agencies 76 in Santa Clara County 7. ISSUES WITH CURRENT FIRE SERVICES AND ANALYSIS OF FIRE 79 SERVICE ALTERNATIVES 1. FIRE PROTECTION FOR AREAS OUTSIDE OF ORGANIZED FIRE 79 PROTECTION JURISDICTIONS A. Background 79 B. Service Characteristics 81 C. Existence of Other Models of Service Delivery 82 D. Issues Summary 83 E. Challenges in Revenue and Cost Determination 83 F. Options and Alternatives 84 2. REGIONAL FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE FOR SOUTH COUNTY 92 A. Background 92 B. Service Characteristics 93 C. Issues Summary 96 D. Options and Alternatives 97 3. REGIONAL PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES FOR SARATOGA AND 106 SURROUNDING AREAS A. Background 106 B. Service Characteristics 108 C. Options and Alternatives 114 4. REGIONAL COOPERATION ON FIRE SERVICE PROTECTION 122 SUPPORT SERVICES, INCLUDING TRAINING AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Background 122 B. Current Characteristics of Approaches to Training in the 125 County C. Issue Summary 126 D. Options and Alternatives 128 5. LOS ALTOS HILLS COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT 132 8. SERVICE REVIEW DETERMINATIONS 134 1. INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS AND DEFICIENCIES 135 2. GROWTH AND POPULATION 136 3. FINANCING CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES 137 4. COST AVOIDANCE OPPORTUNITIES 139 5. OPPORTUNITIES FOR RATE RESTRUCTURING 140 6. OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHARED FACILITIES 140 7. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE OPTIONS 141 8. EVALUATION OF MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCIES 143 9. LOCAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND GOVERNANCE 144 ATTACHMENTS: A. ADDITIONAL AGENCY INFORMATION A – 1 B. GLOSSARY B – 1 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This first chapter of the report describes the background to the study, its scope of work and the methodologies utilized. This first chapter also provides an encapsulated summary of the key findings and alternatives examined in this report. 1. LAFCO’S SERVICE REVIEW REQUIREMENTS The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (California Government Code §56000 et seq.) requires that each Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) conduct service reviews prior to or in conjunction with the 5-year mandated sphere of influence updates. As part of the service review, LAFCOs must prepare an analysis and written statement of determinations regarding each of the following nine categories: • Infrastructure needs and deficiencies • Growth and population projections • Financing constraints and opportunities • Cost avoidance opportunities • Opportunities for rate restructuring • Opportunities for shared facilities • Government structure options (including advantages and disadvantages of consolidation or re-organization of service providers) • Evaluation of management efficiencies • Local accountability and governance The service reviews are intended as an informational tool to help LAFCO, the public and other agencies better understand the public service structure. The service Matrix Consulting Group Page 1 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study review will serve as an important resource to LAFCO in meeting its goals of preventing urban sprawl, protecting open space and agricultural lands and ensuring efficient service provision. LAFCOs are not required to initiate boundary changes based on service reviews. However, LAFCO, local agencies or the public may subsequently use the service reviews together with additional research and analysis where necessary, to pursue changes in jurisdictional boundaries or spheres of influence. 2. AGENCIES INCLUDED IN THIS SERVICE REVIEW This service review has been conducted on a countywide basis and includes all the agencies that provide fire protection services in Santa Clara County. It focuses on the four special districts that provide fire protection services, as well as on the municipal fire departments of seven cities. Special Districts Cities Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Gilroy Fire Department Saratoga Fire Protection District Milpitas Fire Department Los Altos Hills County Fire District Mountain View Fire Department South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District Palo Alto Fire Department San Jose Fire Department Santa Clara Fire Department Sunnyvale Public Safety Department The report also includes information on private fire protection service providers, volunteer fire companies, and other fire protection service providers (e.g., California Department of Forestry) to the extent necessary to establish relationships, quantify services, designate or map service locations/facilities and provide a complete overview of fire protection services in the County. LAFCO has no authority over these organizations. Matrix Consulting Group Page 2 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT The countywide fire protection service review report provides an overview of the overall fire service provision structure in the County along with profiles of all the agencies/departments that provide fire protection service. It identifies issues related to fire service provision, proposes various options for addressing these issues and provides a brief analysis of the alternatives. The report does NOT make any specific recommendations with regard to the alternatives proposed. Lastly, the report includes the required service review determinations for each of the four fire special districts. 4. HOW THE REPORT WILL BE USED (1) To Update Spheres of Influence (SOI) The information collected through the service review report will be used by LAFCO specifically to update the SOIs of individual agencies (cities and special districts) including expansions or reductions in the SOI boundaries or creation of new SOIs. This report will be used to update the SOIs of the four fire special districts. With regard to the cities, LAFCO will use this information along with the information gathered in subsequent sub-regional service reviews to update the SOI of cities. (2) To Initiate or Consider Jurisdictional Boundary Changes The service review report contains a discussion of various alternative government structures for efficient service provision. LAFCO is NOT required to initiate any boundary changes based on service reviews. However, LAFCO, other local agencies (including cities, special districts and the County) or the public may subsequently use the service reviews together with additional research and analysis, where necessary, to pursue changes in jurisdictional boundaries. Government Code Matrix Consulting Group Page 3 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Section 56375(a) gives LAFCO the power to initiate certain types of boundary changes consistent with a service review and sphere of influence study. These boundary changes include: • Consolidation of districts (joining two or more districts into a single new successor district); • Dissolution (termination of the existence of a district and its corporate powers); • Merger (termination of the existence of a district by the merger of that district with a city); • Establishment of a subsidiary district (where the city council is designated as the board of directors of the district); or • A reorganization that includes any of the above. Any local agency (cities, special districts or the County) which contain, or would contain, or whose sphere of influence contains, any territory within the proposal to be reviewed by LAFCO may apply to LAFCO for a boundary change with a resolution adopted by its legislative body. Registered voters within the proposal area or property owners owning property within the proposal area may petition LAFCO for a boundary change. The following boundary changes in addition to those listed above may be proposed to LAFCO: • Formation of a new district/city; • Annexation or detachment to /from a city/district; or • A reorganization that includes any of the above. (3) To Consider Other Types of LAFCO Applications LAFCO may also use the information presented in the service reviews in reviewing future proposals for extensions of services beyond an agency’s jurisdictional boundaries or for amendment of urban service area boundaries of a city. Matrix Consulting Group Page 4 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study (4) Other Uses Other entities and the public may use this report as a foundation for further studies and analysis of issues relating to fire protection services in this County. 5. SERVICE REVIEW PROCESS LAFCO retained the Matrix Consulting Group in March 2003 to conduct the countywide fire protection service review. The consultants have met with, discussed and collected information from all the agencies that provide fire services in Santa Clara County. Interviews were conducted with the Fire Chiefs in each agency. These interviews were followed-up by meetings with other command and program staff. The purpose of these meetings was to develop an understanding of each agency’s organization of emergency services, costs, staffing and programs as well as issues potentially impacting this study. Interviews were followed-up by data collection. Data collection focused on documenting key aspects of fire service organization, staffing, staffing policies, budgets, salaries and fringe benefits, emergency medical service delivery, fire prevention programs, training, apparatus and facilities, and call for service workloads. Profiles for each of the agencies were created using the information collected. These profiles were sent to the agencies for review and comment. Changes proposed were incorporated into the final profiles of the agencies included in this report. A technical advisory committee comprised of two fire chiefs, a city manager and LAFCO staff have been working closely with the consultant, discussing, reviewing and providing input as well as serving as liaison between LAFCO, City Manager’s Association and the Fire Chief’s Association throughout the process. Matrix Consulting Group Page 5 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study In addition, periodic updates on the service review process have been provided to LAFCO, the Fire Chief’s Association, the Santa Clara County Cities Association and the City Manager’s Association. 6. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT This report is divided into eight chapters, as detailed below: • Chapter 1 – describes the background and scope of this study, its use and the methodologies utilized. • Chapter 2 – provides an overview, or summary description, of the fire services system in Santa Clara County. • Chapter 3 – provides additional detail on the on the fire services providers in the County. • Chapter 4 – provides information on the current and projected population of the County, by jurisdiction. • Chapter 5 – provides an overview of local government funding as it relates to the provision of fire services in California. • Chapter 6 - provides an overview of defining and determining levels of service for fire protection delivery systems. • Chapter 7 – identifies issues related to the current system to delivery in Santa Clara County and analyzes alternatives to the issues identified. • Chapter 8 – provides the recommended service review determinations. • Attachment A – provides additional information for each fire agency in the County. • Attachment B – provides a glossary of key terms. Matrix Consulting Group Page 6 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 7. SUMMARY OF KEY AREAS The following table provides an encapsulated summary of key areas, conclusions and alternatives examined in this report. Area Report Summary Implementation of Revenue (1) Requirements for New Fees Enhancement Measures To impose a new or increased property-related fee, local government must comply with the certain fee restriction and fee rate calculation requirements. Local governments must also: • Mail information about the proposed fee to property owners. • Hold a hearing at least 45 days after the mailing. • Reject the proposed fee if written protests are presented by a majority of the affected property owners. • Hold an election on any property-related fee, other than a fee for water, sewer, or refuse collection. As a practical matter, many local governments are more likely to try to raise revenues through non property-related fees or taxes. (2) Requirements for New Taxes In order to impose or increase a tax, local government must comply with the following provisions: • All general taxes must be approved by a majority vote of the people. A 1986 statutory initiative, Proposition 62, previously imposed this vote requirement on general law cities and counties. Proposition 218 expands this requirement to include charter cities. • Elections for general taxes must be consolidated with a regularly scheduled election for members of the local governing body. In an emergency, this provision may be waived by a unanimous vote of the governing body. • Any tax imposed for a specific purpose is a "special tax." This approach is difficult because of the two-thirds vote threshold. (3) Requirements for New Assessments All new or increased assessments must follow certain assessment calculation and election requirements. As a practical matter, this requirement will mean that programs that benefit people, rather than specific properties, such as libraries, mosquito abatement, recreation programs, police protection, and some business improvement programs, must be financed by general or special taxes or by other non-assessment revenues. Matrix Consulting Group Page 7 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Area Report Summary Assessment of Service • The more urbanized North County Region has a greater Capabilities number and higher density of resources than the South County Region. • In general, the more urbanized areas of the County meet performance goals established in this study. • The deployment of resources in and around Saratoga is fairly consistent with the overall County now that there is a boundary drop agreement in place. • The current deployment in the South County Region has some difficulty in meeting performance goals established in this study. However, the City of Gilroy does provide a higher degree of compliance with performance goals established in this study. • The current “underserved areas” of the County universally fall outside of the performance goals established in this study. Principal Issues and Alternatives 1. Fire services in the areas of 1. FIRE PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES FOR AREAS the County outside of cities OUTSIDE OF ORGANIZED FIRE PROTECTION AGENCIES and districts do not meet • Creation of a new fire district, or expansion of existing fire performance goals protection district(s) to cover all underserved areas. established in this study. • Creation of a JPA between the Cities of Milpitas and San Jose, the County of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire), the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) and the South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District (South County Fire). • Creation of a County Service Area (CSA) to include all the areas outside of organized fire protection agencies. • Continuation of the current system of local service delivery with or without other service improvements or coordination. 2. Fire service performance in 2. REGIONAL PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES FOR SOUTH the South County varies by COUNTY jurisdiction. • Creation of a new fire district, or expansion of existing South County Fire to cover the entire South County area. • Creation of a JPA between the Cities of Morgan Hill and Gilroy, the County of Santa Clara and the South County Fire – service contracted out to a single entity. • Creation of a County Service Area (CSA) within the South County Region. • Continuation of the current system of local service delivery with or without other service improvements or coordination. Matrix Consulting Group Page 8 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Area Report Summary Principal Issues and Alternatives 3. The City of Saratoga is 3. REGIONAL PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES FOR served by two agencies with SARATOGA AND SURROUNDING AREAS differing capabilities. • Dissolution of the Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) and annexation of existing district to County Fire. • Withdrawal of the City of Saratoga from the County Fire and the SFPD. Ultimate method of providing fire protection within the City decided by Saratoga City Council. • Expansion of boundaries of the SFPD to include all of the City of Saratoga. Detachment of relevant properties from the County Fire. • Continuation of the current system of local service delivery with or without other service improvements or coordination. 4. There are a number of ways 4. REGIONAL APPROACHES TO FIRE SERVICE RESOURCE in which agencies can share SHARING resources to improve • Creation of a JPA among all established fire agencies in Santa efficiency and effectiveness. Clara County or contracts for service for purposes of providing support services (e.g., training and emergency communications). • Continuation of the current system of local training delivery and emergency communications with or without other service improvements or coordination. • Standardization of equipment and apparatus. • Standardization of tasks and evolutions. • Cost sharing opportunities associated with facility and apparatus maintenance. 5. Los Altos Hills has a fire 5. LOS ALTOS HILLS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT district which contracts with • Continued independent existence to provide fire and other another fire district for local services. service. • Dissolution of the District and merger with the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District. Matrix Consulting Group Page 9 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 2. OVERVIEW OF THE FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES SYSTEM IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY The fire services system in Santa Clara County, as is the case in most urbanized counties in California, is a complex mix of municipal agencies, fire protection districts, volunteer companies and various forms of State fire protection. The following points provide a general overview of the fire protection system in Santa Clara County: • There are seven (7) municipal fire departments in the County, including: – Gilroy – Milpitas – Mountain View – Palo Alto – San Jose – Santa Clara – Sunnyvale (a department of public safety, which consists of both fire and police functions) Municipal fire departments are funded through general fund monies. • In addition, there are four special districts in Santa Clara County, including: – Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire), serves areas in the central and northern parts of the County including cities of Cupertino, Los Gatos, a part of Saratoga, Monte Sereno and other unincorporated areas as well as provides services by contract to the cities of Campbell, Los Altos, Morgan Hill as well as the Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD); and is governed by the County Board of Supervisors. – South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District (South County Fire), which serves the unincorporated areas in the southern portion of the County, contracts with the California Department of Forestry (CDF) for service, and is governed by the County Board of Supervisors. Matrix Consulting Group Page 10 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study – The Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) serves half of the City of Saratoga and the unincorporated lands to the west of the City and is governed by an independent Board of Directors. – The Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD), which serves the Town of Los Altos Hills in addition to some surrounding unincorporated areas and is a dependent district governed by the Board of Supervisors with an Advisory Fire Commission. The LAHCFD contracts with County Fire for fire protection services. • Several jurisdictions have their fire service provided by another service provider through a contract. Jurisdiction Type Service Provider Campbell City County Fire Cupertino City County Fire Los Altos City County Fire Los Altos Hills City LAHCFD Los Altos Hills County Fire District District County Fire Los Gatos City County Fire Monte Sereno City County Fire Morgan Hill City County Fire Saratoga City SFPD County Fire Stanford University Unincorporated. Palo Alto F.D. • As noted above, the California Department of Forestry (CDF) not only provides service within State Responsibility Areas (SRA’s), principally wildland and open space areas within the County, but is part of a countywide mutual aid and specific automatic aid systems. • County Fire acts as the Fire Marshal not only for the areas it directly serves but for all unincorporated areas of the County, including Stanford University which receives suppression and EMS services from Palo Alto under contract. County Fire also performs responsibilities of the State Fire Marshal relating to institutional facilities (e.g., detention facilities). • There are six volunteer fire companies in rural areas which are outside of organized fire jurisdictions. While they are supported in their operations by Matrix Consulting Group Page 11 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CDF, County Fire, and South County Fire as well as by neighboring city fire departments, the volunteer companies are private entities (e.g., the County pays for workers compensation and liability insurance for volunteers). They include: – Ormsby Fire Brigade, serving areas north of Mt. Madonna Park – Casa Loma Volunteers, serving areas west of Uvas Road and south of Mt. Umunhum – Stevens Creek Volunteers, serving areas west of Cupertino and Saratoga – Spring Valley Volunteers, serving areas east of Milpitas – San Antone Volunteers, serving areas east of Mt. Hamilton – Uvas Volunteers, serving areas of Croy and Uvas • There are other fire service agencies which exist to serve in special capacities, as follows: – The United Technology plant has a fire service to provide immediate emergency service relating to missile propulsion system testing as well as other activities at the plant. – Moffett Field has a federally funded and operated fire service to serve NASA and the other operators at the former naval air station and air force base. • In addition to the individual agency capabilities, there are several systems or subsystems in place within the County that support the operations of the fire delivery system and/or provide enhanced levels of service. These include the following: – A countywide mutual aid agreement in which any agency can request general or specialized services from another agency in the County. The Santa Clara County Local Fire Service and Rescue Mutual Aid Plan is an extension of, the California Fire Service and Rescue Emergency Mutual Aid Plan. This Plan supports the concepts of the Incident Command System (ICS), the Integrated Emergency Management System (IEMS), and multi-hazard response planning. All public agencies are a signatory to the agreement with the exception of CDF which utilizes the Statewide Mutual aid plan because of their statewide presence. – Agency automatic aid agreements in which neighboring jurisdictions ‘drop their boundaries’ and practice closest unit response (e.g., Palo Alto and Mountain View). Matrix Consulting Group Page 12 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study – A Countywide system of hazardous materials response is in effect. County Fire provides a Type 1 Response Capability throughout the County, 24-hours/day – 365 days/year. The City of San Jose also has a staffed Type 1 hazardous materials response team. This is the highest service level available to provide containment and mitigation of hazardous materials skills. This level of service is supplemented by other jurisdictions that also provide Hazardous Materials Response although not at Type 1. These agencies include the Cities of Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale. – Emergency communications is provided on a multiple tier basis. Generally speaking, those agencies with their own law enforcement agencies provide initial call taking and fire related dispatch. Emergency medical services (EMS) dispatching and the communications function of the ambulance provider is maintained at County Communications and is provided on a Countywide basis, except for the City of Palo Alto. The County Communications and the City of San Jose provide fire dispatching and are accredited centers for EMS dispatching. Pre-arrival instructions and call prioritization take place within the City of San Jose. However, ambulances in the City are still dispatched by County Communications. Smaller agencies that receive their law enforcement through the County Sheriff and their fire services through County Fire are dispatched solely through County Communications. CDF provides dispatch services for its resources with EMS/ambulance dispatch taking place through County Communications as in the remainder of the County. – Emergency medical services are mostly provided through an integrated system utilizing both public and private resources. This can be summarized, as follows: •• With the exception of Sunnyvale, all fire service agencies in the County provide first response ‘advanced life support’ (ALS) service on calls. •• With the exception of the City of Palo Alto, American Medical Response (AMR) is the provider of Advanced Life Support (ALS) ambulance transportation services. There is a countywide Quality Assurance program that monitors and maintains clinical standards of excellence for both the public and private agencies. •• The City of Palo Alto has an ALS capacity in house and responds with paramedics as well as transports, as needed. •• AMR sub-contracts with the various fire agencies to provide ALS First Responder Services (with the exception of the City of Matrix Consulting Group Page 13 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Sunnyvale where AMR provides first responder as well as transport services). •• The cities of Santa Clara, San Jose and Gilroy have additional agreements that supplement the EMS system with additional ambulances that can be utilized at times of high system demand or disaster. – Fire service training occurs primarily on an individual agency basis. There are Regional Recruit and Officer academies that operate with varying degrees of participation and success. There are multiple training facilities within the County including those operated by County Fire, the Cities of Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale. – Disaster Management and Mitigation operations are within in the framework of the Countywide Fire Services and Rescue Master Mutual Aid Plan. This Plan covers unit designations, common/master mutual aid radio frequencies, command structures, standard deployment and response characteristics and contingency plans. Universally, individual agencies have created, and offer Community Emergency Response Training (CERT). The purpose of these programs is to increase awareness and the probability of appropriate behaviors within neighborhood communities in the event of a large-scale incident or disaster. The map, which follows this page, shows the jurisdictional boundaries of the special districts that provide fire services in Santa Clara County. Matrix Consulting Group Page 14 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Matrix Consulting Group Page 15 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. SUMMARY PROFILES OF FIRE PROTECTION AGENCIES IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY This section provides a summary of relevant data regarding the agencies that provide fire protection services within Santa Clara County. More detail can be found in the Attachment A – Additional Agency Information found at the rear of this report. It is important to note that as it relates to budgetary comparisons, the data presented here should be viewed with an understanding of its potential limitations. Jurisdictions may account for expenditures in different ways. For example, one jurisdiction may account for apparatus replacement in a “fleet maintenance” account, while other jurisdictions utilize a “sinking fund” approach, which is reflected in an agencies operating budget. Further, there are significant differences between the cost structures of fire districts and municipal fire departments. Districts must support, or provide for the entire administrative overhead and bear the full impact of costs related to being an independent entity. Costs such as liability insurance, capital improvements, director’s expenses, legal expenses and other overhead are usually not reflected in operating budgets of municipal departments, but must be reflected in the overall budget of fire districts. Additionally, municipalities may reflect those costs differently; therefore the summary profile information provided may not be comparable. Matrix Consulting Group Page 16 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CITY OF GILROY FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY City of Gilroy Type of Agency: Municipal Governing Body: City Council Area Covered: 16 square miles Service Area Description: Services the City of Gilroy Population Served (2000 Census): 41,464 Number of Fire Stations: 3 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 2 • Rescue - Ambulance 1 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Chief 1 1 Fire Division Chief 3 3 Fire Captain 12 8 Fire Engineer 6 6 Firefighter 6 8 Firefighter/Paramedic 12 12 Fire Education Specialist 1 1 Fire/EMS Analyst 1 1 Total Paid Staff 42 40 Total Volunteers / Paid Call Firefighters 10 7 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Gilroy Fire Department Annualized Data for 2003 Utilizing 1st Quarter Data Call Type Number Percent of Total Structure Fire 44 2% Other Fire 52 2% Emergency Medical 1,528 69% Vehicle Accident 132 6% Public Service 224 10% Hazardous Material 52 2% Fire Alarm – No Fire 0 0% Auto Aid Provided 180 8% Total Demand for Services 2,212 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 17 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $ 4,965,461 79% Operating Expense Total $ 1,117,480 18% Subtotal $6,082941 Capital Expense Total $ 190,259 3% Total Operational and Capital Budget $6,273,200 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 18 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study LOS ALTOS HILLS COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD) Type of Agency: Special District (Dependent) Governing Body: District Board Service Area Description: Covers the Town of Los Altos Hills in addition to some surrounding unincorporated area. Also contracts with the Palo Alto Fire Department to assist with summertime station coverage at the Foothills station. Population Served (2000 Census): 11,609 Number of Fire Stations: 2 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 0 • Ambulance 0 2. SERVICE DESCRIPTION Service Description Fire Protection • Provided through contract with County Fire • Supplemental services provided under contract by the Palo Alto Fire Department during the summer. Emergency Medical • Provided through contract with County Fire. Chipper Service • Provides chipping service to citizens free during a month period each year. Garden Debris • Provides yard waste removal program for citizens. Brush and Weed Clearance • Hillside weed clearance. Water Mains and Fire • Replacement of undersized water mains and Hydrants installation of new water mains and fire hydrants where needed. Matrix Consulting Group Page 19 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing * Auth. Actual Secretary 0.5 0.5 TOTAL STAFF 0.5 0.5 * In addition to the staff shown, the LAHCFD retains a consultant to provide counsel to the District Board. 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Contract Services $2,012,236 50% District Operations $585,258 14% Subtotal $2,597,494 Capital Expense Total $1,450,000 36% Total Operational and Capital Budget $4,047,494 100% Revenue Item Amount % of Total Property Taxes $3,600,000 82% Tax Collection Fee 45,000 1% Unsecured Property Taxes 350,000 8% SB-13 35,000 1% HOPTR 29,971 1% Unitary Refund 10,000 Refunds (4,000) Interest 300,000 7% Total Revenue Budget $4,365,971 100% Reserves Item Amount % of Total Property Taxes $3,600,000 50% Tax Collection Fee 45,000 5. AGENCY MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE Area of Organization and Management Details How Legally Organized Fire District (dependent) Year Organized (if independent entity) 1949 Board Composition Board of Supervisors who appoints a District Commission Board Selection and Terms General Election – 4 year terms Matrix Consulting Group Page 20 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CITY OF MILPITAS FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY City of Milpitas Type of Agency: Municipal Governing Body: City Council Area Covered: 13.6 square miles Service Area Description: Services the City of Milpitas Population Served (2000 Census): 62,698 Number of Fire Stations: 4 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 4 • Trucks 1 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Chief 1 1 Secretary 1 1 Office Assistant 1 1 Assistant Chief 1 1 Battalion Chief 3 3 Captain I 15 15 Engineer/Paramedic 15 15 FF/Paramedic 20 20 Fire Mechanic 1 1 Battalion Chief 1 1 Fire Marshal 1 1 Assistant Fire Marshal 1 1 Office Specialist 1 1 Fire Inspector/ Captain 2 2 Haz Mat Inspector/ Captain 3 3 Plan Check Engineer 2 1 TOTAL STAFF 69 68 Matrix Consulting Group Page 21 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Milpitas Fire Department Calendar Year 2002 Call Type Number Percent of Total Structure and Other Fire 174 5% Hazardous Materials 45 1% Emergency Medical 2,165 58% Vehicle Accident 342 9% Public Service 267 7% Fire Alarm – No Fire 352 9% Other 416 11% Total 3,761 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $ 10,921,853 85% Operating Expense Total $ 1,537,385 12% Subtotal $12,459,238 Capital Expense Total $ 422,640 3% Total Operational and Capital Budget $12,881,878 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 22 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study MOFFETT FIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT The profile format for the Moffett Field Fire Department is quite different than the other profiles because the mission, purpose, organization, and operations of the Moffett Field Fire Department is quite unique and unlike any other organization in the United States. • The equipment utilized and the training required of the staff is more specialized than a typical agency fire department. This includes operating sophisticated and numerous Crash Units for various aircraft as well as training for highly acute hazardous materials utilized by NASA labs. • All positions are certified firefighters, they are also Airport Certified, which follows the Department of Defense protocols. • The funding approaches, incident demand and type and response policies are unique. As such, the Moffett Field Fire Department is really not a component of a larger network of fire operations in Santa Clara County. However, we note and emphasize that the Moffett Field Fire Department responds to most requests for Mutual Aid, especially with the City of Mountain View. Moffett Field Fire Department Type of Agency: California State Military Reserve Governing Body: Reports to multiple agencies include NASA, State of California, and the California National Guard Service Area Description: Moffett Field Number of Fire Stations: 1 Number of Front Line Apparatus: 7 CRASH units 6 structural response units Staffing: • Fire Chief 1 • BC 3 • Fire Captain 11 • Fire Engineer 4 • Fire Fighter 24 Total 42 Matrix Consulting Group Page 23 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY City of Mountain View Type of Agency: Municipal Governing Body: City Council Area Covered: 12 square miles Service Area Description: Services the City of Mountain View Population Served (2000 Census): 70,708 Number of Fire Stations: 5 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 5 • Trucks 1 • Rescues 1 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Chief 1 1 Battalion Chief 4 4 Fire Marshal 1 1 Senior Administrative Analyst 1 1 Communications Manager 1 1 Executive Assistant 1 1 Office Assistant III 2 1 Fire Captain 13 13 Fire Engineer 13 13 Firefighter 4 6 Firefighter Paramedic 21 19 Fire Captain HazMat I 2 2 Fire Captain HazMat II 3 3 Fire Engineer HazMat I 2 2 Fire Engineer HazMat II 3 3 Firefighter HazMat I 2 0 Firefighter HazMat II 3 2 Deputy Fire Marshal 2 2 Fire Protection Engineer 1 1 Env. and Safety Protection Inspector 2 2 Building Inspector III 2 2 Hazardous Materials Specialists 2 2 Urban Runoff Coordinator 1 1 Total 87 83 Matrix Consulting Group Page 24 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Mountain View Fire Department (2002) Fire, Explosion 123 3% Medical/Rescue 2,753 56% Hazardous Condition 179 4% Service 573 12% Good Intent 667 14% False 554 11% Natural Disaster 4 0% Other 34 1% TOTAL 4,887 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total - - Operating Expense Total - - Subtotal $13,616,355 Capital Expense Total $267,955 - Total Operational and Capital Budget $13,884,310 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 25 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CITY OF PALO ALTO FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY City of Palo Alto Type of Agency: Municipal Governing Body: City Council Area Covered: 50 square miles Service Area Description: Services the City of Palo Alto, Stanford University, Stanford Linear Acceleration Center, and part of Los Altos Hills (summer only) Population Served (2000 Census): 58,598, excludes Stanford University Number of Fire Stations: 7 (plus 1 summer only station) Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 7 (plus 1 summer only engine) • Trucks 1 • Rescue 1 • Ambulance 2 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Chief 1 1 Deputy Chief 3 3 Environmental Coordinator 1 1 Hazardous Materials Specialist 1 1 Fire Inspector 4 2 Battalion Chief 6 5 Fire Captain 35 27 Operator 33 33 Firefighter / Paramedic 48 48 Disaster Coordinator 1 1 Administrative Assistant 1 1 Office Specialist 4 3 Total 138 126 Matrix Consulting Group Page 26 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Palo Alto Fire Department From July 1, 2001 To June 30, 2002 Call Type Number Percent of Total Fire 285 4% Medical / Rescue 3,958 57% False Alarm 1,311 19% Service Calls 1,152 16% Hazardous Condition 279 4% Total Demand for Services 6,985 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $16,085,368 85% Operating Expense Total $ 2,808,820 15% Subtotal $18,894,188 Capital Expense Total – – Total Operational and Capital Budget $18,894,188 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 27 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CITY OF SAN JOSE FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY City of San Jose Type of Agency: Municipal Governing Body: City Council Area Covered: 174 square miles Service Area Description: Services the City of San Jose and pockets of unincorporated areas through contract with the Santa Clara County Central Fire District. Population Served (2000 Census): 894,943 Number of Fire Stations: 31 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 31 • Trucks 8 • Rescue 8 • Ambulance 2 • Hazardous Incident Team 1 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual OFFICE OF THE CHIEF Fire Chief 1 1 Administrative Assistant 1 1 Public Information Officer 0 1 Assistant Fire Chief 1 1 BUREAU OF FIELD OPERATIONS Deputy Fire Chief 1 1 Division Chief 3 0 Secretary 1 1 Administrative Captain 1 1 Wildland Captain 1 1 Division Chief 0 0 Senior Office Specialist 1 1 Battalion Chief 18 13 Captain 123 118 Captain 28 33 Engineer 199 175 Engineer 29 29 Firefighter 105 102 Firefighter 19 19 Paramedic 126 106 Matrix Consulting Group Page 28 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Number Staffing Auth. Actual Paramedic 22 20 BUREAU OF SUPPORT SERVICES Deputy Chief 1 1 Secretary 1 1 Fire Protection Engineer 1 1 Network Technician/Engineer 2 2 Infrastructure and Supplies Division Battalion Chief 1 1 Fire Equipment Technician 1 1 Fire Equipment Technician 1 1 Captain 1 1 Captain 1 1 Administrative Analyst 1 1 Communications Division Battalion Chief 1 1 Senior OS 1 1 Supervising Public Safety Dispatcher 3 3 Operations Senior Public Safety Dispatcher 6 6 PSD II 29 29 Training Senior Public Safety Dispatcher 2 2 Systems Support Senior Public Safety Dispatcher 1 1 BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION Deputy Chief 1 1 Battalion Chief 1 1 Senior Haz Mat Inspector 1 1 Special Occupancies Unit Captain 1 1 Inspector 4 3 Arson Unit Capitan 1 1 Arson Investigator 4 4 Plan Review Unit — Architectural Supervising Fire Protection Engineer 1 0 Fire Protection Engineer 7 4 Inspector 1 1 Permit Specialist 1 1 Plan Review Unit — Systems Supervising Fire Protection Engineer 1 1 Fire Protection Engineer 5 5 FP Assistant 2 2 Permit Specialist 1 1 Inspector 2 1 Permitted Occupancies Captain 1 1 Inspector 5 4 Hazardous Materials Senior Haz Mat Inspector 1 1 Haz Mat Inspector 7 7 Inspector 1 1 Matrix Consulting Group Page 29 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Number Staffing Auth. Actual Support Staff Principal Office Specialist 1 1 Senior OS 1 1 Office Specialist II 5 5 BUREAU OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING Deputy Chief 1 1 Training Specialists 1 2 Office Specialist II 1 1 Training Division Battalion Chief 1 1 Training Captain 4 0 Staff Specialist 1 1 Fiscal Unit Analyst II 1 1 Office Specialist II 1 1 EMS Division Battalion chief 1 1 EMS Field Coordinator 3 3 CQI 1 1 Training Coordinator 1 1 Basic Life Support Coordinator 1 1 Medical Director 1 1 EMS Nurse 1 1 Staff Specialist 1 1 Office Specialist II 1 1 Public Education Division Training Specialist 1 2 BUREAU OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Deputy Chief 1 1 Internal Affairs — Analyst 1 1 Administrative Officer 1 1 Fiscal Division — Senior Analyst 1 1 Account Payable/ Receivable Supervisor 1 1 Accounting Staff 1 1 Budget Division — Senior Analyst 1 1 Budget Staff 4 4 Personnel Division — Senior Analyst 1 1 Personnel Staff 2 2 Senior Office Specialist 0 0 Office Specialist 1 1 Total 828 763 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the San Jose Fire Department FY 2002 – 2003 Call Type Number % of Total Rescue Call (EMS) 39,948 67% Structure Fires 475 1% Vehicle Fires 532 1% Vegetation Fires 328 1% Matrix Consulting Group Page 30 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Incident Demand for the San Jose Fire Department FY 2002 – 2003 Call Type Number % of Total Other Fires 492 1% Overpressure, Rupture 298 0% Hazardous Condition 1,882 3% Service Call 4,820 8% Good Intent Call 3,410 6% False Call 2,223 4% Natural Disaster (80) 31 0% Other Situations (90) 262 0% Not Classified (Canceled Enroute, Etc.) 5,287 9% Total 59,988 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $101,633,529 93% Operating Expense Total $7,567,557 7% Subtotal $109,201,086 Capital Expense Total – – Total Operational and Capital Budget $109,201,086 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 31 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CITY OF SANTA CLARA FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY City of Santa Clara Type of Agency: Municipal Governing Body: City Council Area Covered: 19.3 square miles Service Area Description: Services the City of Santa Clara Population Served (2000 Census): 102,361 Number of Fire Stations: 8 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 7 • Trucks 2 • Rescue 1 • Ambulance 3 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Chief 1 1 Administrative Secretary 1 1 Typist Clerk 4 4 EMERGENCY SERVICES Deputy Fire Chief 1 1 Fire Protection Division Battalion Chief 3 3 Captain 39 39 Driver/Engineer 45 45 Firefighter 55 55 EMS Division Battalion Chief 1 1 Training Division Battalion Chief 1 1 Assistant Training Officer 3 3 ADMINISTRATIVE – TECHNICAL SERVICES Deputy Fire Chief 1 1 Fire Graphics Technician 0.5 0.5 Administrative Division Staff Aide 1 1 Fire Prevention Division Fire Marshal 1 1 Deputy Fire Marshal 6 6 Fire Inspector 3 3 Matrix Consulting Group Page 32 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Protection Technician 1 1 Non-Point Source Fire Inspector 0.5 0.5 Hazardous Materials Division Hazardous Materials Administrator 1 1 Hazardous Materials Specialist 4 4 Total 173 173 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Santa Clara Fire Department From January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2002 Call Type Number % of Total Structure Fire Not Reported Other Fire Not Reported Emergency Medical Not Reported Vehicle Accident Not Reported Public Service Not Reported Hazardous Material Not Reported Fire Alarm – No Fire Not Reported Total 7,932 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $23,926,356 90% Operating Expense Total $745,610 3% Subtotal $24,671,966 Capital Expense Total $196,990 1% Other $1,514,574 6% Total Operational and Capital Budget $26,383,530 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 33 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study SANTA CLARA COUNTY CENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire) Type of Agency: Fire Protection District (Dependent) Governing Body: Board of Supervisors Area Covered: 137.4 square miles Service Area Description: Services much of the unincorporated areas in the central and northern parts of the County, as well as provides services by contract with the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills County Fire District, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill and part of Saratoga. Also serves as the County Fire Marshal. In 1977, the Department contracted with the cities of Campbell, Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara to service portions of the Department referred to as ‘Zone 1.’ The City of San Jose provides fire services for a majority of the unincorporated areas in the eastern part of County Fire. Five fire stations and assigned personnel ultimately transferred to the City. The ‘Zone 2’ designation remains as the primary service area for County fire. Population Served (2000 Census): 271,138 Number of Fire Stations: 16 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 15 • Trucks 2 • Rescue 2 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Chief 1 1 Assistant Fire Chief 1 1 Director of Business Services 1 1 Deputy Chief 4 4 Matrix Consulting Group Page 34 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Number Staffing Auth. Actual Personnel Services Manager 1 1 Battalion Chief 9 9 Firefighter/Engineers (FFE) 148 148 Associate Public Education Officer B 1 1 Senior Deputy Fire Marshal 3 3 Senior Hazardous Materials Specialist 1 1 Associate Fire Protection Engineer 2 2 Assistant County Fire Marshal 1 1 Emergency Services Coordinator 1 1 Fire Captains 64 64 Administrative Captains 3 3 Supply Services Specialist 1 1 Master Mechanic 1 1 Administrative Support Officer III 1 1 Information Systems Manager 1 1 Arson Investigator 1 1 Fire Mechanic 3 3 Associate Management Analyst 1 1 Business Services Associate 1 1 Construction Coordinator 1 1 Deputy Fire Marshal II 13 13 General Maintenance Craftsworker 2 2 Hazardous Materials Specialists 2 2 Office Assistant II 4 4 Secretary 4 4 Public Education Officer 1 1 Supply Services Assistant 1 1 Total Paid Staff 279 279 Total Volunteer Staff 40 35 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District From January 1, 2002 To December 31, 2002 Call Type Number Percent of Total Structure Fire 150 1% Other Fire 432 3% Emergency Medical 7,141 53% Vehicle Accident 956 7% Public Service 1,963 14% Hazardous Material 171 1% Fire Alarm – No Fire 2,753 20% Total Demand for Services 13,566 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 35 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $37,429,266 76% Operating Expense Total $8,074,120 16% Subtotal $45,503,386 Capital Expense Total $3,960,457 8% Total Operational and Capital Budget $49,502,701 100% Revenue Item Amount % Total Property Taxes $33,923,505 68.2% Fire Service Fees/Parcel Taxes – 0.0% Development Fees – 0.0% Unitary Tax $300,000 0.6% SB 813 $1,205,000 2.4% Home Owners Property Tax Relief $350,000 0.7% Contracts for Service $12,754,083 25.7% Interest Accrued $595,083 1.2% ALS County Revenue $448,512 0.9% Sale of Fixed Assets $2,000 0.0% Other/Miscellaneous $139,381 0.3% Operating Transfer-In $0 0.0% Revenue Total $49,717,960 100.0% Reserves 2003 Reserve Fund Balance $12,335,582 – 5. AGENCY MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE Area of Organization and Management Details How Legally Organized Fire District (Dependent) Year Organized (if 1947 independent entity) Board Composition Board of Supervisors Board Selection and Terms General Election – 4 year terms Matrix Consulting Group Page 36 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study SARATOGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) Type of Agency: Fire Protection District (Independent) Governing Body: Board of Directors Area Covered: 12 square miles Service Area Description: Services half of the City of Saratoga and the unincorporated lands to the west of the City. Population Served (2000 Census): 12,784 Number of Fire Stations: 1 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 1 • Rescue 1 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Chief 1 1 Assistant Chief 1 1 Fire Captain 6 6 Fire Engineer 9 9 Firefighter I 9 9 Business Manager 1 1 Administrative Assistant 1 1 Fire Inspector 1 1 Total Paid Staff 29 29 Total Volunteers 25 15 Matrix Consulting Group Page 37 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Saratoga Fire Protection District From January 1, 2002 To December 31, 2002 Call Type Number % of Total Structure Fire 17 1% Other Fire 18 1% Emergency Medical 451 35% Vehicle Accident 68 5% Public Service 53 4% Hazardous Material 45 3% Auto/Mutual Aid Outside Area 59 5% Fire Alarm – No Fire 350 27% Cancelled en route 118 9% Other 125 10% Total Demand for Services 1,304 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $3,359,490 85% Operating Expense Total $429,675 12% Subtotal $3,789,165 Capital Expense Total $129,6491 3% Total Operational and Capital Budget $3,954,889 100% Revenue Item Amount % Total Property Taxes $3,395,000 87.1% Fire Service Fees/Parcel Taxes – – Development Fees – – Prior Year Property Tax ($3,000) -0.1% Unitary Tax – – SB 318 $155,000 4.0% HOPTR $30,000 0.8% Contracts for Service $160,000 4.1% Interest Accrued $29,200 0.7% ALS County Revenue – – Sale of Fixed Assets – – Other/Miscellaneous $130,000 3.3% Operating Transfer-In – – Revenue Total $3.896,200 100.0% Reserves Reserve Fund Balance $1,300,000 – 1 SFPD has a Capital Building fund that is funded through a $6 million (face value) bond and other revenue assets including prior years PERS surplus and donations. This is not included in SFPD’s operating budget. Matrix Consulting Group Page 38 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 5. AGENCY MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE Area of Organization and Management Details How Legally Organized Fire District (Independent) Year Organized (if 1924 independent entity) Board Composition 3 Member Elected Board Board Selection and Terms General Election – 4 year terms staggered terms Matrix Consulting Group Page 39 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study SOUTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 1. AGENCY SUMMARY South County Fire Protection District (South County Fire) Type of Agency: Fire Protection District (Dependent) Governing Body: Board of Supervisors Area Covered: 264 square miles Service Area Description: Services the unincorporated areas in the southern portion of the County. Population Served (2000 Census): 20,545 Number of Fire Stations: 3 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 3 (plus 1 Amador Engine) 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Fire Battalion Chief 1 1 Fire Captain (ALS) 6 6 Fire Engineer (ALS) 6 6 Fire Engineer (BLS) 6 6 Firefighter I 3 3 Communications/Dispatch Clerk 2.75 2.75 Mechanic 1 1 Account Clerk 0.5 0.5 Office Technician 1 1 Total Paid 27.25 27.25 Total Volunteer 25 25 Matrix Consulting Group Page 40 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the South County Fire From January 1, 2002 To December 31, 2002 Call Type Number Percent of Total Structure Fire 144 7% Other Fire 118 6% Emergency Medical 1,530 71% Vehicle Accident 253 12% Public Service 30 1% Hazardous Material 40 2% Fire Alarm – No Fire 28 1% Total Demand for Services 2,143 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel Total $1,900,549 76% Operating Expense Total $471,732 19% Subtotal $2,372,281 – Capital Expense Total $116,000 5% Total Operational and Capital Budget $2,488,281 100% Revenue Item Amount % of Total Property Taxes $2,448,014 88.8% Fire Service Fees/Parcel Taxes – – Development Fees – – Prior Year Property Tax $13,256 0.5% Unitary Tax $42,049 1.5% SB 813 $124,158 4.5% HOPTR $63 0.0% Contracts for Service – – Interest Accrued $10,682 0.4% ALS County Revenue $120,000 4.4% Sale of Fixed Assets – – Other/Miscellaneous – – Operating Transfer-In – – Revenue Total $2,758,222 100.0% Reserves Reserve Fund Balance $1,354,802 – Matrix Consulting Group Page 41 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 5. AGENCY MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE Area of Organization and Management Details How Legally Organized Fire District (Dependent) Year Organized (if 1924 independent entity) Board Composition Board of Supervisors Board Selection and Terms General Election – 4 year terms Matrix Consulting Group Page 42 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study CITY OF SUNNYVALE PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT – FIRE DIVISION 1. AGENCY SUMMARY City of Sunnyvale Type of Agency: Municipal Governing Body: City Council Area Covered: 23.8 square miles Service Area Description: Services the City of Sunnyvale Population Served (2000 Census): 131,760 Number of Fire Stations: 6 Number of Staffed Front Line Apparatus: • Engine 6 • Trucks 2 • Squad 3 • Rescue 1 2. STAFFING SUMMARY Number Staffing Auth. Actual Public Safety Director 1 1 Fire Field Operations Captain II — Bureau of Fire Field Operations 1 1 Captain I 3 3 Lieutenant 21 21 Lieutenant 2 1 Public Safety Officer 60 60 Lieutenant 1 1 Staff Maintenance Officer 1 0 Prevention Captain II 1 1 Lieutenant 1 1 Fire Protection Engineer 4 3 Public Safety Officer 4 3 Hazardous Materials Supervisor 1 1 Hazardous Materials Inspector 3 3 Total 104 100 Matrix Consulting Group Page 43 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. CALLS FOR SERVICE Incident Demand for the Sunnyvale Fire Department From January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2002 Call Type Number Percent of Total Structure Fire 71 1% Emergency Medical 6,100 85% Other 1,006 14% Total 7,177 100% 4. BUDGET SUMMARY (FY 2002 –2003) Expenditures Item Amount % of Total Personnel $14,653,734 90% Operating Expense $319,298 2% Subtotal $14,973,032 Capital Expense Total $1,279,977 8% Total Operational and Capital Budget $16,253,010 100% Matrix Consulting Group Page 44 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANIES There are several volunteer fire companies in the rural areas which are outside of organized fire jurisdictions. While they are supported by CDF and County Fire, as well as by neighboring cities, the volunteer companies are private entities. They include Ormsby Fire Brigade, Casa Loma Volunteers, Stevens Creek Volunteers, Spring Valley Volunteers, San Antone Volunteers, and Uvas Volunteers (recently created). Each Department was contacted and provided the opportunity to provide information about their Department. Stevens Creek Volunteers did not respond and; Uvas Volunteers has just been created. The table, which follows, provides a summary of the volunteer agencies that provided information. Characteristic Casa Loma Ormsby San Antone Spring Valley Number of Staff 23 14 16 27 Budgets: Not reported Income: $6,640 $5,000 - $6,000 $5,000 - $8,000 Expenses: $15,713 Number of Fire 2 1 1 2 Stations Number of Apparatus • Engine 3 2 2 4 * Truck • Water Tanker 1 1 Dispatch / Call out CDF pages CDF pages CDF pages CDF pages volunteers volunteers volunteers volunteers Calls for Service • EMS 3 28 43 18 * Fire 4 6 2 5 • Vehicle Accident 13 14 • Auto Fire 4 11 • Vegetation Fires 9 13 • Illegal Burns 20 5 • Other Calls __ 7 4 3 Total 7 87 49 69 Fire Prevention No Yes No Yes Activities Matrix Consulting Group Page 45 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Casa Loma Ormsby San Antone Spring Valley Governance 7 member Board 5 member Fire 5 member Fire 5 member Board of Trustees Board of Board of of Trustees Trustees Trustees Matrix Consulting Group Page 46 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 4. GROWTH AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS Cities and fire protection districts in Santa Clara County rely on various data sources (e.g. Census, California Department of Finance, Association of Bay Area Governments, and individual models) for determining service population. In addition, some fire protection districts estimate their service population based on the number of parcels within their districts and therefore some fire districts did not have information on the number of persons in their district. 1. POPULATION DATA AND PROJECTIONS FOR CITIES IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY Given that there is no single data source that all fifteen cities use when determining the number of persons in their jurisdiction, this report uses Census 2000 data to develop population projections. Using each cities’ Census 2000 population figure as the base population number and then projecting population over the next fifteen years in five year increments [2000 (base), 2005, 2010, 2015] based on the growth percentages (i.e. percent change for each of the cities) developed by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) for that same time frame. ABAG publishes population growth projections for each city and the unincorporated area within each city’s sphere of influence. The table below presents the United States Census Bureau’s 2000 population for cities within Santa Clara County and their population projections over a fifteen-year period in five-year increments [2000 (bases), 2005, 2010, and 2015]. The table, below, presents the population projections for cities within the County. Matrix Consulting Group Page 47 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study City Population Projections Population Projections Based on ABAG’s Growth Projections2 % Change Cities Census 2000 2005 2010 2015 2000 - 2015 Campbell 38,138 39,025 39,899 40,579 6% Cupertino 50,546 54,487 57,541 60,117 19% Gilroy 41,464 46,929 53,140 57,971 40% Los Altos 27,693 28,193 28,467 28,650 3% Los Altos Hills 7,902 8,357 8,525 8,525 8% Los Gatos 28,592 29,050 29,947 30,754 8% Milpitas 62,698 68,278 72,371 77,462 24% Monte Sereno 3,483 3,740 3,984 3,984 14% Morgan Hill 33,556 37,728 41,070 44,500 33% Mountain View 70,708 73,125 75,220 77,914 10% Palo Alto 58,598 61,764 63,394 65,024 11% San Jose 894,943 954,893 1,007,336 1,040,967 16% Santa Clara 102,361 108,600 115,700 122,000 19% Saratoga 29,843 30,939 31,430 32,020 7% Sunnyvale 131,760 135,635 138,605 141,971 8% 2. POPULATION DATA FOR FIRE DISTRICTS IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY The service population figures for each of the four fire districts are developed using 2000 Census data. Specifically, with the assistance of the Santa Clara County Planning Office, the Geographical Information System (GIS) was used to review Block Level 2000 Census data for each of the fire districts based on their specific service boundary. Because district boundaries and Census 2000 Blocks do not correspond exactly, project staff included all Census 2000 Blocks that had their center points that were within the fire district boundary. Additional Census Blocks were included where appropriate, using aerial photographs showing land development patterns. The data each fire district are presented in the table which follows: 2 The population projections figures for the 2005, 2010 and 2015 were developed for the purposes of this report. In order to create the projections, ABAG’s Projections 2002 growth percentages for each time frame were applied to the 2000 Census population figure for each City. Matrix Consulting Group Page 48 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Service Population for Fire Districts Census 2000 Population Fire District (Number of Persons) Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District: All Areas Inside County Fire Boundary 160,142 Areas County Fire Provides Service Through Contract 110,996 Total for County Fire 271,138 Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD) 11,609 Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) 12,784 South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District (South County Fire) 20,545 The points provide an explanation of the above data: • County Fire’s service population is approximately 160,142 persons. This figure includes all areas inside the County Fire’s boundary. However, County Fire contracts with adjacent city fire department to provide direct fire protection service to some portions of this area because they are small in size and scattered in terms of their location and as result they are inefficient for County Fire to serve directly. The population that resides in these small, unincorporated, scattered areas is approximately 47,987 persons. Therefore, the actual direct service population for County Fire is approximately 112,155 persons. Neither of these figures includes areas in which County Fire provides service through a contract with the City. • County Fire provides fire marshal services to Stanford University. The City of Palo Alto provides fire suppression services to the University. • The Cities of Los Altos, Campbell, and Morgan Hill, as well as the Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD) all contract with County Fire for fire protection services. Approximately 110,996 persons are served by County Fire through these contracts. Monte Sereno and Cupertino do not contract with County Fire, however, they fall within the District’s boundaries. • LAHCFD contracts with County Fire for fire protection services. LAHCFD’s service population is presented in the table above and is also included in the County Fire’s “service through contract” population numbers. • SFPD provides fire protection services to approximately half of the City of Saratoga, as well as to unincorporated lands to the west of the City. • South County Fire provides fire protection services to some unincorporated areas in the southern portion of the County. Matrix Consulting Group Page 49 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study The following sub-sections provide a discussion of the potential changes in service population for the each of the four fire districts. (1) Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire) County Fire provides direct fire protection services to the Cities of Cupertino, Monte Sereno, a portion of Saratoga, Los Gatos and some of the unincorporated lands to the west of these Cities. Each of these cities is expected to experience very little population growth due to the fact that these cities are considered built-out and that their land-use policies do not call for increases in development densities. This conclusion is further supported by the individual population projections developed for Cupertino, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, and Los Gatos (see table titled “Population Projections for Cities in Santa Clara County”). County Fire also provides services to a portion of the unincorporated area of the County. Under the County’s strict land use policies, these unincorporated lands can only be developed at very low densities due to their physical limitations and the fact that they are remote and hard to serve. There are also lands inside County Fire’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) that are outside of its boundary. These lands could be annexed to County Fire in the future. These lands are unincorporated and subject to the County’s strict policies which only allow very low-density development. Therefore, it is unlikely that County Fire will experience significant service population growth in the lands that they directly serve. County Fire, through contracts, also provides fire protection services to the Cities of Campbell, Morgan Hill, and Los Altos Hills, as well as Los Altos Hills County Fire Protection District (LAHCFD). These areas, with the exception of the City of Morgan Hill are expected to experience minimal growth. Matrix Consulting Group Page 50 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study This report projects that the Morgan Hill Sub-Region will experience a 33% increase in population for the 15 year time frame (see table titled “Population Projections for Cities in Santa Clara County” for specific projected increases in population). This increase would occur through Morgan Hill’s annexing of surrounding lands and the development of those lands. Even if the City of Morgan Hill’s population did increase, this increase would only result in a minor overall increase in the service population of County Fire. Lastly, County Fire serves much of the unincorporated areas in the central and northern parts of Santa Clara County. County Fire contracts with the Cities of San Jose, Milpitas and Santa Clara to provide fire service to the urbanized, unincorporated areas that are surrounded by these cities and adjacent to these cities (i.e. “County Pockets”). The areas are considered built-out or limited in potential development under the County’s policies. Under the cities, the County, and LAFCO’s policies, increases in development densities would require these lands to be annexed into a city first. Therefore County Fire is not expected to see an increase in service population for the “County Pockets.” The “County Pockets” area also includes Moffett Field, which currently receives fire protection services from the Federal Government. The Federal Government is in the process of finalizing and implementing a plan to transition the area from Military/Government use to civilian uses. Implementation of the plan would likely include detaching the area from the County Fire and annexing the area to the City of Sunnyvale and/or the City of Mountain View. Upon annexation, the annexing city would provide fire protection services to Moffett Field. Matrix Consulting Group Page 51 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study In summary, County Fire is not expected to experience significant growth in its service population due to the development policies that exist among the County and the cities. Similarly, the Cities that are served directly by County Fire are mostly built-out. (2) Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD) The Los Altos Hills County Fire District's boundaries include the Town of Los Altos Hills and some of the surrounding unincorporated area. The development pattern of the Town of Los Altos Hills is overwhelming low density residential in nature. The Town requires a 1-acre minimum lot size for residential development and has policies that limit development. The unincorporated lands within LAHCFD are limited in development potential due to the County's strict land use policies. Permanently protected open space lands border the southwest section of the Town. The Town is considered built out. Little population growth is expected over the next 15 years. This conclusion is further supported by the individual population projections developed for Los Altos Hills (see table titled “Population Projections for Cities in Santa Clara County”) that project an 8% percent growth increase for the 15-year time frame (2000 to 2015). (3) Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) The Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) serves approximately half of the City of Saratoga and the unincorporated lands to the west of the City. SFPD service boundaries include all lands within SFPD’s Sphere of Influence (SOI). Therefore, SFPD currently has no potential to annex additional lands. The City of Saratoga as a whole is built out in terms of residential development. Any new growth in the City of Saratoga would be the result of redevelopment. The unincorporated lands within SFPD are limited in development potential due to the County's development policies. The City is expected Matrix Consulting Group Page 52 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study to experience very little population growth over the next 15 years. This conclusion is further supported by the individual population projections developed for Saratoga (see table titled “Population Projections for Cities in Santa Clara County”) that projects a 7% percent growth increase for the 15-year time frame (2000 to 2015). (4) South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District (South County Fire) The South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District serves the unincorporated areas in the southern portion of Santa Clara County. These lands are under the jurisdiction of the County of Santa Clara. The northern parts of South County Fire consist of an area known as "Coyote Valley." The City of San Jose is currently involved in a planning process that would allow the City to annex three quarters of these lands in order to develop a new community that would eventually have 50,000 jobs, 25,000 housing units, and a population of 75,000 persons. These lands would be annexed to the City of San Jose, prior to their development. Therefore, the City of San Jose Fire Department would serve the area once annexed. South County Fire also serves the unincorporated area directly surrounding the Cities of Morgan Hill and Gilroy. These lands are developed with mostly low-density rural-residential development, consistent with the County's minimum lot size requirement of 5 acres and 20 acres per residence. The County, Cities of Morgan Hill and Gilroy, and LAFCO all have policies that require lands to be annexed to their respective City, if the development proposal is for a higher density than what is allowed by the County. South County Fire also includes the unincorporated rural residential Community of San Martin and Corde Valle Estate development. It also includes remote areas of the Matrix Consulting Group Page 53 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Santa Cruz Mountains and the Diablo Range that are difficult to access and hard to serve and therefore have limited development potential. The existing development policies and the remoteness of the lands limit the amount of population growth that will occur within South County Fire’s boundaries. Therefore, South County Fire is expected to see very little growth within the existing boundaries. However, large amounts of land lie outside of South County Fire’s boundaries but within its Sphere of Influence (SOI). Even if these lands were annexed to South County Fire in the future, South County Fire’s service population would not grow significantly because these lands are remote and could only be developed at very low densities (120 acres minimum lot size based on slope density) under the County's policies. 3. POPULATION OF THE “UNDERSERVED AREA” The “underserved area” consists of lands that are located outside of any city fire department or fire district boundary. A base population of approximately 6,047 persons was calculated for the “underserved area.” This calculation was done using the same methodology used for determining the approximate service population within the fire districts. The ‘underserved area” is not expected to experience significant growth because the area is remote in nature and difficult to serve and County land use policies severely limit the amount of development that may occur in the “underserved area.” Matrix Consulting Group Page 54 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 5. FUNDING MECHANISMS FOR FIRE SERVICES Presented in this chapter is an assessment of the revenue sources which are available to support fire service operations. 1. BACKGROUND In 1978, nearly two-thirds of California's voters passed Proposition 13, reducing property tax rates on homes, businesses, and farms by about 57%. According to the amended State constitution, property tax rates could not exceed 1% of the property's market value and valuations could not grow by more than 2% per annum unless the property was sold. In addition, Proposition 13 required that all State tax rate increases be approved by a two-thirds vote of the legislature and that local tax rates also have to be approved by a vote of the people.3 Since Proposition 13, many local governments have relied increasingly upon other revenue tools to finance local services (which will be defined later) such as: assessments, property-related fees, and a variety of small general-purpose taxes (such as hotel, business license, and utility user taxes). In 1996, Proposition 218 was passed. As a constitutional initiative, it applies to each of California's nearly 7,000 cities, counties, special districts, schools, community college districts, redevelopment agencies, and regional organizations. In general, the intent of Proposition 218 is to ensure that all taxes and most charges on property owners are subject to voter approval. The following table gives a general summary of local revenues affected by Proposition 218: 3 Proposition 13: A Look Back by Joel Fox Matrix Consulting Group Page 55 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study AFFECTED NOT DIRECTLY AFFECTED TAXES New and some recently imposed “general” Property taxes taxes Bradley-Burns sales taxes Special taxes Vehicle license taxes Redevelopment Revenues Mello-Roos taxes Timber taxes ASSESSMENTS All new or increased assessments Most existing assessments Some existing assessments FEES Property-related fees. (Fees imposed as an Fees that are not property-related “incident of property ownership,” not including gas, electric, or developer fees.) 2. REVENUE TERMS AND DEFINITIONS The extended table, which starts below, describes and defines all available revenue sources and identifies their potential for use in support of the fire service.4 TERM DEFINITION Assessments These are charges levied to pay for public improvements or services within a predetermined district or area, according to the benefit the parcel receives from the improvement or services. The rules and procedures for assessments are provided by the California Constitution, Article XIII, section C & D (Prop. 218). Assessments are usually collected on the regular property tax bill. They are different, however, from the regular 1 percent property tax and property tax debt overrides in that assessment rates are not based on the value of the property. Assessments are also different from another charge that sometimes is placed on the property tax bill, parcel taxes. Unlike parcel taxes, assessments typically were not voter approved prior to Proposition 218. In addition, assessment rates were linked to the cost of providing a service or improvement, whereas parcel taxes could be set at any amount. Typical assessments include those for flood control improvements, streets, and lighting and landscaping. Use: Cities, counties and special districts. 4 A Primer on California City Finance by Michael Coleman November ‘02 Matrix Consulting Group Page 56 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study TERM DEFINITION Business License Most cities in California levy a business license tax. Tax rates are Tax determined by each city, which collects the taxes. In all cases, cities have adopted their tax as a general tax. On average, the business license tax provides about 3 percent of city general revenue, and often 10 percent or more. Use: Cities – A business license tax raises general fund revenues (i.e. it is not a dedicated revenue source for fire services). Development One time charges applied to new developments to raise revenue for the Impact Fee5 construction or expansion of capital facilities located outside the boundaries of the new development that benefit the contributing development. Impact fees, for example, are assessed and dedicated principally for the provision of additional water and sewer systems, roads, schools, libraries and parks and recreation facilities made necessary by the presence of new residents in the area. The funds collected cannot be used for operation, maintenance, repair, alteration or replacement of capital facilities. Use: Cities, counties and special districts. Enterprise Service-fee-supported city utilities and enterprises constitute a substantial Service Charges portion of most city budgets. These include water, sewer, electric, solid and Fees waste, harbor/marina and airport services. In some cities, a public or private agency other than the city provides and funds these services. Use: Cities, counties and special districts Fees A charge imposed on an individual for a service provided to that person. A fee may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the particular service or facility for which the fee is charged, plus overhead. Cities have the general authority to impose fees (charges and rates) under the cities’ police powers granted by the state Constitution (Article XI, section 7; Proposition 218). There are specific procedures in state law for fee and rate adoption. Prop. 218 provides special rules for property-related fees used to fund property-related services. Examples of city fees include water service, sewer service connection, building permits, recreation classes and development impact fees. Use: Cities, counties and special districts Inter- Local governments also receive revenue from other government agencies, Governmental principally the state and federal governments. These revenues include Revenue general or categorical support monies called “subventions,” as well as grants for specific projects, and reimbursements for the costs of some state mandates. Intergovernmental revenues provide 13 percent of city revenues statewide. In the early 1990s, the state experienced a recession and budget deficit. To offset its fiscal shortfall, the state shifted property tax revenues from cities to local schools. This ERAF shift continues today and is discussed later. Use: Cities, counties and special districts 5 Development Impact Fees: A Primer by Carrion and Libby Matrix Consulting Group Page 57 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study TERM DEFINITION Mello Roos6 This is an area where a special tax is imposed on those real property owners within a Community Facilities District. This district has chosen to seek public financing through the sale of bonds for the purpose of financing certain public improvements and services. These services may include streets, water, sewage and drainage, electricity, infrastructure, schools, parks, fire protection and police protection to newly developing areas. The services may be financed only to the extent of new growth, and may include both services and facilities. The tax paid is used to make the payments of principal and interest on the bonds. Use: Cities and counties. Property Tax The property tax is an ad valorem (value-based) tax imposed on real property and tangible personal property. (State law provides a variety of exemptions to the property tax, including most government-owned property; nonprofit, educational, religious, hospital, charitable and cemetery properties; the first $7,000 of an owner-occupied home; business inventories; household furnishings and personal effects; timber; motor vehicles, freight and passenger vessels; and crops and orchards for the first four years). California Constitution Article XIIIA (Prop. 13) limits the property tax to a maximum 1 percent of assessed value, not including voter-approved rates to fund debt. The assessed value of property is capped at the 1975–76 base year rate plus inflation— or 2 percent per year. Property that declines in value may be reassessed at the lower market value. Property is reassessed to current full value upon a change in ownership (with certain exemptions). Property tax revenue is collected by counties and allocated according to state law among cities, counties, school districts and special districts. The share of property tax revenue allocated depends on a variety of factors, including historical allocation of tax dollars, the number of taxing entities in a tax rate area, etc. Use: Cities, counties and special districts – Property taxes raise general fund revenues (i.e. except for special districts, it is not a dedicated revenue source for fire services). Sales Tax The sales tax that an individual pays on a purchase is collected by the state Board of Equalization and includes a state sales tax, the locally levied “Bradley Burns” sales tax and several other components. The sales tax is imposed on the total retail price of any tangible personal property. (State law provides a variety of exemptions to the sales and use tax, including resale, interstate sales, intangibles, food for home consumption, candy, bottled water, natural gas, electricity and water delivered through pipes, prescription medicines, agricultural feeds, seeds, fertilizers and sales to the federal government). Use: Cities and counties – Sales taxes raise general fund revenues (i.e. it is not a dedicated revenue source for fire services). 6 About Mello-Roos by Cal Land ‘01 Matrix Consulting Group Page 58 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study TERM DEFINITION Transient Like the business license tax, TOT may be levied by a city under the police Occupancy Tax powers granted cities in the State constitution. More than 380 cities in California impose TOT on people staying for no more than 30 days in a hotel, inn or other lodging facility. Rates range from 4 to 15 percent of the cost of the lodging. In nearly all cases, cities have adopted these as general taxes, but some cities make a point of budgeting the funds for tourism or business-development-related programs. The TOT typically provides 7 percent of a city’s general revenues on average, and often as much as 17 percent. Use: Cities and counties – Transient occupancy taxes raise general fund revenues (i.e. it is not a dedicated revenue source for fire services). Use Tax A use tax is imposed on the purchaser for transactions in which the sales tax is not collected. Sales and use tax revenue received by cities is general- purpose revenue and is deposited into a city’s general fund. Although cities vary widely, on average, sales and use tax revenue provides 30 percent of city general purpose revenue, and often as much as 45 percent. Use: Cities and counties – Use taxes raise general fund revenues (i.e. it is not a dedicated revenue source for fire services). Vehicle License The VLF is a tax on the ownership of a registered vehicle in place of taxing Fee vehicles as personal property. (Vehicles that are exempt from VLF include government-owned, diplomatic, civil air patrol and farm vehicles; privately owned school buses; and vehicles owned by blind or amputee veterans. Various classes of specialized vehicles are exempt but are instead subject to the property tax. These include farm trailers, privately owned firefighting vehicles and forklifts.) Since 1948, the VLF tax rate had been 2 percent. In 1998, the Legislature and governor began cutting the tax, backfilling the loss to local governments with a like amount of state general fund money. The effective rate is now 0.65 percent. The VLF is collected by the state Department of Motor Vehicles and allocated to cities and counties according to law (after retaining several hundred million dollars for the administrative costs of state agencies). Most of the allocation to cities is based on population and provides 16 percent of general revenues to the average city budget, and often as much as 24 percent. Of the $1.6 billion that will go to cities in FY 2002–03, about one-third is from actual VLF paid by vehicle owners and two-thirds is from the state general fund backfill. Use: Cities and counties – Vehicle license taxes raise general fund revenues (i.e., it is not a dedicated revenue source for fire). Utility User Tax More than 150 cities, collectively representing a majority of the state’s population, impose a utility user tax. UUT rates vary from 1 to 11 percent and are levied on the users of various utilities, depending on the local ordinance and including telephone, electric, gas, water and cable television. For those that impose the UUT, it provides an average of 15 percent of general revenue, and often as much as 22 percent. Use: Cities and counties. 3. FUND DESCRIPTION The following provides a brief description of where funds are accounted: • Special revenue funds are used to account for activities paid for by taxes or other designated revenue sources that have specific limitations on use according to law. For example, the state levies gas taxes and subvenes some of these Matrix Consulting Group Page 59 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study funds to cities and counties. A local government deposits gas tax revenue in a special fund and spends the money for streets and road-related programs, according to law. • Enterprise funds are used to account for self-supporting activities that provide services on a user-charge basis. For example, many cities provide water treatment and distribution services to their residents. Users of these services pay utility fees, which the city deposits in a water enterprise fund. Expenditures for water services are charged to this fund. • The general fund is used to account for money that is not required legally or by sound financial management to be accounted for in another fund. Major sources of city general fund revenue include sales and use tax, property tax, the vehicle license fee subvention from the state, and local taxes, including business license tax, hotel tax and utility user taxes. 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION7 In order to raise a new tax, assessment, or property-related fee, or to increase an existing one, local governments must comply with many provisions. In general, these requirements are that local governments may use assessments and property-related fees only to finance projects and services that directly benefit property--and that most revenue-raising measures be approved in an election. The table below summarizes the vote requirements for each type of revenue enhancement: VOTE TYPE VOTE NEEDED WHO VOTES REQUIREMENT TAXES General Yes All voters in Majority community or affected area Special Yes All voters in Two-thirds community or affected area ASSESSMENTS All Yes Property owners (and Majority, weighed in renters responsible for proportion to paying assessments) assessment liability in affected area FEES General, not property No N/A N/A related 7 Understanding Proposition 218: CA LAO December ‘96 Matrix Consulting Group Page 60 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study VOTE TYPE VOTE NEEDED WHO VOTES REQUIREMENT Property related Yes, for any service Local government Majority of property other than water, may choose. owners or two-thirds sewer, or refuse Property owners in of electorate. Local collection affected area, or governments may electorate in the weight ballots in affected area proportion to fee liability (1) Requirements for New Fees To impose a new or increased property-related fee, local government must comply with the certain fee restriction and fee rate calculation requirements. Local governments must also: • Mail information regarding the proposed fee to every property owner. • Hold a hearing at least 45 days after the mailing. • Reject the proposed fee if written protests are presented by a majority of the affected property owners. • Hold an election on any property-related fee, other than a fee for water, sewer, or refuse collection. As a practical matter, local governments will find it much more difficult to impose or increase property-related fees. As a result, many local governments are more likely to try to raise revenues through non property-related fees or taxes. (2) Requirements for New Taxes In order to impose or increase a tax, local government must comply with the following provisions: • All general taxes must be approved by a majority vote of the people. A 1986 statutory initiative, Proposition 62, previously imposed this vote requirement on general law cities and counties. Proposition 218 expands this requirement to include charter cities. Matrix Consulting Group Page 61 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • Elections for general taxes must be consolidated with a regularly scheduled election for members of the local governing body. In an emergency, this provision may be waived by a unanimous vote of the governing body. • Any tax imposed for a specific purpose is a "special tax," even if its funds are placed into the community's general fund. Prior to Proposition 218, all taxes placed into a community's general fund were commonly considered general taxes, requiring only a majority vote. A special tax requires a two-thirds voter approval. The experience of many jurisdictions across the State is that it is difficult for achieve a threshold of a two-thirds vote. (3) Requirements for New Assessments All new or increased assessments must follow certain assessment calculation and election requirements. As a practical matter, this requirement will mean that programs that benefit people, rather than specific properties, such as libraries, mosquito abatement, recreation programs, police protection, and some business improvement programs, must be financed by general or special taxes or by other non-assessment revenues. (4) Property Taxes and Jurisdictional Change8 Santa Clara County, cities and special districts within the County are operating under a “master agreement” which consists of resolutions adopted by the County, cities and special districts. While there are a variety of scenarios relating to annexation and service provision, the scenarios below are most applicable to this study. According to the master agreement, the following can occur: • When there is a jurisdictions change – Under AB 8, each jurisdiction receives the amount it received from its prior year’s property tax ‘base’, plus a share of the ‘annual tax increment’ generated in the area. 8 Information relating to property tax adjustments was taken from a 1981 Intergovernmental Council letter, explaining the master tax agreement and property tax exchange after jurisdictional change. Matrix Consulting Group Page 62 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • When a service is provided by a special district where there was no prior service provider – Under SB 180, the service provider is restricted to access only to the annual tax increment generated in the area. • When a new special district is formed – Under SB 180, the new entity is restricted to access only to the annual tax increment generated in the area. These principles govern the financial viability of any organizational change in fire service delivery. 5. THE EFFECTS OF THE ERAF PROPERTY TAX SHIFTS In the early 1990s, the State experienced a recession and significant budget reductions. To offset its fiscal shortfall, the State shifted property tax revenues from cities to local schools (a State action that was enabled by a provision of Proposition 13). The legislation that created this shift established the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF), and relieved some of the state general fund obligation for school funding. Today, the ERAF shift continues to dramatically affect city revenues and the fiscal health of cities: • In FY 2002–03 this is, in effect, a $4.9 billion shift of city, county and special district revenue to the state general fund; • City property tax shares are reduced by an average of 24 percent; and • Prop. 172 and Citizens’ Option for Public Safety (COPS) grants return only about 28 percent of the city revenue lost due to ERAF. These shifts occur in a context of continuing citizen demands for service, declines in other forms of revenue and continuing increases in the cost of service. 6. REVENUE SOURCE AND AMOUNT FOR EACH SPECIAL DISTRICT As discussed in previous sections of this chapter, there are a variety of funding alternatives for fire agencies, and in particular special districts. The tables which follow Matrix Consulting Group Page 63 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study present the revenue source and amount for each of the four special districts for fiscal year 2002 - 2003. Los Altos Hills County Fire District Revenue Source Amount % of Total Property Tax $3,6000,000 82% Tax Collection $45,000 1% Unsecured Property Taxes $350,000 8% SB 8139 $35,000 1% Home Owners Property Tax Relief $29,971 1% Unitary Refund $10,000 Refunds ($4,000) Interest $300,000 7% Revenue Total $4,365,971 100% Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Revenue Source Amount % of Total Property Taxes $33,923,505 68.2% Fire Service Fees/Parcel Taxes – 0.0% Development Fees – 0.0% Unitary Tax $300,000 0.6% SB 813 $1,205,000 2.4% Home Owners Property Tax Relief $350,000 0.7% Contracts for Service $12,754,083 25.7% Interest Accrued $595,083 1.2% Paramedic County Revenue $448,512 0.9% Sale of Fixed Assets $2,000 0.0% Other/Miscellaneous $139,381 0.3% Operating Transfer-In $0 0.0% Revenue Total $49,717,960 100.0% Saratoga Fire Protection District Revenue Source Amount % of Total Property Taxes $3,395,000 87.1% Fire Service Fees/Parcel Taxes – – Development Fees – – Prior Year Property Tax ($3,000) -0.1% Unitary Tax – – SB 813 $155,000 4.0% Home Owners Property Tax Relief $30,000 0.8% Contracts for Service $160,000 4.1% Interest Accrued $29,200 0.7% Paramedic County Revenue – – Sale of Fixed Assets – – Other/Miscellaneous $130,000 3.3% Operating Transfer-In – – Revenue Total $3,896,200 100.0% 9 SB 813 property tax revenue generated as result of the purchase of home (i.e. at the point of sale the new homeowners are required to pay property tax rather than wait until the new property tax year). Matrix Consulting Group Page 64 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District Revenue Source Amount % of Total Property Taxes $2,448,014 88.8% Fire Service Fees/Parcel Taxes – – Development Fees – – Prior Year Property Tax $13,256 0.5% Unitary Tax $42,049 1.5% SB 813 $124,158 4.5% Home Owners Property Tax Relief $63 0.0% Contracts for Service – – Interest Accrued $10,682 0.4% Paramedic County Revenue $120,000 4.4% Sale of Fixed Assets – – Other/Miscellaneous – – Operating Transfer-In – – Revenue Total $2,758,222 100.0% Matrix Consulting Group Page 65 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 6. DEFINITION OF FIRE SERVICE GOALS This chapter provides a general discussion regarding the “targets” or “community goals” which have been adopted by jurisdictions throughout the United States and serve as a baseline for determining optimal service levels for purposes of comparison in this report. 1. THERE IS EXTENSIVE DEBATE REGARDING THE MOST APPROPRIATE APPROACH TO DEFINING SERVICE LEVELS IN THE FIRE SERVICE. This section provides a summary of the various fire service targets that have been developed for the evaluation of staffing and deployment. These represent a range of thinking including efforts to scientifically identify critical points in the combat of structure fires as well as the need to intervene in medical emergencies. While these neither cover every eventuality nor cover each community’s special needs, they serve as an important starting point for conducting such an analysis. (1) Most Targets for Fire and EMS Service Delivery Are Based on Research into Fire Behavior and Cardiac Survival. Most fire and emergency medical service targets or goals have their basis in research that has been conducted into two critical issues: • What is the critical point in a fire’s “life” for gaining control of the blaze? • What is the impact of the passage of time on survivability for victims of cardiac arrest? The graphic, that follows, shows the typical “flashover” curve for interior structure fires. The point of “flashover” is critical because it defines when all of the contents of a room become involved in the fire. This is also the point at which a fire changes from “room and contents” to a structure fire – involving a wider area of the building. Matrix Consulting Group Page 66 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Note that this graphic depicts a fire from the moment of inception – not from the moment that a fire is detected or reported. This demonstrates the criticality of early detection and fast reporting and dispatch of responding units. This also shows the critical need for a rapid (and sufficiently staffed) initial response – by quickly initiating the attack on a fire, “flashover” can be averted. The points, below, describe the major changes that occur at a fire when “flashover” occurs: • It is the end of time for effective search and rescue in a room involved in the fire. It means that likely death of any person trapped in the room – either civilian or firefighter. • After this point in a fire is reached, potable extinguishers can no longer have a successful impact on controlling the blaze. Only hand-lines will have enough water supply to affect a fire after this point. • The fire has reached the end of the “growth” phase and has entered the fully developed phase. During this phase, every combustible object is subject to the full impact of the fire. • This also signals the changeover from “contents” to “structure” fire. This is also the beginning of collapse danger for the structure. Structural collapse begins to become a major risk at this point and reaches the highest point during the decay stage of the fire (after the fire has been extinguished). Matrix Consulting Group Page 67 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study It should be noted that not every fire will reach flashover – and that not every fire will “wait” for the 8-minute mark to reach flashover. A quickly responding fire crew can do things to prevent or delay the occurrence of flashover. These options include: • Application of portable extinguisher or other “fast attack” methodology. • Venting the room to allow hot gases to escape before they can cause the ignition of other materials in the room. • Not venting a room – under some circumstances this will actually stifle a fire and prevent flashover from occurring. Each of these techniques requires the rapid response of a company that can safely initiate these actions. Under most circumstances, this requires at least three firefighters on-scene. Furthermore, OSHA requires that, except in exigent circumstances requiring action to safeguard life, a minimum of 2-people must be available as a rescue crew outside of a building before a crew can enter a burning building. OSHA, then, as a practical matter at fire scenes, results in working groups of four persons. The second issue to consider is the delivery of cardiac and other emergency medical first response. The exhibit, below, demonstrates the survivability of cardiac patients as a timeline: % Survival Rate 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Response in Minutes etaR laiviruS Matrix Consulting Group Page 68 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study This graph shows the results of extensive studies of the survivability of patients suffering from cardiac arrest. This is the most-often studied issue due to the ease of evaluating the outcome (a patient either survives or does not) from a cardiac arrest. This research results in guidelines (arising from King County, Washington, and other studies as described in succeeding sections of this report) for the provision of basic life support (BLS) within four minutes of notification and the provision of advanced life support (ALS) within 8 minutes of notification. The goal is to provide BLS within 8 minutes of the onset of the incident (including detection, dispatch and travel time) and ALS within 12 minutes. Further descriptions of practical research into these issues are summarized in the section that follows. (2) Extensive Research Has Been Conducted Regarding the Impact of Response Times, Company Staffing and Other Factors on Service Delivery. The fire service (including response to fire / rescue and EMS events) lends itself to statistical study – there is a large sample of events to choose from and there are a large number of service providers who deliver service in various ways. This creates a “natural laboratory” for examining the impact of various policy decisions. Some of that research and its impacts on fire service staffing, deployment and service level targets or goals are provided in the table below: Matrix Consulting Group Page 69 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study FIRE/EMS MASTER PLANNING FACTORS Response Factor Description of Factor Research Results Response Time to • Elapsed time between receipt of • "Flashover" (the point at which Fires a call at the dispatch center and temperatures in a structure arrival of units at the scene. reach a point at which materials simultaneously ignite) normally • Relationship between response occurs between 6.5-10 minutes time and the likelihood that units from ignition. Structural can control the spread of a fire. damage progresses geometrically from ignition. • Response time controllable through station location, avail- • Station networks in urbanized ability of staff, training and settings usually designed to characteristics of jurisdiction. deliver initial response to fires in 4 minutes to 80%-90% of calls. Response Time to • Elapsed time definition the same • King County EMS (Seattle) has Medical Calls as for fires. conducted extensive research on the survival rates associated • Relationship between response with response times for time and the likelihood that units ALS/BLS units. These studies can increase the survivability show an average survival rate of potential in certain situations 43% for cardiac arrest calls in (e.g., cardiac arrests). which BLS response is within 4 minutes and ALS response is • Most medical response systems within 8 minutes. If each designed to be "two-tier" -- initial response time is doubled (to 8 basic life support (BLS) response and 16 minutes, respectively) by fire personnel within 4-5 survivability falls to 6%. Use of minutes utilizing techniques defibrillation devices increases ranging from first aid and CPR to survivability rates for cardiac cardiac defibrillation; advanced situations for all response life support (ALS) response by systems. paramedics within 8-10 minutes utilizing a wide variety of techniques (e.g., drugs, telemetry to hospital, etc.). Matrix Consulting Group Page 70 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Response Factor Description of Factor Research Results Company Size • Number of personnel assigned to • Extensive research by the a unit -- especially for fire calls. Dallas Fire Department has indicated that the relative • As with response time, engine effectiveness of 3, 4 and 5 company size is a significant person companies is least factor in enabling personnel to pronounced in the private, control the spread of a fire. single-family residence fire and widens as the size of the • Much debate in fire professional structure involved increases. circles about optimum company size -- larger units can perform • Comparatively, fire departments more tasks at a fire scene more serving large, metropolitan quickly. areas staff engine and truck companies with additional • Actual amount of staff required at personnel in high hazard areas specific fires dependent on size (e.g., high levels of water flow of structure, combustibility, etc. required, high-rise structures, industrial occupancies, etc.). • In "ordinary" hazardous areas (single-family residential, small commercial, etc.), 3 person engine companies normally encountered and viewed to be effective mix of performance versus costs. Aerial Ladder Truck • Ability to maximize response • Research conducted by the Availability capabilities on structure fires Dallas and Seattle Fire involves obtaining an aerial Departments indicate that an ladder truck within a specified effective target for aerial ladder time to perform roof ventilation, truck response is within an 8-10 elevated water stream and minute timeframe. additional persons for rescues. Initial Response • The total number of people able • Again, Dallas Fire Department Capability to respond on-scene to a fire time trials indicates that in within a specified time is a critical "ordinary" hazard areas that a element to controlling its spread. minimum of three 3-person units required in an 8-10 minute timeframe. Matrix Consulting Group Page 71 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Response Factor Description of Factor Research Results Automatic Sprinkler • Use of automatic sprinkler • For Scottsdale, the impact of Systems systems in new construction has requiring sprinklers in all new been shown in many construction has been to allow communities (particularly in the them to extend emergency sunbelt states where a greater response times and/or build proportion of construction is fewer fire stations. newer than in the northern and eastern United States) to reduce • Other agencies have mandated fire loss, loss of life, firefighter built-in fire protection on all new injuries and time devoted to construction out-side of a handling fire calls. Typically, specified response time costing 1%-2% of construction, capability of the fire department automatic sprinkler systems also (e.g., five minutes) as a way to results in lower insurance mitigate the impacts of fires on premiums. outlying areas. • While automatic sprinkler systems can influence fire service resource requirements, there is no effect on EMS needs. The number of persons staffing engine and truck companies is a significant factor affecting fire service requirements in terms of engine company staffing. While there has been much debate about the most appropriate engine company staffing level, it is clear from a landmark study completed by the City of Dallas/Dallas Fire Department (and duplicated by several other communities) that the effectiveness of alternative engine company staffing levels is least pronounced in lower density jurisdictions (i.e., those without very large downtown areas and higher risk occupancies). For this reason, communities that are primarily suburban and moderate downtown density commonly target a three-person engine company size. These differences are illustrated in the table, which follows: Matrix Consulting Group Page 72 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Illustrative Performance Levels Demonstrated in Dallas Fire Study Single-Family Home - Response Tasks Line Window Search Line Window Charged Ventilation Completed Charged Ventilation Completed Crew Size (In Mins.) (In Mins.) (In Mins.) (% Diff. (% Diff. (% Diff. Ea. Increm.) Ea. Increm.) Ea. Increm.) 5 2.9 3.7 5.1 (15%) (16%) (29%) 4 3.4 4.4 7.2 (15%) (12%) +11% 3 4.0 5.0 6.5 - - - Two Story Apartment House Line Charged Line Charged Line Charged Line Charged Front of Bldg. Back of Bldg. Front of Bldg. Back of Bldg. 5 1.5 1.4 (21%) (13%) 4 1.9 1.6 (42%) +45% 3 3.3 1.1 - - The table above shows illustrative performance levels for single-family and multi- family residential structures. There is a clear decrease in response capabilities as the staffing levels on an engine company decline, although the performance of individual tasks varies. This distinction is greatest for the larger occupancy then it is for the single- family home. If the three single-family home tasks are averaged to create an "index" of performance, the five-person company is at 3.9, the four- person company is at 5.0 and the three-person company is at 5.2. This leads to the conclusion that, for smaller/lower risk occupancies, the risk/staffing trade-off is most pronounced for the five-person versus four-person companies and less pronounced for the four-person versus three- person companies. (3) The National Fire Protection Association Has Developed a Set of Guidelines for Fire Service Deployment and Response Capabilities. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has endeavored to address the debate regarding the appropriate service levels by drafting a new set of guidelines or Matrix Consulting Group Page 73 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study ‘standards’ called NFPA 1710 – which is recommended for the delivery of fire / rescue services in career fire departments. The title of the standard is “Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments (2001 Edition).” What NFPA 1710 Is: • A recommended set of guidelines or ‘standards’ of service for fire, EMS and other fire department activities. • A tool for local policy makers to use when evaluating their own service delivery networks. What NFPA 1710 Is Not: • A law, a regulation or a requirement for cities and other municipalities to follow. • An immediate requirement – NFPA 1710 lays out a master planning process for each community to evaluate its own needs. What NFPA 1710 Recommends: • Dispatch handling times equal to one (1) minute or less. • En route times (reaction times) equal to one (1) minute or less. • Travel times for the initial arriving unit (or for the delivery of BLS level care in an EMS system) of four (4) minutes or less, 90% of the time. • Travel times for a full structure fire response (defined below as 12 – 15 people) or for an ALS response (also defined below) in eight (8) minutes or less, 90% of the time. • The standard for fire can also be met if four (4) firefighters are on–scene in four (4) minutes or less. • An ALS response is defined in the standard as at least four people, at least two (2) of whom should be paramedics and two (2) of whom are at the EMT–basic level. • An initial full structure fire response is defined as 12 –15 people: Matrix Consulting Group Page 74 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study – One (1) incident commander. – One (1) supply line. – Two (2) attack lines of two (2) people plus one (1) support person (for a total of six people). – One (1) search and rescue team of at least two (2) people. – One (1) ventilation team of at least two (2) people. – One rapid intervention team (RIC) comprised of at least two (2) people. This team can be formed from other staff on scene until a dedicated RIC arrives. This would reduce the staffing required on the first response to 12 people. – If in use, one (1) aerial operator should be assigned to maintain control of the aerial unit. • Goal should be to achieve these response times and staffing levels at a minimum of 90% of applicable calls for service. • Engine / aerial company staffing should be a minimum of four (4) people: – However, NFPA 1710 explicitly recognizes that there are many ways to achieve this result. – The standard does not require that four (4) people arrive on the scene in the same unit. – Could use, for example, a department with many two–person units that provide this level of coverage (i.e., all calls receive two units minimum). The consultant has utilized some of these guidelines in developing the proposed service level objectives. 2. ANALYSIS OF CURRENT SERVICE DELIVERY SHOWS POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT DEPLOYMENT. This section provides the consultant’s analysis of the current service delivery capabilities of the fire protection agencies within Santa Clara County. Matrix Consulting Group Page 75 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study (1) The Matrix Consulting Group Used a Computer Mapping Model to Evaluate Response Capabilities of the Fire Department. In order to accomplish this, the consultant has utilized a GIS-based product called “FLAME.” This software enables an analyst to input current resources (stations, personnel, water supply, and apparatus) and then evaluate the ability of a system of fire stations and personnel to meet a specified set of criteria, including travel speeds. In this case, the consultant evaluated the deployment of fire protection resources against the following standards: • The ability of the system to provide a response of at least 13 people in 8 minutes or less. This can be described as the ability of the system to place on-scene, a full structure fire response. The ability of the system to provide a level response within a 4-minute travel time • or less. This can be described as the ability of the current system to deliver first response emergency medical services. • The ability of the system to provide a travel-time that can deliver the first due fire company in 4 minutes or less. This can be described as the fire protection system’s ability to: - Provide an appropriate first response to emergency medical calls for service. - Provide an appropriate initial response to fire calls for service (and for many non-structure fires, this would be the full response). The next section describes the current response capabilities of fire agencies in Santa Clara County. (2) Summary of Current Response Capabilities of Fire Agencies in Santa Clara County. The table below summarizes the overall comparison of the current system, the Saratoga sub-region and the South County sub-region to the response goals identified above: Matrix Consulting Group Page 76 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Travel Time Performance Goals – Deployment Coverage Approximate % Ability to Deliver 4 Ability to Deliver 13 Response Time < 4 People in 4 Minutes People in 8 Minutes Minutes County Overall 58% 79% 70% South County Sub- 27% 16% 41% Region North County Sub- 61% 84% 73% Region Saratoga Sub- 48% 78% 39% Region Actual Response Time Compliance All fire jurisdictions report monthly response time compliance in association with their contracts for paramedic/ALS First Responder Services. The contracted standard is a response time of 8-minutes or less, to 90% of emergency medical calls for service. All local agency jurisdictions are compliant with their contracted requirements. Therefore, Countywide first unit on-scene performance is, at minimum, 8-minutes 90% of the time. Discussion of Modeled System Performance An analysis of the computer response modeling yields the following conclusions and results: • The more urbanized North County Region has a greater number and higher density of resources than the South County Region. • The deployment of resources in and around the Saratoga Region is fairly consistent with the overall County. • The current deployment in the South County Region has significant difficulty in meeting the performance goal of delivering 13 people in 8 minutes and 4 people in 4 minutes. Matrix Consulting Group Page 77 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • The City of Gilroy, with its higher per-unit staffing in the South County Region, provides a higher degree of compliance with all response time performance goals than the neighboring jurisdictions. South County Fire has fewer per unit staffing levels than other agencies in the Region. • Regardless of political jurisdiction, the current location of the Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) fire station is advantageous to the overall delivery network. • The current “underserved areas” of the County universally fall outside of any of the performance goals established in this study. The chapter which follows presents issues and alternatives with the current fire services. Matrix Consulting Group Page 78 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 7. ISSUES WITH CURRENT FIRE SERVICES AND ANALYSIS OF FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES This chapter identifies issues with the current system of delivery of fire services in Santa Clara County. It then lists and analyses the options to address these issues. 1. FIRE PROTECTION FOR AREAS OUTSIDE OF ORGANIZED FIRE PROTECTION JURISDICTIONS A. Background The County of Santa Clara has approximately 401,280 acres of land (627 square miles) that is not currently within the boundaries of an organized fire protection agency. For purposes of this study, “organized fire protection agency” refers to agencies that derive revenue from some form of direct property taxation (i.e., property tax or property based assessments). While these areas are largely within State Responsibility Areas (SRA), the actual responsibility of the State ends with wild-land protection. Thus, structure fires, EMS calls and traffic accidents that occur in these areas are receiving unpredictable and uncompensated levels of service. There are currently a total of 6 Volunteer fire companies serving these rural/remote areas. These volunteer departments are: Ormsby Fire Brigade, serving areas north of Mt. Madonna Park • Casa Loma Volunteers, serving areas west of Uvas Road and south of Mt. • Umunhum Stevens Creek Volunteers, serving areas west of Cupertino and Saratoga • Spring Valley Volunteers, serving areas east of Milpitas • San Antone Volunteers, serving areas east of Mt. Hamilton • Uvas Volunteers, serving areas of Croy and Uvas • Matrix Consulting Group Page 79 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Currently, the areas served by these agencies can be summarized as follows: Agency Area Covered Description Ormsby Fire Brigade North of Mt. Madonna Park • Agencies generally formed as non- Casa Loma VFC West of Uvas Road and south profit corporations of Mt. Umunhum • Funding is from community Stevens Creek VFC West of Cupertino and donations/fundraisers Saratoga • County provides Workers Spring Valley VFC East of Milpitas Compensation Insurance. • County pays $4,000/year stipend to San Antone VFC East of Mt. Hamilton CDF for training • CDF provides communications/ dispatch at no additional charge. Staff members from the San Jose Fire Department, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), and the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire) have been meeting for over a year to identify underserved areas and develop solutions to the increasing challenges associated with servicing them. They have developed a series of alternative plans to enhance training levels, coordinate responses, and provide greater accountability for services provided in these areas. Unfortunately, no independent form of revenue has been identified and these plans have not been implemented. While the population in these areas is relatively small, the number of incidents is increasing because of development and recreational uses. The following table summarizes the best estimates of the overall population trends in this area with some allowance for annexation of some lands adjacent to existing municipal areas: Est. Current Est. Population Jurisdictional Area Population 2010 Santa Clara County Underserved Areas 6,047 See note below* *Refer to the chapter on growth and population projections. Due to the County’s land use policies and the development constraints of these areas, only very minimal growth is projected for the ‘underserved areas’. These areas currently generate approximately 600 incidents per year and provide an increasing trend in call demand and receive services from the volunteer Matrix Consulting Group Page 80 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study companies identified above. Because of the volunteer nature of these agencies, actual first response is often time carried out by the City of Milpitas, City of San Jose, CDF, County Fire, and Saratoga Fire Protection District. The underserved lands can be described in terms of the agencies that most often (and most logically) provide emergency response resources into a given area. Where applicable, the existing Sphere of Influence Boundaries are taken into consideration in the definition of these “service zones.” The consultant created designations based on this. The table below summarizes the description of the underserved lands ‘service zones’ (note that these ‘service zones’ have no legal basis nor are they specifically designated planning areas, they are service designations used as descriptors in this study): Approx. Sq. Calls for Defined Service Area Miles Service Calls/Day Remote Service Zone 391.19 119 0.33 Milpitas Service Zone 6.67 40 0.11 San Jose Service Zone 79.44 120 0.33 County Fire Service Zone 39.11 145 0.40 South County Zone 97.11 176 0.48 Totals 613.52 600 1.64 B. Service Characteristics From a fire protection service delivery, operations and financial perspectives, there are several challenges that are presented by the current situation. The following points illustrate this: • Santa Clara County has approximately 627 square miles of land area that is outside the jurisdiction of any “organized” fire protection agency. • Fire protection and rescue services in these areas are primarily provided by volunteer agencies with the support of CDF and response support from the nearest accessible fire agency. Matrix Consulting Group Page 81 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • There are approximately 600 incidents/year (1.65 incidents/day) that require an emergency response into these areas. • Because of their proximity and or ability to access the various areas, the Cities of Milpitas and San Jose, CDF, South County Fire and County Fire all provide services into these areas without compensation or legal responsibility. • The County pays for volunteer workers compensation and liability insurance. • Response times into many of these areas exceed 20 to 30 minutes because of the rural/remote nature. • Volunteer agencies are mostly formed as non-profit corporations. Public accountability is limited. • CDF provides minimal training to volunteer companies. Controls for mandatory training are not integrated into the monitoring capabilities of any organized fire protection agency. • Dispatch of volunteer agencies is provided by CDF at no charge. C. Existence of Other Models of Service Delivery This section examines other service delivery approaches in place in other counties in the State. The consultant reviewed the operations of other counties in the State for the purposes of determining their manner and method of dealing with similar issues. The table that follows summarizes the various approaches: County Description San Diego • Formed several fire districts in and around rural communities. • Formed Countywide Assessment District for rural/desert communities. Santa Cruz • Formed County Service Area 48 to provide funding in all areas outside of organized fire districts. • Contract with CDF for wilderness and remote areas in coastal mountains. • There are no “underserved areas” remaining in Santa Cruz County Alameda • Formed a fire district for underserved areas. • There are no “underserved areas” remaining in Alameda County Matrix Consulting Group Page 82 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study County Description Contra Costa County • Formed County Fire Department through the Fire District formation model (i.e. created a county fire department and funding by establishing countywide fire district). • There are no “underserved areas” remaining in Contra Costa County D. Issues Summary The provision of services to the underserved areas of the County is an issue that has become problematic to the general fire service in Santa Clara County. The issues associated with this delivery system element are summarized in the table below: Service Delivery Issues Cost Issues Service demand is growing in areas outside No compensation is being provided to of “organized” fire protection agencies. agencies providing services outside of their areas of responsibility. Current volunteer agencies receive minimal Current cost structures of delivering these training from CDF with growing concern with services exceeds the revenues needed to respect to the accountability for that training. provide adequate levels of service. Could impact service levels of these Dispatch/Communication costs of providing communities that assist in providing services service in the underserved areas not to the underserved areas. reflected as CDF providing dispatch services for no charge. CDF providing limited oversight for $4,000/year. The primary challenge associated with this issue is the ability to generate revenue to compensate agencies responding outside of their geo-political boundaries and support the necessary functions of the on-going volunteer departments. The following section outlines a baseline estimate of reasonable costs associated with these functions. E. Challenges in Revenue and Cost Determination The task of identifying needed revenues for the underserved areas has several challenges: The services provided by existing agencies are incremental in nature (in the • absence of response into the “underserved areas” the agency would not reduce service levels or staffing). Matrix Consulting Group Page 83 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study The underserved areas do not enjoy the benefits of the entire spectrum of fire • protection services offered by a given agency – thus utilizing a total cost/call mechanism of cost determination would not be appropriate. Despite the issues above, from the agency delivering the service, the cost • remains the same regardless of where the service is delivered. Utilization of resources outside of a given service provider’s boundaries provide a • service “subsidy” to another jurisdiction. It is impossible to provide a service level comparison as the database is of limited • size and of limited verifiability in these areas. Current costs of providing services of the volunteer companies is difficult to • ascertain because of the private fund raising and fund allocation processes of these entities. While, in aggregate, the service demand is only 1.65 calls per day to the • underserved areas, the highest service demand on a service zone basis is approximately 0.48 calls/day or 3.4 calls/week (this is in the South County Fire service area). The primary obstacle to developing a workable solution to the issue of funding services to these areas is the zero-sum nature of the local government revenue environment. Given the competing nature of regional service priorities, it is difficult to divert existing revenues to the provision of services that are now occurring outside of those revenues. Therefore, any acceptable solution must involve the creation of new revenues outside of existing property tax increments received by any unit of local government. F. Options and Alternatives The potential alternatives with respect to the underserved areas of Santa Clara County are focused primarily on assuring that some form of revenue is attached to these areas for the development of a response infrastructure that adequately meets the Matrix Consulting Group Page 84 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study safety needs of the area(s). The variables in evaluating these alternatives essentially have two components – operational and financial. The table, below, summarizes the various factors that comprise the potential effectiveness of the various alternatives: Factors to be Considered Elements Operational Comparability or improvement in levels of service Improve consistency of service levels. Financial Mechanism for addressing current costs of service Mechanism for on-going funding of service levels Development of alternative revenues Degree of property tax increment exchange or impact to County General Fund levels. Land Use Instituting land use controls to limit expansion of service demand The following discussion summarizes the various options to be considered in achieving solutions to the issues identified above: F.1. Creation of a New Fire District, or Expansion of Existing Fire Protection District(s) to Cover All Underserved Areas That Are Outside an Organized Fire Protection Agency. Creation of a new special district or expansion of an existing district would address the issues associated with providing a consistent regional service with an alternative revenue source utilizing property tax increment which would be dedicated to fire service delivery. This alternative would consist of the following: Matrix Consulting Group Page 85 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Organization Creation (or expansion) of fire service entity providing fire suppression, rescue and prevention services to the areas of the County outside of existing fire protection agencies. This could be either through an expansion of the existing “special districts,” (i.e. South County Fire and/or County Fire or the creation of a new “special district” for fire services. Financial Establishment of new property tax increment to be negotiated with the County of Santa Clara. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Provides for overall governance and A new district only has access to incremental accountability of system. revenue. Additional supplemental tax would require a two-thirds voter approval. Money available over time. Provides a mechanism for funding. Allows for coordination of development activities and provides mechanism for ensuring development does not exceed ability to provide services. The steps required to implement this alternative include: Matrix Consulting Group Page 86 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Special District Re-Organization and/or 1. Preparation of Application: Defining Formation proposed boundaries and services, environmental effects, and financing needs and options. 2. LAFCO Review and approval: Includes public hearing and LAFCO determination. If approved, opportunity for protests. 3. Protest hearing: LAFCO holds a second public hearing to measure formal protests from voters and property owners. A majority protest stops the proposal; otherwise there’s an election. 4. Election: Voters inside the proposed district’s boundaries vote. Requires majority-voter approval. If the proposal involves new special taxes, the measure needs 2/3-voter approval. 5. Formal filing: If the voters approve the proposed district, filing for District formation with State. Review and Determination of Service 1. Establishment of regional service levels. provision model by Board of Supervisors 2. Establishment of development thresholds for service enhancement. 3. Possible implementation of development impact fees in underserved areas. F.2. Creation of a JPA between the Cities of Milpitas and San Jose, the County of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District. Creation of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) for the purposes of providing fire protection services in the underserved areas would provide coordination and accountability in the regional provision of services. It would also provide a mechanism to negotiate uniform service charges/costs for providing services to the area. It would not, however, create a revenue source to pay for these service charges/costs. This alternative would consist of the following: Matrix Consulting Group Page 87 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Organization • Creation of a new JPA and management structure. • Management staff could be independently formed or contracted from existing regional infrastructure (i.e. County Fire or CDF). • Functional operations consolidated (i.e. single point of communications, Joint Training, shared fire prevention staff/weed abatement, ALS Quality Improvement efforts, etc.) Financial • As a JPA, revenues would be received directly from the participating agencies. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown below: Advantages Disadvantages Provides mechanism for accountability of service provision. Does not require massive governmental re- Does not provide revenue stream. organization Potential to expand services to include training and fire prevention activities. Provides forum for intergovernmental coordination of services. The steps required to implement this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Construction of Joint Powers Authority 1. Determination of desired level of Document integration 2. Agreement between multiple governmental agencies on responsibilities and roles in addition to service goals. 3. Agreement on cost sharing and governance mechanisms. Matrix Consulting Group Page 88 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study F.3. Creation of a County Service Area (CSA) to cover the underserved areas of the County. Creation of a County Service Area (CSA) could provide a funding mechanism independent of current local government revenues to provide fire services on a regional basis in the underserved areas of the County. A special tax would require a two-thirds voter approval. This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Rationale Organization • Creation of a CSA overlay to cover the regions not included in any fire agency. Financial • Establishment of new special tax rate associated with the CSA. This would require a two-thirds voter approval. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Could provide a funding source for services independent of current local government revenues, though 2/3rd voter approval is required. Potential to create effective governance Operational and management issues source and accountability for service provision generated. Potential to expand services to include Special taxes would require the two-thirds training and fire prevention activities. voter approval. The steps required to implement this alternative include: Matrix Consulting Group Page 89 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation County Service Area 1. Preparation of Application: Defining exact, proposed boundaries and services, environmental effects, and financing needs and options. 2. LAFCO Review and approval: Includes public hearing and LAFCO determination. If approved, opportunity for protests. 3. Protest hearing: LAFCO holds a second public hearing to measure formal protests from voters and property owners. A majority protest stops the proposal; otherwise there’s an election. 4. Election: Voters inside the proposed district’s boundaries. Vote requires majority-voter approval. Proposal involves new special taxes, thus the measure requires two-thirds voter approval. 5. Formal filing: If the voters approve the proposed district, filing for District formation with State. Review and Determination of Service 1. Determination on method of best provision providing services (i.e. independent agency or contracting for services) 2. Establishment of regional service levels and needs. Determination of Service Model 1. Independent third party provider, contract for region-wide service provision, or maintenance of existing multiple-party service assistance model. F.4. Continue the Current System of Local Service Delivery With or Without Other Service Improvements or Coordination. Continuation of existing approaches of service delivery clearly would not directly address the operational and cost issues identified in this report. It would not require any governmental re-organizations or the creation of a new “level of government.” No new government revenue streams would be identified or collected. This alternative would consist of the following: Matrix Consulting Group Page 90 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Organization • Maintenance of existing system of delivery divided between 5 agencies and volunteer companies. • Additional services such as training, fire prevention, etc. would not be extended to the area. Financial • The existing situation of non-compensated responses would continue until such time as various jurisdictions determine they no longer could serve these areas. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages No property tax increment adjustments or Provides no solution to “underserved areas;” additional revenue generation required. financial subsidy provided by agencies to underserved areas. Matrix Consulting Group Page 91 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 2. REGIONAL FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE FOR SOUTH COUNTY REGION A. Background The South County Region is defined, for purposes of this report, as the area in the southern portion of the County that includes the cities of Gilroy, Morgan Hill and the area served by South County Fire. Because of the current physical separation of the South County (i.e. Morgan Hill, Gilroy and the surrounding unincorporated area) as well as its future growth potential, this area presents a unique opportunity for planning efficiencies in fire service delivery system design. At this stage of this region’s development, certain advantages can be obtained by the creation of a unified service area in the South County Region. There are several aspects of the current environment that lend themselves to this regional service model. The City of Morgan Hill relies on a regional system utilizing resources of both the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire) and the South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District (South County Fire). Additionally, increasing development demands will likely continue to push development southward and a coordinated approach to this planning has the opportunity of reducing overall community and development costs as well as providing a cohesive service delivery system at or above mandated community standards or expectations. Currently, this area is served by the following agencies: Agency Area Covered Relationship County Fire City of Morgan Hill City of Morgan Hill contracts with County Fire. South County Fire Unincorporated Area Included in South County Fire, which surrounding and between contracts (Schedule A) with the the Cities of Morgan Hill and California Department of Forestry Gilroy (CDF). Matrix Consulting Group Page 92 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Agency Area Covered Relationship California Department of Responsible for wildland Schedule B, services provided for Forestry (CDF) areas in Santa Clara County State responsibility area during fire season Gilroy Fire Department Incorporated area in the City Municipal department. of Gilroy. There is a growing population base in this region divided among these agencies. The table, below, summarizes estimated and projected population levels among these jurisdictions: 2000 Est. Population Jurisdictional Area Population 2010 Morgan Hill 33,556 41,070 Gilroy 41,464 53,140 Unincorporated Area Served by South County Fire 20,545 See note below* “Underserved” Areas 6,047 See note below* * Note: Refer to the chapter on growth and population projections. Because of County land use policies and development constraints, minimal population growth is projected to occur within the existing boundaries of South County Fire and the “underserved” areas. B. Service Characteristics From a fire protection service delivery and governance perspective, this is a complex region of the County. The following points illustrate this: • As noted above, there is a unique service delivery model in City of Morgan Hill and the areas surrounding Morgan Hill. County Fire provides service to Morgan Hill through a contract. However, large unincorporated areas to the north and east of the Morgan Hill, which are in South County’s Fire District, are served by County Fire, while large areas of the southern one-third of the Morgan Hill are served primarily by South County Fire through an automatic aid agreement. • Much of the unincorporated area south of Morgan Hill and north of Gilroy is within the South County Fire, which is served by a total of 3 fire stations staffed by CDF. Matrix Consulting Group Page 93 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • In the surrounding valley hillsides much of the area is outside of an organized jurisdiction. Some of these areas are served by volunteers supported by CDF. • Gilroy, which has its own municipal fire department, is currently served by 3 fire stations with the primary distinguishing characteristic of the service delivery model found there being the staffing levels: with two 4-person engine companies and a 2-person Rescue/Ambulance. The distribution of fire stations in the South County is shown in the map, which follows this page. All first-responding apparatus in the South County Region are engine companies with the exception of the Rescue/Ambulance described above and a truck company that is operated out of a Morgan Hill Station (provided by County Fire). However, this truck company is cross-staffed with an engine company and when it does respond, responds with the staffing of that station thereby staffing only one of the two pieces of apparatus, depending on the need. The table, below, provides the allocation of staff resources and apparatus in the South County Region: Summary of Resources in South County Region Agency Number of Companies Minimum Staffing Levels/Company City of Morgan Hill/County Fire 2.0 3 City of Gilroy 3.0 410 South County Fire 3.0 2 CDF 0.5 Volunteers with CDF assistance Overall Region 8.5 Average of 3.0 10 Gilroy staffs its Rescue/Ambulance with a minimum of 2. However, conventional fire apparatus is staffed at a 4-person minimum. Matrix Consulting Group Page 94 LLAAFFCCOO OOFF SSAANNTTAA CCLLAARRAA CCOOUUNNTTYY CCoouunnttyywwiiddee FFiirree PPrrootteeccttiioonn SSttuuddyy MMaattrriixx CCoonnssuullttiinngg GGrroouupp PPaaggee 9955 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Battalion Chiefs are provided and available by all 3 agencies in the South County Region on a varying basis to achieve 24-hour coverage: • CDF and the City of Gilroy have at least 1 Battalion Chief who is on-call at all times. • County Fire staffs a forty hour Battalion Chief in the City of Morgan Hill. After hours, chief officer coverage is provided through a neighboring battalion. The table, below, summarizes additional characteristics that define the current response system in the South County Region as well as costs: Facility On- Replacement Calls Sq. Total 1st Line duty Addition For Mi. Pop.* Budget Apparatus Staff Stations Needs? Service South County Fire 264 20,545 $2,488,281 3 9 3 Yes 2,143 Morgan Hill 12 33,556 $3,555,272 2 6 2 Yes 1,787 City of Gilroy 16 41,464 $6,082941 3 10 3 Yes 2,212 CDF 97 1,500 $185,000 0.5 3 0.5 No 176 So. County Total 389 97,065 $12,311,494 10 28 8.5 – 6,318 • Note that population figures are from the 2000 Census counts. The table, above, describes a sub-regional system that responds to 6,318 calls for service per year, expends $12.3 million on an annual basis and covers over 389 square miles. The population protected in this area is over 97,000. All of the first line apparatus are engine companies (with the exception of a Squad/Rescue-Ambulance that is operated by the City of Gilroy). There are no dedicated first-line truck companies in the South County Region.11 C. Issue Summary This analysis has identified several cost and service delivery issues which need to be addressed. The table, below, lists these issues: 11 County Fire operates a truck company from Morgan Hill. It is cross-staffed with an engine company and is available for response in a “task force” response with that engine company under normal operating parameters. Matrix Consulting Group Page 96 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Service Delivery Issues Ability of current individual service agencies to deliver full-first alarm response including, specifically, truck company and support services. Duplication of Battalion Chief coverage between agencies. Variances in on-duty staffing levels between County Fire and South County Fire providing services to Morgan Hill. Given existing populations and the growth potential of the South County Region together with the somewhat fragmented service delivery model currently found in this region, the potential exists to create a regional service delivery model that could provide for higher levels of service more cost effectively, than might be attainable from individual agencies providing separate delivery systems. The next section outlines these opportunities. D. Options and Alternatives The alternative of a regional service delivery model has three components – organization, governance and financial. Options for achieving a more regional of delivery system must consider all of these components. The table, which follows, summarizes the various factors that comprise the potential effectiveness of the various alternatives: Factors to be Considered Elements Organization Comparability or improvement in levels of service Human resource issues and labor contract issues to be addressed Matrix Consulting Group Page 97 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Factors to be Considered Elements Governance Degree of local control Flexibility to provide or contract services Degree of governmental reorganization required Reduction in the “levels of government” Financial Costs versus benefits of the alternative Time for operating savings to offset transitional costs Development of alternative revenues Adequacy of current revenue sources and potential to create new sources The following discussion summarizes the various options to be considered in the potential re-organization of the South County Region as it relates to the provision of fire protection services: D.1. Creation of a New Fire District Covering the South County Area Region (Gilroy, Morgan Hill, and South County Fire) or Expansion of an Existing Agency to Cover the Same Area. Creation of a new special district or expansion of the existing South County Fire to cover the same area would address the issues associated with providing a consistent regional service with an alternative revenue source, utilizing a property tax increment dedicated to fire service delivery. If unincorporated lands outside of current protection zones were included, this alternative could address the issues surrounding the current “underserved” areas in the County. This alternative would consist of the following: Matrix Consulting Group Page 98 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Organization • Creation (or expansion) of fire service entity providing fire suppression, rescue and prevention services to the South County. This could be either through an expansion of the existing district, or the creation of a new special district. (cid:131) Provides scale of operations that could allow for redeployment and/or additional resources (i.e. truck/rescue companies) to serve the area on a regional basis. (cid:131) Functional operations consolidated (e.g. single point of communications, Joint Training, shared fire prevention staff/weed abatement, ALS Quality Improvement efforts, etc.) (cid:131) Provides scale for single Battalion Chief coverage 24-hours/day. (cid:131) Provides for more effective coverage and move-up capability than currently required from other areas of the County. Governance • Independent or dependent special district providing regional governance. • Currently labor contracts exist with CDF, City of Gilroy and County Fire. Depending upon method/purveyor of service decided upon, integration of a minimum of 2 and maximum of 3 employee groups would be predicted. • A change in service area could mean a change in service providers. Service providers could most likely be decided through a competitive contract or through a new employee group. Financial • Establishment of new property tax increment to be negotiated with existing cities and districts. • Potential reduction/elimination of General Fund expenditures for Gilroy and Morgan Hill. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Provides for overall governance of system Requires property tax increment from existing agencies Matrix Consulting Group Page 99 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Advantages Disadvantages Provides a mechanism for funding the Integration of labor contracts may be difficult services Provides a foundation for regional planning Provides lesser degree of local control than current system Provides flexibility to provide services or contract services out Provides for a reduction/elimination of general fund subsidies for fire protection from cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill Provides moderate degree of local control The steps required to implement this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Special District Formation 1. Preparation of Application: Defining exact, proposed boundaries and services, environmental effects, and financing needs and options. 2. LAFCO Review and approval: Includes public hearing and LAFCO determination. If approved, opportunity for protests. 3. Protest hearing: LAFCO holds a second public hearing to measure formal protests from voters and property owners. A majority protest stops the proposal, otherwise there’s an election. 4. Election: Voters inside the proposed district’s boundaries vote. Requires majority-voter approval. If the proposal involves new special taxes, the measure needs 2/3-voter approval. 5. Formal filing: If the voters approve the proposed district, filing for District formation with State. Review and Determination of Service 1. Determination on method of best provision model by District Board providing services (i.e. independent agency or contracting for services) 2. Establishment of regional service levels and needs. Labor Relationships 1. Determination of methods of either contract integration or other manner of managing employee relationships in previous fire service entities. Matrix Consulting Group Page 100 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study D.2. Creation of a Joint Powers Authority Between the Cities of Morgan Hill and Gilroy and South County Fire – Service Contracted Out to a Single Entity. Creation of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) for the purposes of providing fire protection services in the South County Region would provide a regional service delivery model, without the creation of an alternative revenue source. There would be a high degree of local autonomy maintained and governmental re-organizations would be minimal to non-existent. This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Description Organization • Creation of a new JPA and management structure. • Contract between the JPA and a unified service provider. • Management staff could be independently formed or contracted to existing regional infrastructure (e.g., County Fire or CDF). • Functional operations consolidated (e.g., single point of communications, joint training, shared fire prevention staff/weed abatement, ALS quality improvement efforts, etc.) Governance • Board potentially consisting of elected officials from the Board of Supervisors (e.g., South County Fire and County Fire), and elected officials from the City of Gilroy and the City of Morgan Hill. Potential to have another member to be appointed by a majority vote of the 4 –elected officials. • JPA could potentially prepare a bid process to determine best cost/benefit relationship attainable if service were delivered to the entire region. Financial • As a JPA, revenues would be received directly from the participating agencies. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Matrix Consulting Group Page 101 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Advantages Disadvantages Does not require massive governmental re- Revenues dependant upon general fund organization revenues of agencies No exchange of property tax increment Governance dependent upon member agency agreement. Requires consent. Provides flexibility to provide services or contract services out or merely provide Provides additional “layer of government” planning and regional coordination The steps required to implement this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Construction of Joint Powers Authority (JPA) 1. Determination of desired level of Document integration 2. Agreement between 3 governmental agencies on service levels and service goals. 3. Agreement on cost sharing and governance mechanisms. Determination of Service Model 1. Independent third party provider, contract for region-wide service provision, or maintenance of existing 3-party service model. D.3. Creation of a County Service Area (CSA) to Cover the South County Region Along with Two-Thirds Voter Approval for Special Tax. Creation of a County Service Area (CSA), along with a two-thirds voter approval, would provide a funding mechanism independent of current local government revenues to provide fire services on a regional basis in the South County Region. This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Rationale Organization • Creation of a CSA overlay to the existing sub-region. Governance • Advisory Board could be established to identify potential cost savings and enhancements in the efficiency of service delivery on a regional basis. Matrix Consulting Group Page 102 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Rationale Financial • Establishment of new assessment. • Special tax requiring two-thirds voter approval. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Provides independent funding source for Deals only with the “funding” aspect of system services upon two-thirds voter approval and requires two-thirds voter approval Potential to create effective governance Governance still requires formation of a source structure The steps required to implement this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Special District Formation 1. Preparation of Application: Defining exact, proposed boundaries and services, environmental effects, and financing needs and options. 2. LAFCO Review and approval: Includes public hearing and LAFCO determination. If approved, opportunity for protests. 3. Protest hearing: LAFCO holds a second public hearing to measure formal protests from voters and property owners. A majority protest stops the proposal, otherwise there’s an election. 4. Election: Voters inside the proposed district’s boundaries vote requires majority-voter approval. If the proposal involves new special taxes, the measure needs 2/3-voter approval. 5. Formal filing: If the voters approve the proposed district, filing for District formation with State. Review and Determination of Service 1. Determination on method of best provision model by District Board providing services (i.e. independent agency or contracting for services) 2. Establishment of regional service levels and needs. Matrix Consulting Group Page 103 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Labor Relationships 1. Determination of methods of either contract integration or other manner of managing employee relationships in previous fire service entities. D.4. Continue the Current System of Local Service Delivery With or Without Other Service Improvements or Coordination. Continuation of existing approaches of service delivery clearly would not directly address the service and cost issues identified in this report. However, it would maintain the very high levels of local control currently enjoyed by the incorporated cities and would obviously not require any governmental re-organizations or the creation of a new “level of government.” This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Description Organization • Maintenance of existing system of delivery divided between 3 agencies. • Multiple communication centers would remain serving the area. • Each agency maintains responsibility for maintaining independent support services including fire prevention/weed abatement and communications. Governance • Board of Supervisors, Gilroy City Council and Morgan Hill City Council independently determine service levels and resultant costs. Financial • The existing expenditure level of $12.3 million would continue from existing governmental revenue streams. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages No property tax increment adjustments or additional revenue sharing. Accountability for cost remains at the local Fails to maximize economies of scale level. Matrix Consulting Group Page 104 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Advantages Disadvantages No need to integrate labor contracts/costs The steps required to implement any efficiencies potentially available in this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Enhanced regional cooperation 1. Formal meetings to determine desired service levels and ascertain the ability of the existing structure to provide those levels of service. 2. Potential for eliminating duplicate services (i.e. Battalion Chief Coverage) and enhancing station/district coverage ability utilizing existing resources. 3. Potential of utilizing single communications center/dispatch point. Matrix Consulting Group Page 105 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 3. REGIONAL PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES FOR SARATOGA AND SURROUNDING AREAS A. Background The City of Saratoga is currently served by two fire protection agencies, the Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) and the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire). Presented on the following page is a map of the Saratoga Sub-Region. Currently, this area is served by the following agencies: Agency Area Covered County Fire • Approximately one-half the City of Saratoga and surrounding areas to the north, east and southeast. • County Fire has a boundary drop agreement with the SFPD for certain, pre-defined areas. SFPD • Approximately one-half the City of Saratoga and the adjacent and surrounding unincorporated areas to the southwest. • SFPD has a boundary drop agreement with County Fire for certain, pre-defined areas. The table, below, summarizes estimated and projected population levels between the two jurisdictions: 2000 Est. Population Jurisdictional Area Population 2010 City of Saratoga* 29,843 31,430 SFPD 12,784 See note* * Note: Refer to the chapter on growth and population projections. SFPD has annexed all lands within their Sphere of Influence. Due to existing development patterns and the County’s and City’s land development policies, the SFPD service area is not expected to grow significantly. Also note that County Fire provides service to approximately half of the City of Saratoga. Therefore, the City of Saratoga’s contribution to County Fire’s service population is approximately 17,000. * Matrix Consulting Group Page 106 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Map of Fire Districts in the Saratoga Sub-Region Matrix Consulting Group Page 107 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study The table below summarizes the approximate division of the City of Saratoga between the County Fire and the SFPD: Approximate Approximate Calls for Saratoga Sub-Region Sq. Miles Population Service SFPD 6.68 12,784 1,091 County Fire 5.46 17,059 830 City of Saratoga Totals 12.14 29,843 1,921 B. Service Characteristics From a fire protection service delivery and governance perspective, this is a complex region of the County. The following points illustrate this: • The City of Saratoga is essentially bisected by the boundaries of the SFPD and the County Fire. • The County Fire provides protection to the surrounding communities, with the SFPD extending westward into high-hazard, urban-wildland interface areas in the coast mountain area. • Both districts provide paramedic, first response services and the per-company staffing is essentially consistent. The depth of resources provided by County Fire is obviously deeper than that available from the SFPD. The distribution of fire stations in the SFPD and surrounding area is shown in the map, which follows this page. Matrix Consulting Group Page 108 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Matrix Consulting Group Page 109 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Agency Resources The table, which follows, provides the allocation of staff resources and apparatus in the Saratoga Region: Summary of Resources in Saratoga Region Agency Number of Minimum Staffing Companies Levels/Company SFPD 2.0 3 County Fire 3.0 3 Overall Region 5.0 Average of 3 County Fire has an on-duty Battalion Chief serving this area 24-hours/day. SFPD utilizes on-call Chief Officers and/or Captains assigned out-of-class (AOC) to provide Battalion Chief level supervision outside of normal business hours. In addition to the three engine companies that are located at Quito, West Valley, and Seven Springs stations, County Fire has a Hazardous Materials company within the Saratoga sub- region. Those three County Fire stations include portions of the City of Saratoga in their first due areas. With respect to Saratoga Fire Protection District, it should be noted that the SFPD’s minimum staffing includes seven personnel who respond on three pieces of apparatus. In other words, while the above table shows an average of 3 person companies, SFPD will staff one three-person engine company and either one four- person rescue (for the ‘fast attack’ approach), or one two person rescue and one two person patrol, depending on the situation. Boundary Drop Agreement In August of 2001, the SFPD and County Fire entered into a boundary drop agreement to assist each other in responses in border areas between the two agencies. The table below summarizes the operationally relevant aspects of this agreement: Matrix Consulting Group Page 110 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Agreement Element Conditions/Requirements Requirement for Available Resources SFPD – Minimum of 7 paid personnel on a constant staffing basis. County Fire – Minimum 6 personnel from nearest available fire station(s) and 62 paid personnel in its regional system. Commitment of Resources SFPD– Provides 2 Units as system resources when dispatched under this agreement. Will provide “Quint” into Commercial and Residential Truck zones County Fire – Provides 3 Units as system resources when dispatched under this agreement. Will provide 1 off-road “Patrol” and 1 engine company into wildland urban-interface areas. Area of Agreement SFPD – Agreement covers boundary areas separating the two agencies where the other agency can respond more quickly. County Fire– Agreement covers boundary areas separating the two agencies where the other agency can respond more quickly. Staffing Levels of Companies SFPD– Engines: 3 personnel, including an officer. Rescue: 4 personnel, including an officer. County Fire – Engines: 3 paid personnel, including an officer. Trucks: 4 paid personnel, including an officer. Patrols: 2 paid personnel. The boundary drop agreement has a term of 5-years (August, 2006). It may be terminated by either party upon 90-days advance notice and subsequent to a dispute resolution process which includes review by the Fire Services Oversight Committee which is comprised of representatives from the SFPD, County Fire, City of Saratoga Public Safety Commission, the Saratoga City Council and the Saratoga City Manager. Other Service Characteristics The table below, summarizes additional characteristics that define the agencies that form the current response system in the region surrounding the City of Saratoga as well as costs: Matrix Consulting Group Page 111 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Facility Min. Replace. Calls Total 1st Line On-duty Addition For Sq. Mi. Pop. Budget Appar. Staff Stns. Needs? Service SFPD 6.68 12,784 $3,954,889 212 7 1 yes 1,304 County Fire 129 271,138 $49,502,701 19 64 16 yes 13,566 Total 135.68 283,922 $53,457,590 21 71 17 – 14,870 A comparison of costs for this area is complex. The SFPD is an independent entity with service responsibility to an area from a single fire station. County Fire is a regional service delivery agency that provides multiple services and provides an infrastructure that supports its regional nature. This analysis was made more complex by the fact that there is no City specific “defined” service area – the stations of the County Fire serving the City of Saratoga are part of a larger regional network. The list, below, summarizes some of these infrastructure elements that are provided by County Fire but are not elements of the SFPD service structure: Regional Training Center and Facilities • Type I HazMat Team • Dedicated public education staff • Special Operations Companies • Incident Command Management Teams • Truck Company • Apparatus Maintenance Facility • 12 Saratoga Operates its 2nd Company in a flexible deployment mode with 2 apparatus normally staffed in a “task force” response mode wherein they are responded together. Matrix Consulting Group Page 112 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Tax Rate Areas and Varying Increment Because parcels within the City of Saratoga are within differing fire districts, residents pay varying tax rates for fire protection. The table below, summarizes the tax rates apportioned to the districts providing fire protection services: Agency Tax Rate Area Factor SFPD 060-039 - Low 0.0955 085-003 - High 0.1367 Average 0.1126 County Fire 003-162 - Low 0.0944 091-012 - High 0.1800 Average 0.1441 The table below summarizes the varying tax rate areas within the City of Saratoga and approximates the total property tax revenue generated to each fire district from within the City itself. Average Fire District Agency Assessed Value Tax Rate Revenue SFPD* $3,260,701,577 0.001126 $3,671,550 County Fire $3,235,041,951 0.001441 $4,661,695 * Property owners within the Saratoga Fire Protection District boundaries pay an additional assessment to finance bonds issued to construct the new fire station. The data supplied by the Santa Clara County Controller’s Office indicate that parcels within the City of Saratoga generate approximately $8.3 million is revenues for fire protection purposes. The above data should only be utilized in terms of understanding the general context of revenue generation within the City of Saratoga. The Saratoga Region has a demand for services lower than that found in the County as a whole. The cost to provide these services in this area are higher and the staffing levels found in this Region are higher than the County average. Service and cost issues associated with the delivery sub-system are summarized below: Matrix Consulting Group Page 113 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Service Delivery Issues Full first alarm response in Saratoga Fire Protection District is dependant upon additional resources from outside SFPD and provided through either mutual aid or Boundary Drop agreement. The City of Saratoga is bisected by the boundaries of these 2 fire districts. The Boundary drop agreement has alleviated many of the on-going operational issues. The current situation finds County Fire providing services on virtually 3-sides of the SFPD. Moreover, the fire districts divide the City of Saratoga between two service providers. This may present an opportunity for cost efficiencies through governmental reorganization. C. Options and Alternatives The potential alternatives related to possible governmental reorganization of fire service delivery involve (1) dissolution of SFPD and annexation to County Fire; (2) the City withdrawing from both districts and making a decision about a unified approach to service delivery within the City; (3) expansion of the SFPD into the County Fire area of the City; and (4) continuation of the current approach with/without additional service improvements. The table, below, summarizes the various factors that comprise the potential effectiveness of the various alternatives: Factors to be Considered Elements Organization Comparability or improvement in levels of service Human resource issues and labor contract issues to be addressed Matrix Consulting Group Page 114 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Factors to be Considered Elements Governance Degree of local control Flexibility to provide or contract services Degree of governmental reorganization required Reduction in the “levels of government” Financial Costs versus benefits of the alternative Degree of reduction in redundancy Time for operating savings to offset transitional costs Development of alternative revenues Degree of property tax increment exchange The following discussion summarizes the various options to be considered in the potential re-organization of the Saratoga Region as it relates to the provision of fire protection services: C.1. Dissolution of the Saratoga Fire Protection District and Annexation to Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District. Dissolution of the Saratoga Fire Protection District and annexation to Santa Clara County Fire Protection District would provide for uniformity of service provision to the City of Saratoga, as residents would receive fire protection services from one agency. Additionally, the City would benefit from a greater “depth of resources” available through County Fire. This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Description Organization (cid:131) Provides scale of operations that could allow for redeployment and/or additional resources (i.e. truck/rescue companies) to serve the area on a regional basis. (cid:131) Provides scale for single Battalion Chief coverage 24-hours/day. (cid:131) Provides for more effective coverage and move-up capability than currently required from other areas of the County. Matrix Consulting Group Page 115 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Governance • Dependent special district providing regional governance. • Currently labor contracts exist with SFPD and County Fire. Depending upon method/purveyor of service decided upon, integration of 2 employee groups would be predicted. • City of Saratoga would receive fire services from a single entity providing greater continuity of services and consistency in service delivery. Financial • Transfer of property tax increment from SFPD to County Fire. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Maximizes economies of scale for overall Requires a process of voter approval governance of system Uniform regionwide service delivery could be Integration of existing labor contracts may be achieved. difficult Enhances levels of service in areas of Provides lesser degree of local control than Saratoga covered by SFPD. County Fire current system for SFPD could provide a greater “depth of response’” for incidents with its infrastructure elements in the region. Provides moderate degree of local control in the region. Uniform service levels would be provided to all residents of the City of Saratoga. Provides greater depth of resources to respond to wildland fires. The steps required to implement this alternative include: Matrix Consulting Group Page 116 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Dissolution of SFPD and Annexation to 1. Preparation of Application: Defining exact, County Fire proposed boundaries and services, environmental effects, and financing needs and options. 2. LAFCO Review and approval: Includes public hearing and LAFCO determination. If approved, opportunity for protests. 3. Protest hearing: LAFCO holds a second public hearing to measure formal protests from voters and property owners. A majority protest stops the proposal, otherwise there’s an election. 4. Election: Voters inside the proposed district’s boundaries vote. This requires majority-voter approval. 5. Formal filing: If the voters approve the proposed district, filing for District formation with State. Review and Determination of Service 1. Determination on method of best provision model by County Fire’s Board providing services 2. Establishment of regional service levels and needs. Labor Relationships 1. Determination of methods of either contract integration or other manner of managing employee relationships in previous fire service entities. C.2. The City of Saratoga Withdraws from County Fire and SFPD. Ultimate Method of Providing Fire Protection within the City Decided by Saratoga City Council. Withdrawal of the City of Saratoga from the existing fire districts would provide for a uniformity of service provision and high degree of local control for City residents. Additionally, a uniform level of service would be provided within the City boundaries and all residents would share the cost of that service level equally. Region wide service delivery could be achieved through a contract for service mechanism with a single service provider. This alternative would consist of the following: Matrix Consulting Group Page 117 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Organization • Withdrawal of areas within the incorporated limits of the City of Saratoga from the County Fire and the SFPD. • City determines best method of providing protection either through formation of municipal department or contracting services to existing agency. Governance • City Council of the City of Saratoga responsible for service levels in the City. • Contract mechanism most likely as City lacks necessary infrastructure such as communications/dispatch. Financial • SFPD has heavily reliance on City Tax Rate areas. If these were removed, the viability of the district would be a significant question. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Provides uniform service levels to all residents Potential negative revenue and service of the City of Saratoga. impacts on County Fire. Contract costs may be different than existing property tax generated revenues leading to the City subsidizing fire services in the former SFPD area. City lacks the internal capacity in infrastructure to create major service delivery department such as fire. The steps required to implement this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Application to withdraw city properties from 1. Filing of application and LAFCO analysis the Fire Districts. specifically on financial impacts to existing districts and reasonable property tax exchange. Creation of RFP for service provision within 1. Evaluation of existing service levels and the City costs. 2. Creation of RFP document for competitive bid process for providing services within the City. Matrix Consulting Group Page 118 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Implementation of new service model 1. Dependent upon model selected and viability of remaining district components. 2. May include obtaining infrastructure such as fire stations and/or apparatus. C.3. Expansion of Boundaries of the SFPD to Include All of the City of Saratoga. Detachment of Relevant Properties from County Fire. Expansion of the existing boundaries of SFPD to include all of the City of Saratoga would also create a uniform service delivery model within the City. The infrastructure of SFPD, which currently serves the City, would remain in place and service levels will continue in the same fashion as today. The additional level of services provided by County Fire would either have to be duplicated by the SFPD or contracted for (i.e. CERT Programs, etc.). Moreover, County Fire has developed a regional fire services system which includes a portion of the City of Saratoga. If these areas were lost to County Fire and served by SFPD, there would be impacts on neighboring areas. This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Rationale Organization • Existing SFPD boundaries would be expanded to include all of the City of Saratoga. Existing properties within the County Fire would be detached and annexed into the SFPD. Governance • SFPD Board would have legislative responsibility for fire protection within the City of Saratoga. Matrix Consulting Group Page 119 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Rationale Financial • Potential Revenue decrement to the County Fire with no commensurate reducible capacity to the service delivery system. • Potential increased cost to SFPD to provide current public education/investigation and related services to the reorganized area of the City of Saratoga. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Provides uniform service levels to all residents The SFPD does not provide the depth of of the City of Saratoga resources provided by the County Fire. Potential inefficiencies to remaining communities served by County Fire. Does not address regional service issues in the area. Fewer on-duty resources to respond to wildland / hillside fires. The steps required to implement this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Application to withdraw city properties from 1. Filing of application and LAFCO analysis County Fire. specifically on financial impacts to existing districts and reasonable property tax exchange. Boundary reorganization 1. Evaluation of service levels and costs. 2. Evaluation of need and/or impact on existing Boundary drop agreement between SFPD and County Fire. C.4. Continue the Current System of Local Service Delivery With or Without Other Service Improvements or Coordination. Continuation of existing approaches of service delivery clearly would not directly address the service and cost issues identified in this report. However, it obviously Matrix Consulting Group Page 120 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study would not require any governmental re-organizations, the creation of a new “level of government,” or adjustments to tax increments. This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Description Organization • Maintenance of existing system of delivery divided between 2 agencies. • Each agency maintains responsibility for maintaining independent support services including fire prevention/weed abatement, communication, etc. Governance • Board of Supervisors and Saratoga Fire Protection District Board would remain governance bodies for the 2 agencies providing protection. Financial • The existing expenditure level of $7.847 million would continue from existing governmental revenue streams. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages No property tax increment adjustments or Provides no solution to differences in service additional revenue sharing. levels and differences in tax rates for the same services. Cost structure remains local/ High degree of Fails to maximize economies of scale. local autonomy and control. No need to integrate labor contracts/costs. Efficient system delivery dependent upon “boundary drop” agreement with a termination date. Matrix Consulting Group Page 121 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 4. REGIONAL COOPERATION ON FIRE SERVICE PROTECTION SUPPORT SERVICES, INCLUDING TRAINING AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Background In the course of this study the consultant met with each of the fire service providers in the County. Interviews and data collected during this effort demonstrated that urban area agencies generally met their own and other service targets relating to response and related fire service programs. The consultant also developed an understanding of the many currently existing cross-agency cooperative efforts relating to response, training, emergency communications and specialized services which are an important part of the efficiency and effectiveness of the current situation. These past and current efforts are an important foundation upon which to build continuing or additional efforts – particularly in the areas of training and emergency communications. Emergency Communications An issue which should be considered by fire service agencies in the County relates to emergency communications issues. Currently, emergency communications in Santa Clara County is a patchwork of: • Independent 911 public safety answering points (i.e., where 911 calls come into a communications center) for municipalities, County Communications for areas served by the County Fire and the California Department of Forestry (CDF). • Differing dispatching levels of service relating to such things as “emergency medical dispatching (EMD),” (i.e., providing of pre-arrival instructions and triage techniques in emergency medical situations). • Not all agencies having comparable capabilities relating to computer aided dispatch, automated records management, etc. This often can impact the effectiveness of response and post-call evaluation. • The County Wide Interoperability Project is a long-term project examining technological solutions for the multiple radio systems used within the County. While the Project will provide a technological solution to Countywide Matrix Consulting Group Page 122 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study communications, it does not address issues relating to resources and fire service delivery. Some counties across the State of California (e.g., San Mateo County) and elsewhere in the country have developed joint dispatching centers for fire/emergency medical or for all emergency services. Such joint efforts should be encouraged because of the efficiencies it brings in the following areas: • Utilization of dispatchers. • Cross border utilization of field resources. • Cost effectiveness in service management. • Ability to spread costs over a wider field or participants. • Ability to more cost effectively and consistently implement system enhancements (e.g., radio systems, information systems, etc.) than is possible through individual agency approaches. These efforts should be pursued by public safety agencies (police, fire and emergency medical services) in the County. Use of a separate authority approach is a way for individual agencies to retain a measure of control and influence in these joint efforts (as opposed to contracts with larger agencies). However, because of the fact that many jurisdictions have consolidated police and fire dispatch centers this is a more complex issue than other shared service opportunities. The impacts of this alternative on other public safety services could not be explored in this study. Training Under the current system of service delivery, all of the fire protection agencies identify training as a major departmental program and 80% of the agencies identify a Matrix Consulting Group Page 123 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study minimum of 1-full time equivalent position assigned to the function of training and human resource development. Fire service agencies have been tasked with an increasing array of responsibilities over the past 2-decades. These responsibilities come with additional requirements for training and accreditation related to skills development associated with that training. Examples of mandated training include: Blood Borne Pathogens • Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) • Hazardous Materials (Haz Mat) • Respiratory Protection • Confined Space entry • EMT/Paramedic certification/accreditation • Additionally, as many of the fire protection agencies in Santa Clara County rely on the resources of neighboring jurisdictions to assist in the delivery of essential services, the close coordination in the training of these resources would result in increased efficiencies. Potential to share the services in the County are described in the next section with the example of training. Comparable approaches to sharing services and costs are available with respect to emergency communications and other support services. Given the current economic environment, there are more immediate opportunities to share training centers and conduct joint training events, rather than build joint training centers. Matrix Consulting Group Page 124 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study B. Current Characteristics of Approaches to Training in the County Training is most commonly conducted on an individual jurisdiction basis. All agencies have identified some form of computerized record keeping in tracking training activities and 75% of jurisdictions identify utilization of automation to track certifications/accreditation of its employees. Traditional fire training is further encumbered by the contemporary issues requiring the containment of water run-off and increasing densities/traffic making suitable training sites more difficult to identify and utilize. There are currently 5 fire service training facilities within Santa Clara. These are operated by the City of Santa Clara, the City of Milpitas, County Fire, the City of San Jose, City of Sunnyvale and the City of Mountain View. The remaining jurisdictions either utilize these facilities with prior arrangements or utilize large open spaces within their respective jurisdictions to conduct manipulative training of fire suppression personnel. A well-coordinated regional approach to fire training has a demonstrated ability to accomplish the following results: Enhance fire ground effectiveness and efficiency • Increase the actual time spent on manipulative training and “per-person basis. • Increase the efficiency in the management of accreditation and certifications. • Early identification of training needs and system deficiencies. • Enhanced skill retention • Reduction in overall community cost through reduction in duplicative capacity. • The next section summarizes these issues. Matrix Consulting Group Page 125 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study C. Issue Summary Models of regional training delivery can be found in Stanislaus County (CA) and San Diego County (CA). These regional training systems have identified, and found solutions for, the primary obstacles found in implementing regional training facilities. These obstacles can be summarized as follows: Availability of equipment and resources to provide multi-company training • Standardization of equipment • Standardization of tasks and evolutions. • Costs associated with facility establishment and maintenance. • Backfill capacity if companies move out of first due area. • A brief discussion and clarification of these issues follows in the remaining portion of this subsection. C.1. Availability of Equipment and Resources to Provide Multi-Company Training Many agencies are unable to commit an engine company for an extended period of time, often a long distance out of its jurisdiction to conduct training. Successful regional training facilities are capable of making the investment necessary to obtain engine and truck companies that can be assigned to the training grounds, allowing crews to either utilize training apparatus while the local agency apparatus remains in service with off duty crews, or; the regional model provides for company move-ups from neighboring jurisdictions while companies are out of service at the training grounds. C.2. Standardization of Equipment The issue of standardized equipment has largely been resolved through a series of large-scale incidents where incompatible equipment in some ways hindered Matrix Consulting Group Page 126 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study fireground operations. Contemporary fire service organizations, for the most part, utilize equipment that is, in most ways, compatible with equipment utilized in neighboring jurisdictions. C.3. Standardization of Tasks and Evolutions Despite the uniformity in command strategy and operational tactics throughout the fire service, many organizations insist on adapting unique variations to standardized tactical operations. Additionally, in some organizations performance of tactical evolutions are utilized as minimum performance standards which relate to the employment relationship between firefighters and their respective agencies. In these cases, specific performance standards have been negotiated as “conditions of employment” with various agencies. Generally speaking however, for the reasons stated above, regional adoption of tactical evolutions and training mechanisms enhance the effectiveness of the fire defense system and provide opportunities for cost effectiveness as certain cost efficiencies are exploited. C.4. Costs Associated with Facility Establishment and Maintenance Fire training facilities are very expensive developments with significant limitations as to their geographic placement. Average development costs for training towers and confined space training areas exceed $320/square foot. If not located in an existing site already utilized for that purpose, neighborhoods are typically very skeptical of allowing development of large-scale training centers. Concerns about liability as well as the simple integrity of these facilities require extensive investment in on-going facilities maintenance. For these reasons, funding Matrix Consulting Group Page 127 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study (both startup and on going) is usually facilitated by regional service agreements and/or the inclusion of grants from educational institutions or the federal government. C.5. Boundary Drops In urban areas around the country, the concept of “automatic aid” or “boundary drop” has been well established since the 1970’s. This is true for Santa Clara County agencies, many of which have shared response capabilities for decades. Over time, this approach to providing fire protection has resulted in greater resources available for initial responses to major fires, quicker responses to many areas, and a more rational location of fire stations in a regional manner rather than solely to the benefit of individual agencies. However, while there is a countywide mutual aid agreement in which the request of specific resources results in their dispatch anywhere in the County, automatic aid agreements are bi-lateral, between specific agencies. A countywide boundary drop agreement would provide the potential to further improve service as well as the efficiency of service delivery; however, a countywide boundary drop would not fully address service delivery issues (e.g., lack of resources). D. Options and Alternatives The variables in evaluating these alternatives have three components – organization, governance and financial. Options in achieving this type of delivery system must consider all of these components. The table, below, summarizes the various factors that comprise the potential effectiveness of the various alternatives: Matrix Consulting Group Page 128 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Factors to Be Considered Elements Organization Comparability or improvement in levels of service Communication systems and compatibility with existing or planned automated systems. Governance Approval of public fund expenditures Planning and Goal establishment Financial Costs versus benefits of the alternative Degree of reduction in redundancy Time for operating savings to offset transitional costs The following discussion summarizes the various options to be considered in the establishment of a regional training authority: D.1. Creation of a JPA Between all Established Fire Agencies in Santa Clara County for Purposes of Regional Fire Training Programs and Facilities Creation of a Joint Powers Authority for the purposes of providing regional fire training programs within Santa Clara County would provide a regional service delivery model, without the creation of an alternative revenue source. There would be a high degree of local autonomy maintained and governmental re-organizations would be minimal to non-existent. This alternative would consist of the following: Characteristic Description Organization • Creation of a new Joint Powers Authority. • Management staff could be independently formed or contracted to existing regional infrastructure (e.g., San Jose, County Fire). Governance • Board consisting of elected officials from member agencies. • Board could identify capital replacement/investment needs and regional adoption of tactical standards. Matrix Consulting Group Page 129 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Financial • As a Joint Powers Authority, revenues would be received directly from the participating agencies. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages Does not require massive governmental re- Revenues dependant upon general fund organization. revenues of agencies. Potential to create effective governance. Governance dependent upon member agencies. No exchange of property tax increment. Provides additional “layer of government.” Provides flexibility to provide services or contract services out or merely provide planning and regional coordination. The steps required to implement this alternative include: Issue Area Steps Required for Implementation Construction of Joint Powers Authority 1. Determination of desired level of Document integration. 2. Agreement between multiple governmental agencies on service levels and service goals, capital plans and tactical procedures. 3. Agreement on cost sharing and governance mechanisms. D.2. Continue the Current System of Local Training Delivery With or Without Other Service Improvements or Coordination. Continuation of existing approaches of service delivery clearly would not directly address the service and cost issues identified in this report. However, it obviously would not require any governmental re-organizations, the creation of a new “level of government,” or adjustments to tax increments. This alternative would consist of the following: Matrix Consulting Group Page 130 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Characteristic Description Organization • Maintenance of existing system of delivery divided between multiple agencies. • Each agency maintains responsibility for maintaining independent training support services. Governance • Maintenance of local control by elected city councils. Financial • The existing expenditure levels would continue from existing governmental revenue streams. Advantages and disadvantages associated with this alternative are shown in the following table: Advantages Disadvantages No property tax increment adjustments or Provides no solution to differences in additional revenue sharing. approaches to training. Cost structure remains local/ High degree of Fails to maximize economies of scale. local autonomy and control. Matrix Consulting Group Page 131 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 5. LOS ALTOS HILLS COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT Currently, the Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD) contracts with County Fire to provide fire services. In addition to contracting for service delivery, the LAHCFD provides other services directly to the community, including weed abatement, yard waste disposal and chipping. Important characteristics of this situation include the following: • The cost of the current contract with County Fire is almost $2 million per year. • The total budget of LAHCFD is approximately $4.75 million. • Current total reserves and fund balances are approximately $12.2 million. • LAHCFD is aggressively replacing hydrants and adding new ones to the system. In the current fiscal year over $2 million is dedicated to hydrants. • LAHCFD participates in payments to Palo Alto Fire Department firefighters who staff the Foothills fire station, primarily on overtime, during the summer months. LAHCFD also pays to augment fire season staffing. In the current fiscal year, $80,000 is dedicated to this. • LAHCFD owns the fire station on El Monte Station on the Foothills College campus. There are costs associated with this – in the FY 03-04 budget, about $103,000 is dedicated to fixed asset replacement and maintenance. • LAHCFD owns some of the apparatus and other equipment utilized by County Fire to provide services in the region. • LAHCFD with its remaining revenue provides relatively unique services its citizens including an unlimited yard waste disposal service, an on site chipping service, utilizes goats to mitigate hillside weeds, assist with water main disruption response, etc. In the current fiscal year, approximately $235,000 is dedicated to these services. • While never utilized, the citizens of LAHCFD have voted for a special assessment to fund services. The authority for this is extended annually. • As a separate entity, there are administrative overhead costs (e.g., insurances, clerical staff and office expense, consultant advisor to the LAHCFD Board, accounting and legal advice, as well as other fees). In the current fiscal year, the ‘cost of being in business’ totals about $163,000 (about 3% of the budget). Matrix Consulting Group Page 132 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study The relatively unique circumstances in which a special district contracts with another special district to provide at least a portion of the services it was formed to provide generates questions about local accountability for a service (revenue generated locally is used to provide local services) versus a potential source of overall cost reduction in system (because regardless of size and contract status a district experiences certain costs associated with ‘being in the business’ such as audit, insurances, office expenses, etc.). The following points should be considered: • Dissolving the LAHCFD would have a minor effect on overall regional fire service cost reduction (between $100,000 and $150,000 per year based on a review of the budget for cost categories needed to support an independent agency). • On the other hand, additional services funded and utilized locally could be threatened in a larger regional consolidation. It would take the creation of another special district or a specific agreement with a provider to maintain these services. • There is no duplication of service since all of the fire services in Los Altos Hills and the surrounding areas contracted with County Fire. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are summarized below: Alternative Advantages Disadvantages Dissolution of LAHCFD and • Realizes cost saving when • These savings may not be annexation to the County Fire having only one agency sufficient to warrant an provide service. organizational change in the • Creates a more uniform perceptions of residents. system of single service • Reduces local accountability. accountability in the area • May reduce the broader served by County Fire. service levels in LAHCFD • May create an opportunity to (associated with the chipping, use revenue to enhance yard waste and clearance services regionally. programs). Maintain current situation (i.e. • Maximizes local • A limited service district retention of LAHCFD) accountability. contracting with another • Maximizes service potential limited service district creates locally. more complex accountability. • Additional costs associated with an independent entity. Matrix Consulting Group Page 133 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 8. SERVICE REVIEW DETERMINATIONS This chapter addresses the requirements of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (California Government Code Section 56430). This act requires LAFCO to conduct Municipal Service Reviews prior to updating the Spheres of Influence (SOI) for local agencies within the County. As part of the review process, LAFCO is required to make written statements of determinations in each of the nine categories listed below: • Infrastructure needs and deficiencies • Growth and population projections • Financing constraints and opportunities • Cost avoidance opportunities • Opportunities for rate restructuring • Opportunities for shared facilities • Government structure options (including advantages and disadvantages of consolidation or re-organization of service providers) • Evaluation of management efficiencies • Local accountability and governance In addition to being used in updating the SOIs, the service review process provides a new set of tools that can be used by LAFCO, local agencies and the public to: • Promote orderly growth and development with consideration of service feasibility and service costs. • Learn about service issues and needs. • Plan for the provision of infrastructure needed to support planned growth. Matrix Consulting Group Page 134 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • Address regional issues. • Develop a structure for dialogue among agencies that provide services. • Develop a support network and promote shared resource acquisition. • Provide an informational database. • Develop strategies to avoid unnecessary costs, and to streamline and improve service delivery. • Provide ideas regarding different or modified government structures. In these ways, the analytical processes utilized in this project can be used to catalyze appropriate change. 1. INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS AND DEFICIENCIES One of LAFCO’s goals is to encourage the efficient provision of public services. Infrastructure needs and deficiencies refer to the adequacy of existing and planned public facilities in relation to how public services are, and will be, provided to citizens. Infrastructure can be evaluated in terms of capacity, condition, availability, quality and correlation among operational, capital improvement, and financial plans. The most common and visible infrastructure aspect of the fire service is a fire station, but other types of facilities need to be evaluated as well (such as training, storage or administration facilities). The following points represent the service review determinations relating to infrastructure needs and deficiencies: • The Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire) has comprehensively identified infrastructure needs in the five year planning horizon. The Driftwood Facility is the only facility rated by County Fire as below “good.” There are no significant infrastructure needs as identified by County Fire. With respect to the communities that contract for services with County Fire, the infrastructure component of the delivery system often remains the responsibility and under the ownership of the contracting City. Matrix Consulting Group Page 135 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • The City of Morgan Hill, which contracts with County Fire, is currently in the planning stages of adding a 3rd fire station. The City of Gilroy has planned the construction of a fourth fire station. The City of San Jose has a renovation program to renovate multiple stations that were constructed in the 1960s, as well as plansfor the construction of two new facilities within the next five years. The City of Mountain View has identified the need for the expansion of two stations and the construction of a fifth permanent station. The City of Santa Clara has identified the need to replace stations 3 and 4 in 2004 and 2005 respectively. • South County Fire owns Station 2 and leases Station 3. South County Fire has decided to relocate Station 3 in the general areas of Watsonville and Redwood Retreat Roads. Additionally, South County Fire has determined that the Station 2 facility is in need of renovations and expansion. South County Fire is pursuing a revenue bond to construct two new fire stations. • South County Fire contracts with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) for fire protection services. Because South County Fire contracts with the CDF, infrastructure needs and operational management practices are determined as part of CDF’s statewide systems (rather than developing South County needs independently of other CDF needs within the region and state). • The LAHCFD contracts with County Fire for services. LAHCFD owns a station and maintains it through its own revenues (for example, a re-roofing project is underway at LAHCFD expense). • The SFPD is currently constructing a new fire station facility in the same vicinity as the existing facility on Saratoga Avenue. 2. GROWTH AND POPULATION The efficient provision of public safety services is related to the ability of an agency to plan for future service demands. The purpose of this category of service review is to provide LAFCO with the ability to review both the existing and reasonable future needs for public services and to evaluate whether the projections for future growth and population are integrated into an agency’s planning efforts. This analysis may be used to determine whether sphere of influence (SOI) and/or urban service area Matrix Consulting Group Page 136 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study (USA) boundaries reflect expected growth areas, if future SOI changes are necessary or feasible and if agencies are planning for anticipated changes in service demands. The following points represent the service review determinations relating to growth and population: • Cities and fire districts in Santa Clara County use varying data sources and methodologies when determining the population they serve and projecting growth in their service population (e.g., number of parcels, number of structures, number of households, and number of persons). • Santa Clara County will continue to experience modest growth (i.e. a 16% growth change is projected for the County for the period of 2000 to 2015) and therefore there will be very modest growth in terms of the fire protection service. • Although modest, the overwhelming majority of fire protection service population growth will occur within cities due to the strict land use policies that require urban development to occur within cities and not the unincorporated County. • Fire protection service population growth in the unincorporated area will be minimal due the County’s very strict land use policies that require large minimum lot sizes (5 acres, 20 acres, or 160 acre depending on the location) for new residential development. • The southern portion of Santa Clara County, specifically the valley floor, has the potential to experience the largest fire protection service population growth due to the availability of vacant land within city limits and adjacent to city limits. • The population of underserved areas (i.e., areas not within any organized fire agency’s boundaries) is not expected to grow significantly because this area is remote, difficult to access, and difficult to serve due to the rugged terrain and lack of roads. 3. FINANCING CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES A community’s public service needs should be reviewed in light of resources available to fund services. The service review examines the financing constraints and opportunities that have an impact on the delivery of services within the County. This provides LAFCO, local agencies, and the public the ability to assess whether agencies are taking advantage of available funding and financing opportunities. Service reviews Matrix Consulting Group Page 137 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study may also discover potential innovations, including collaborative strategies, with financing mechanisms which may hold value for affected local agencies. The following points represent the service review determinations relating to financing constraints and opportunities: • With continuing public fiscal constraints, the local fire agencies’ base property tax revenue may not continue to be available at historical levels. • The local agencies’ abilities to generate revenue through alternative sources such as special assessments, continues to be impacted by the need for two- thirds voter approval. • The LAHCFD has had a voter-approved authority for a special assessment for years, though it has not exercised that authorization. The ability to use the special assessment is renewed each year. • Associated with the lack of revenue stability, the high rates of return experienced in various investment tools in the 1990’s resulted in “over funding” of PERS (public employee retirement system) accounts. Now, returns on retirement investments through the State funds have declined in the past few years, local agencies will see substantial increases in the rate of PERS contributions required. In other words, as a result of a decline in the rate of return experienced in the 1990s, local agencies will be required to substantially increase PERS contributions. • Costs are likely to escalate, particularly for South County Fire, as it contracts with another service provider (CDF) for services. Costs will continue to rise as CDF is impacted by increasing salary, wage and benefit pressures from its full-time labor group (e.g., cost impacts on changing workweek, comparable salary and benefits to other agencies, etc.) In 2003, the State legislature approved SB1049 which provides for a one-time • $70 per parcel charge for fire protection with an on-going $35 per year charge for all parcels in State Responsibility Areas (SRA) within the State. Statewide, it is estimated that this will provide $52 million in additional revenue for CDF. However, analysis by CDF indicates that approximately $50 million has been shifted out of existing programs. Therefore, the overall impact will be cost neutral. • Existing budgetary reserves for some agencies may be insufficient to meet future needs. The SFPD, for example, has expressed that it has concerns relating to the trends affecting the depth of its budgetary reserves. However, the LAHCFD has significant reserves and fund balances of over $12 million. Matrix Consulting Group Page 138 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 4. COST AVOIDANCE OPPORTUNITIES Efficient service delivery depends, in part, on eliminating unnecessary costs. Cost avoidance opportunities are explored in this study including, but not limited to identifying and exploring such actions as reducing or eliminating duplicative services, reducing high administration to operation cost ratios, replacing outdated or deteriorating infrastructure and equipment, redrawing overlapping or inefficient service boundaries, replacing inefficient purchasing or budgeting practices, implementing economies of scale, efficiently utilizing outsourcing opportunities. The following points represent the service review determinations relating to cost avoidance opportunities: • Implementation of a regional fire system in the South County Region could provide sufficient economies of scale to facilitate service improvements throughout the region. It could provide for consistent duty chief coverage on a regional basis. It could provide sufficient economies of scale to facilitate truck company and/or special rescue operations. Combining support service resources for such functions as training and communications would provide these resources at a lower unit cost than on individual agency basis. South County Fire currently uses CDF infrastructure for communications. • Integration of South County Fire into the County Communications infrastructure could enhance operational efficiencies. However, as the CDF dispatch center serves State purposes as well, there are no capital or infrastructure savings available. The implementation of a countywide regional approach to fire training and • communications for EMS/ambulance and fire related dispatch could result in a reduction in the total investment required of local agencies for both operational and capital costs. • The existence of the LAHCFD as a legal entity results in costs that would not otherwise exist. For example, insurance expense, legal and accounting, administrative and management overhead, etc. could be eliminated if LAHCFD were merged with another entity. This presents a limited ability to generate cost savings in the order of $100,000 - $150,000 per year. Matrix Consulting Group Page 139 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study 5. OPPORTUNITIES FOR RATE RESTRUCTURING Although not applicable in all cases, a service review may review agency rates, which are charged for public services, examining opportunities for rate restructuring where possible without impairing the quality of services provided. Agency rates can be reviewed for rate setting methodologies, conditions that could impact future rates, and variances among rates, fees, taxes, charges, etc. within an agency. The following points represent the service review determinations relating to opportunities for rate restructuring: • Local fire agencies that provide services such as inspections and permits for which they charge fees have varying fee structures. There are no identified significant opportunities to improve on rates or fees for service. • Costing on contracts for fire protection services vary greatly from community to community. However, such variation can be expected as different contract agencies provide different in lieu forms of compensations and / or contribute or detract from the existing regional service network. • South County Fire is in the process of considering whether to pursue creating a development impact mitigation fee for new development. At the time of this report, these fees have not been approved or implemented. Given the projected growth rates in the district, it is difficult to project that these fees will fully account for the fire station improvements or replacement in the planned time frames. 6. OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHARED FACILITIES The costs of service provision may be reduced and certain efficiencies increased using strategies for sharing resources and the procurement of those resources. Service review considers the development of options for planning for future sharing of facilities and/or resources. The primary facilities utilized in the delivery of fire protection services are fire stations and training facilities. Many jurisdictions across the State and nationally have Matrix Consulting Group Page 140 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study pursued a regional approach to sharing these facilities. The following points represent the service review determinations relating to opportunities for shared facilities: • The regional nature of the service delivery approach utilized by County Fire includes areas within cities’ and special districts’ boundaries as well as jurisdictions which contract with it. As a result, County Fire already operates out of several facilities owned by jurisdictions that are now either within the boundaries of County Fire or are within cities that contract for services with County Fire. • County Fire and the City of San Jose contract to ensure that unincorporated pockets surrounded by the City of San Jose are adequately covered and automatic aid to ensure that there is a closest unit response for border areas. • County Fire and the South County Fire have an automatic aid agreement that provides efficient utilization of existing resources to deliver services to both the incorporated and unincorporated areas in and around the City of Morgan Hill. • The greatest opportunity for additional shared facilities lies in the potential to share and utilize regional training centers throughout the Santa Clara County region. Adoption of a mechanism to plan and implement such a network would most likely involve the adoption of a countywide fee or contributions from existing fire protection entities. • LAHCFD also assists in the funding of seasonal fire protection needs in the foothills area by funding overtime for Palo Alto firefighters in Station 8. • There are opportunities to share other support services, including emergency communications, specialized equipment and services (e.g., hazardous materials response, confined space rescues, etc.). 7. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE OPTIONS Service reviews provide a mechanism for studying the existing and future public service environment relating to organizational options for accommodating growth, preventing urban sprawl and ensuring that critical services are efficiently and effectively provided. While service reviews do not require LAFCO to initiate organizational changes as a result of this process, LAFCO, the public or local agencies may pursue subsequent Matrix Consulting Group Page 141 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study changes to government structure. LAFCO may evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of amending or updating SOIs, annexations to or detachments from cities or special districts, formation of new special districts, incorporation of cities, dissolutions, mergers, consolidations and other re-organization options. Several government structure options including their advantages and disadvantages are discussed in detail in chapter seven as potential solutions to addressing the issues identified in the provision of fire protection services within Santa Clara County. Government structure options to address the issue of providing services to the underserved areas in the County include: • Creation of a new fire district, or expansion of existing fire protection district(s) to cover all underserved areas. • Creation of a JPA among the Cities of Milpitas and San Jose, the County of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District (County Fire), the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) and the South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District (South County Fire). • Creation of a County Service Area (CSA) to cover all underserved areas. • Continuation of the current system of local service delivery with or without other service improvements or coordination. Government structure options to develop a unified fire protection service area in the South County Region include: • Creation of a new fire district, or expansion of existing South County Fire to cover the entire South County Region. • Creation of a JPA between the Cities of Morgan Hill and Gilroy, the County of Santa Clara and the South County Fire – service contracted out to a single entity. • Creation of a County Service Area (CSA) to cover entire South County Region. • Continuation of the current system of local service delivery with or without other service improvements or coordination. Matrix Consulting Group Page 142 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study Government structure options to provide fire protection service in the Saratoga Region include: • Dissolution of the Saratoga Fire Protection District (SFPD) and annexation of existing district to County Fire. • Withdrawal of the City of Saratoga from the County Fire and the SFPD. Ultimate method of providing fire protection within the City decided by Saratoga ]City Council. • Expansion of boundaries of the SFPD to include all of the City of Saratoga. Detachment of relevant properties from the County Fire. • Continuation of the current system of local service delivery with or without other service improvements or coordination. Government structure options for the Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD) include: • Dissolution of LAHCFD and annexation to County Fire. • Maintaining current situation (i.e. retention of LAHCFD). Government structure options for developing a regional fire protection support services such as training and emergency communications include: • Creation of a JPA between all established fire agencies in Santa Clara County for purposes of regional fire training programs and facilities. • Continuation of the current system of local training delivery with or without other service improvements or coordination. 8. EVALUATION OF MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCIES Management efficiency refers to the overall effectiveness of an agency’s internal organization to provide efficient, quality public services. Local government efficiency can be gauged by a number of approaches and strategies, including implementation of plans to improve service delivery, elimination of duplication of effort cost containment, Matrix Consulting Group Page 143 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study maintenance of qualified employees through training and career development and pursuit of appropriate customer services approaches, including public involvement. Service reviews consider these points in relation to unique local circumstances, resources and issues identified through determinations in other categories. The following points represent the service review determinations relating to evaluation of management efficiencies: • A regional approach to providing services in the southern portion of the County would reduce duplication in services in the areas of duty chief coverage, fire prevention efforts and management overhead. • A regional approach to training and greater consolidation of fire dispatch and communication functions, hold the potential to reduce management overhead in the individual agencies currently providing these services independently. • There exist efforts at continuation and enhancement of dialogue among agencies. County Fire has demonstrated efforts at soliciting and maintaining dialogue with other agencies. Examples include provision of incident command for public safety agencies in Santa Clara County and formation of specialty response companies that provide services ranging from HazMat (Type 1 Response) to Urban Search and Rescue (USAR). Other examples include successful implementation of a boundary drop agreement between County Fire and SFPD and collaboration among agencies to find funding alternative service scenarios for underserved areas of the County. • South County Fire is in need of higher degree of automation in dispatch and MIS. CDF is implementing a statewide CAD improvement project that would address this need in 2004. • As a separate service entity, the LAHCFD incurs many duplicate management and administrative costs associated with clerical, Commission expense, legal and accounting costs, etc., which would not be incurred if it were part of a larger entity. The District Commission retains the services of a part-time ‘consultant’ who advises it on operations, contract services, fire service trends, etc. 9. LOCAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND GOVERNANCE Service reviews include an evaluation of local accountability and governance – that is, the extent to which each agency fosters local accountability. Local Matrix Consulting Group Page 144 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study accountability and governance is measured in terms of decision-making capabilities and management processes. The objective of this portion of the analysis is to positively impact the public’s knowledge of and involvement in local decision-making process and actions and use this information when evaluating change in structure. The following points represent the service review determinations relating to local accountability and governance: • County Fire is a dependent special district under the governance of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. About 40% of County Fire’s service area is comprised of contract for service agreements with incorporated cities. The contractual nature of these relationships allows local entities to define and monitor service levels at a very comprehensive level. The oversight by the Board of Supervisors provides a broad perspective as well as an awareness at the County level with respect to fire service and emergency medical response issues. • County Fire utilizes extensive use and analysis of data, including GIS applications, to evaluate programs and services and makes adjustments as necessary. • South County Fire is a dependent special district under the governance of the Board of Supervisors as its Board of Directors. The Board appointed a 7-member commission and delegated to it the authority to manage the affairs of the District except for (1) land use, acquisition or disposal (2) contracts with other public agencies, and (3) employment of counsel. These matters are reserved for the Board of Directors to handle. • South County Fire is still somewhat hampered by the manual nature of the CDF dispatch system. The installation of a new CAD system by 2004 should alleviate many of the challenges in this area. In the absence of more effective management information tools, access by the public to this information is affected. • LAHCFD is a dependent special district under the governance of the Board of Supervisors as its Board of Directors. The Board established a 7 member Fire Commission and delegated all of its powers to the Commission to manage the affairs of the district, except that the Commission may not initiate litigation without the prior approval of the Board. This provides local accountability for fire and other services provided by or through the District. Matrix Consulting Group Page 145 LAFCO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Countywide Fire Protection Study • LAHCFD provides many non-fire or fire support services which are widely supported such as chipping, yard waste removal and hillside weed abatement. • SFPD is an independent special district under the governance of a locally elected 3-member Board. • All the fire agencies have policies and practices in place to meet Brown Act requirements, other State governance requirements and ‘best practices’ Matrix Consulting Group Page 146