Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFS 2007-04-16 Item 2C - Discussion - Emergency Management Deficiencies INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Date: Mayor Mullet Director of Emergency Managemen~ April 9, 2007 To: From: Subject: Emergency Preparedness - Are We Ready? ISSUE: Prepare a prioritized list of emergency preparedness needs. BACKGROUND: In today's world, emergencies and disasters take many forms, including natural disasters, technological and infrastructure failures, terrorist attacks, and health emergencies such as pandemic disease outbreaks. A well-planned and implemented response is vital to the safety and well being ofTukwila's citizens; an ineffective response, on the other hand, threatens our First Responder Team, our citizens and their property, and can exacerbate damages to the City and its economy. Over the past three years, the City has had to respond to a variety of events: four flooding events, typical winter storms, and a severe windstorm. Overall the City has done an excellent job in planning, responding, and recovering from these events. The City has been lucky because the events have been relatively short-termed and the First Responder Team has been able to handle the incidents. However, the City is unprepared for a sustained, major disaster that would require full mobilization of its emergency management organization. DISCUSSION: Since the official establishment of Tukwila's Emergency Management Program in May 2003, after action reports and end-of-year program status reports have consistently identified a number of deficiencies that should be corrected ifthe City is to be better prepared. What follows is a status update that addresses identified deficiencies to include a brief description of the deficiency, the proposed corrective action, and the cost (personnel and dollars) to implement. /3 1 Corrective Actions Completed 1. Designated an Emergency Management Director 2. All Hazards Emergency Management Plan has been written (Before NIMS). 3. Created an Emergency Operations Center - Golf Maintenance Facility. 4. EOC Operations Manual written (Before NIMS) 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has recertified Tukwila's 205 Levee System. 6. Authorized a CERT Training Position. 7. Increased the Emergency Management Budget from $ 50,000 to $ 100,000. 8. Draft Emergency Communication Plan prepared. Existing Deficiencies Traffic Shrnal QDeration: The City has been installing battery backup capability at key intersections. The batteries will last approximately 2-hours when the signals are in a full-operational mode and up to 10-hours when placed in a flashing mode. During sustained power outages, these batteries must be replaced and recharged on a regular basis. Deficiency: Having sufficient battery backup capability for operating traffic signals at major intersections. Corrective Action: Additional batteries and a separate charging system. Cost: $10,000 Public Shelter CaDabilitv: It is the responsibility of local government to provide emergency shelter and temporary housing for disaster victims within its own capabilities, and to request and facilitate the implementation of shelter assistance provided by private relief agencies and other state and federal programs. Emergency shelters should have the capability to address the needs of the general population and the high-risk population. Six sites within the City have been identified as potential shelter areas - 5 schools and Tukwila Community Center. Deficiency: Having sufficient resources to open a 100-person, City-sponsored shelter. Sixteen (16) trained personnel needed for each 8-hour operational shift. (Does not include security personnel). Corrective Action: Purchase a self-contained Disaster Emergency Response Trailer (DERT). Have a pool of trained /1 2 personnel - need approximately 200 trained people (City employees and volunteers) in order to get the 48 people needed for each 24-hour period. Cost: DERT costs $100,000. Supplies must be rotated on an annual basis - Annual maintenance costs are approximately $10,000 - $15,000. First Responder Support: It is the responsibility of the City to provide medical assistance, shelter, food, water, and commodities for emergency response personnel throughout the duration of the incident. Also, if the First Responders are to be able to concentrate on their jobs, they need to know that their families are safe - Safe @ Home is a program that relieves that worry. Deficiency: Having sufficient resources to care for, shelter and feed 100 response and recovery personnel over a sustained period. Shelter operations will need ten trained people for each 8-hour operational shift. In addition the Safe @ Home Program needs to be implemented. Corrective Action: Purchase a self-contained Disaster Emergency Response Trailer (DERT). Implement Safe @ Home. Cost: DERT costs $100,000. Supplies must be rotated on an annual basis - Annual maintenance costs are approximately $10,000-$15,000. Improvements to Better Inform the Public: Successfully preparing for and responding to a disaster relies heavily upon keeping the public informed. The fust responsibility is in times of an emergency in order to minimize injury to people and damage to property. The second is the general day-to- day public information as to what is being done to protect their welfare, training offered, and their responsibility in times of an emergency. Deficiency: Communicating with the public and keeping the public informed. Corrective Action: Electronic reader boards permanently installed at every City facility. Establish an information center. Consistent messages/updates provided to the radio stations used by the School District. Establish an /5 3 employee call-in line (Done). Establish a citizen call-in line to inform the public if City facilities are open. Establish a phone bank for residents/citizens to call seeking information and to report problems. Capability to go door-to-door to deliver emergency public health messages - messages must be translated into many languages. $150,000 for reader boards. Costs and staffmg requirements are unknown for the other improvement suggestions. Requires a pool of personnel (employees and volunteers) to man the telephones and deliver the messages. Cost: Adequacy of City Facilities: Restoring City services will depend upon City facilities being able to function during an emergency event. 1. Standby Power: Deficiency: City's capability to provide essential services is strained. Nine key facilities have limited or no power backup systems. Corrective Action: Install backup generators at all key City facilities. Cost: City Hall: 6300 Bldg: TCC: Minkler Shop: George Long: Fire Sta 51: Fire Sta 52: Fire Sta 53: Fire Sta 54: 2. Earthquake Resistance: a. City Facilities $ 380,000 $ 280,000 $ 250,000 $ 110,000 $ 150,000 $ 180,000 $ 145,000 $ 123,000 $ 116,000 Deficiency: A number of key City facilities are unable to withstand an earthquake. 10 4 Corrective Action: Study underway to ascertain capability and what is needed to bring key facilities up to code. Cost: TBD b. Bridges Deficiency: Of the 21 city-owned bridges, 11 are seismically deficient. 7 should be either retrofitted or replaced. Corrective Action: Note: a prioritized list has been established. Number 1 priority is Boeing Access Rd Bridge (over UPRR & BNSF). Concentrate resources on retrofitting/replacing the deficient bridges. Cost: Fixing the No.1 priority - City cost estimated at $ 3,000,000; Federal share is $ 12,000,000. Full-time Staffm2 for Emer2enCY Mana2ement Pro2ram: Since 9/11 and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, preparing for an emergency has been a top priority within the United States. The federal government has mandated that local governments create and implement long-lasting emergency management programs that have the capability to meet and respond to any situation. This directive has created a tremendous workload upon City staff. 1. StaffIng Deficiency: City does not have any full-time, dedicated emergency management staff. Corrective Action: Hire a full-time Emergency Management Coordinator Cost: Annual expense is $ 80,000. 2. Plan Preparation Deficiency: Existing plans need to be updated for NIMS compliance - Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan; EOC Operations Manual. Need to perform the federally-mandated /7 5 Hazard Identification, Vulnerability, and Risk Assessment; Hazard Mitigation Plan. Corrective Action: Staff time is the limiting factor. Hire a full- time Emergency Management Coordinator that will report to the Director of Emergency Management. Cost: None. Previously identified staff position needed. Emerl!encv Operations Center: Coordination of emergency response and recovery operations, and development of plans and strategies should occur in a location that is large enough for the organization to come together during the incident. The City has identified over 40 individual functions/positions that will be needed. An effective, safe workspace that includes interoperable communications and telecommunications capability is just as important as clear operating procedures, staff roles, and responsibilities. 1. Permanent EOC Deficiency: Inadequate sized EOC located at the Golf Maintenance Shop. Cannot accommodate all of the anticipated personnel needed to manage a disaster event. Corrective Action: Build a permanent EOC behind the 6300 Building. Cost: Design and Construction - $ 750,000. 2. EOC Communications Deficiency: VRM capability for the Police and Fire Departments. Corrective Action: Install two (2) VRiY1' s in the EOC Cost: $20,000 RECOMMENDATION: The First Responder Team recommends correcting the identified deficiencies in the following prioritized/phased approach: J2 6 Year 1 . Standby Generator for Fire Station 53 . Standby Generator for Fire Station 52 . Standby Generator for City Hall . 1 st Responder Support . Standby Generator for Fire Station 54 Total: Year 2 . Standby Generator for George Long Bldg. . Standby Generator for Community Center . Permanent Staff Position . Standby Generator for 6300 Building Total: Year 3 . Standby Generator for Minkler Shop . Standby Generator for Fire Station 51 . Improved Public Information . Shelter Capability (public) . Permanent EOC . Traffic Signal Operations Improvements Total: Year 4 . Replace Boeing Access Rd Bridge Cost: $ 123,000 Cost: $ 145,000 Cost: $ 380,000 Cost: $ 100,000 Cost: $ 116,000 Cost: $ 864,000 Cost: $ 150,000 Cost: $ 250,000 Cost: $ 80,000 Cost: $ 280,000 Cost: $ 760,000 Cost: $ 110,000 Cost: $ 180,000 Cost: $ 150,000 Cost: $ 100,000 Cost: $ 750,000 Cost: $ 10,000 Cost: $1,300,000 Cost: $3,000,000 /7 7 To: Mayor Steven lVI. Mullet Kevin A. Fuhrer, Finance Director ~ From: Date: April 11, 2007 Subject: Emergency Preparedness ISSUE: Consider the financial implications associated with emergency preparedness. BACKGROUND: In an informational memorandum dated April 9, 2007, prepared by the Director of Emergency Management with the input of the First Responder Team, several deficiencies were identified in the City's Emergency Management Program. The aggregate proposed solutions carry a significant price tag - years 1 through 4 total nearly $6 Million. DISCUSSION: On an annual basis, the operating budget has included dedicated resources for emergency management. By way of reference, the 2005 and 2006 budgets each included $100,000 of programmed expenditures allocated on a 50-50 basis between services and charges and capital outlay for emergency operations center (EOC) equipment. With adoption of the 2007 budget, the total allocation was increased to $238,000. The specific line item distribution provided $50,000 for services and charges, $65,000 for replacement of the EOC radios, $35,000 for development of a Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program, and $88,000 for emergency management/transportation operations center. J/ Upon review of the adopted 2007-2012 Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program, and more specifically Attachment A, the projected accumulated total balance at the end of the six.year planning period is anticipated to be nearly equal to the $ 3 Million minimum set by City policy. Should the City elect to expand the existing emergency management program in a mirror image as set forth in the April 9th informational memo or some derivative thereof, a number of potential funding options may be considered as follows: o Bond for the capital purchase elements o Reprioritize existing program expenditures o Reallocate future funding distributions o Adopt an alternative funding source (e.g. B&O tax, fire impact fee) o Set aside one-time, unanticipated resources earmarked specifically for carrying out a plan implementation. Bonding for the capital purchases presents the opportunity to remedy this component of the deficiencies in one fell swoop. Furthermore the repayment period of the bond more closely aligns with the expected life of the capital asset. On the other hand, the City would need to set aside amounts annually to cover the bond principal and interest. To put it in perspective, a $3 Million bond issue equates to approximately $250,000 in annual debt service costs for a period of 20 years. Moreover a bond issue reduces the amount of our non-voted debt bonding capacity. Today that amount is approximately $16 Million. Finally, consideration should be afforded to other projects in the City in which we may need to draw upon our bonding capacity. A couple of examples that come to mind are the Klickitat and the Strander Boulevard Extension Projects. Each year in developing the subsequent years financial plan we are faced with a myriad of competing needs and interests that regularly outweigh our limited financial resources. Obviously seeking a balance between the 2 necessitates tough choices. This )) issue alone gives rise to the downside associated with a reprioritization or reallocation approach. Either to some degree may require tolling a future work plan or possibly impacting the current level of service delivery. While adoption of an alternative funding source creates a new revenue stream, the type and timing of collections may pose a challenge. And as one might imagine in the current and recent climate, the road to implementing a new tax may be met with some resistance. A fire impact fee would by definition be restricted as to how the monies are used. For additional illustration, assume that we adopt a fire impact fee, issue bonds and plan on using the alternative source as a means to cover the annual principal and interest payments. Given that the fire impact fee revenues are variable year-to-year (the level of development drives the amount), collections may be at a level below the debt service requirement. However, a fire impact fee does present the opportunity to free up General Fund dollars currently directed for capital purposes. Finally, setting aside one-time unanticipated resources and earmarking the same for implementing a plan reduces the risk associated anytime forecasting is employed - the amount is absolute. Conversely, each year may not bear the same fruit in the form of unanticipated resources. RECOMMENDATION: Given the aforementioned discussion, it is recommended that the City consider as part of the planning process, either separately or in combination, the bond issue or one-time unanticipated resources approach to funding a potential plan to address identified emergency preparedness deficiencies. J3