Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFIN 2019-08-12 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Finance Committee • Thomas McLeod, Chair 0 Verna Seal • De'Sean Quinn AGENDA MONDAY, AUGUST 12, 2019 — 5:30 PM HAZELNUT CONFERENCE Room (At east entrance of City Hall) Distribution: T. McLeod V. Seal D. Quinn K. Hougardy D. Robertson K. Kruller Z. Idan Mayor Ekberg D. Cline R. Bianchi C. O'Flaherty A. Youn L. Humphrey Item Recommended Action Page 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a. A resolution updating the Fire Department fee schedule. a. Forward to 8/26 C.O.W. and Pg.1 Vicky Carlsen, Finance Director 9/3 Regular Mtg. b. Discussion on Fire Marshal's office. [Continued from b. Discussion only. Pg.17 7/22/19 Finance Committee meeting" Vicky Carlsen, Finance Director c. Sources of revenue for fire departments. c. Discussion only. Pg.27 Vicky Car/sen, Finance Director d. Discussion on Fire Department service levels. d. Discussion only. Pg.33 [Continued from 7/22/19 Finance Committee meeting] Vicky Carlsen, Finance Director 3. MISCELLANEOUS 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, August 26, 2019 15. The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206-433-1800 (TukwilaCityClerk(aTukwilaVVA.gov) for assistance. City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor TO: INFOR ATIONAL E ORANDU Finance Committee FROM: Vicky Carlsen, Finance Director Ben Hayman, Fire Marshal CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: August 7, 2019 SUBJECT: Update Fire Department Fee Schedule ISSUE Recommendation for Council to update the current Fire Department fee schedule by adjusting current fees to market rates and adding new fees to more closely align with other fire jurisdictions. BACKGROUND The Fire Department charges fees for a variety of services performed. The fees are intended to recover a portion of the City' costs for processing permit applications, plan reviews, and re - inspections as well as a fee in conjunction with recovery of hazardous incident response costs. With the exception of fees for fire permits required by the International Fire Code and plan reviews, fees have not been increased since at least 2010. Because the structure of fire fee schedules can vary significantly from entity to entity, comparison data has been provided at the end of this memo. DISCUSSION As noted above, the Fire Department charges fees for a variety of services performed. Fees charged can be categorized in several sections including fire permit, plan review and inspection fees, re -inspection, and new fees. Each fee type is discussed below. In order to review and streamline current processes, the City is recommending that the changes to the fee schedule take effect January 1, 2020.This date will allow the build -out of the new fees in TRAKIT and the outreach to key stakeholders. Fire Permit Fees The first table represents fire permit fees. The current fee is $150.00 for all fire permit fees. The recommended update to the fee breaks the permits into several categories with fees reflective of the type of permit and complexity. Also reflected in this section are short-term/temporary permits, which reflect a fee increase plus the addition of one inspection included in the fee, and special event permits with no recommended change to the fee. 1 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Fire Permit Fees Current Fee Revised Fee Fire permits required by the International Fire Code TMC 16.16.080 $150.00 for each permit Construction Permits: $500.00 for high pile storage, flammable and combustable liquids, hazardous materials. $300.00 all other contruction fire permits Operational Permits: $300.00 for high pile storage, flammable and combustable liquids, hazardous materials. $175.00 for all other operational fire permits Short term permits (i.e. for food vendors); for events not to exceed 3 consecutive days in duration: - Liquid propane permit - Open flame permit TMC 16.16.080 $25.00 for each permit $250.00. Fee includes one inspection Temporary / Special Events Permit: TMC 16.16.030 - Commercial - Residential $400.00 $100.00 $400.00 $100.00 Plan Review and Inspection Fees The recommendation for plan review fees is to revamp the structure to more accurately reflect the types of systems installed in the City and the effort required as the number of sprinkler heads in a sprinkler system and number of devices in an alarm system increase. The current fee structure breaks the number of sprinkler heads/alarm devices between 1 and 5 then 6 and more. The revised schedule provides for more categories and adds in inspection fee to the schedule. The first chart reflects the current structure, while the second chart displays the recommended new fee structure for plan review fees. 2 Z:\Council Agenda ItemsTinance108.12.191Info Memo - Fire Department Fee Schedule.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 Plan Review Fees (Current Fee Schedule) Fee For alternative fire protection systems 77kC1(lY6.080 Commercial: For 1'5de\tineo/headeBase fee =$2O0.OU For or more de\Aces/heado 8eoe fee = $300.00 + $2.00 per de\Aoe/hoadinexcess cf10 Single-family- Base fee = $50.00 + $1.50 per sprinkler head inexcess of1O ResVb[nitta|fee $300.00 For fire alarm plans 7lmCf640.04D Commercial: For 1'5dmAoao Base fee = $200.00 For or more de\Aoeo Base fee = s300.00 + $2.00 perde\Ane in excess of1Q Single-family: Base fee = $50.00 + $1.50 perde\Aoe inexcess of1Ocle\tiueo F{eaubnnitta|fee $300.00 For sprinkler system plans 77NC1G.42040 Commercial: For 1-5heads Base fee =$2O0.0O For or more heads Base fee = $300.00 + $2.00 per sprinkler head in excess ofY0 Single-family: Base fee = $50.00+ $1.50 per sprinkler head inexcess of1n Resubmitta|fea $300.00 Z:�Coumcil Ag,nda1tems\FinanceW812.1Rmfo Memo . Fire Department Fee Schedule.dox INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 Proposed Fee Schedule Commercial Fire Sprinkler Fees Numberof heads Plan Re\�ew Fee Per Head Re\Aew Inspection Fee Per Head Inspection 1 to10 $300.00 $2.50 $175.00 $1�50 11to25 $350.00 $2.50 $200.08 $1.50 26to50 $350.00 $2.30 $225.00 $1.50 51to100 $350.00 $2.25 $300.00 $1.50 101to1000 $358�00 $1.90 $500.00 $1.30 1001 or More $400.00 $2.25 S750.00 $1.00 13O Sprinkler System Fees Number nfheads Plan Re�AewFee Per Head Ra\tiew Inspection Fee Per Head Inspection 1 to1O $150 N64 $%OO.UO N/A 11 to25 $175 N64 $250.00 N/4 2GorMore $200 N/A $300.00 N/4 Additional Systems Plan Re\hevvFee Inspection Fee Per Riser $100 $100.00 Per Fire Pump $150 $300.00 Fire Alarm System Fees Number ofDe\Acee Plan Re�iew Fee Per Oe\Acn Ra\iiew Inspection Fee Per Device Inspection 1 tp1O $300 $2.25 $150 $1.00 11 to25 $300 $0.75 $250 $1.00 26tV100 $350 $1.00 $275 $1.00 101to500 G400 $1.10 $500 $1.50 5OOorMore $500 $0.85 G1.100 $1.00 CoDlDnG[cia| Clean Agent SVst8'nlS and Commercial Kitchen Fire Protection Systems Plan Re\AewFee PerDo\hce Re\�avv Inspection Fee $350 $1.00 $150.00 ReinopectionFeeo The current fee schedule for re -inspections reflects a stair step approach. Aoeach additional re - inspection occurs the fee increases. The first neineoecUOnat $0O.00then stepping uptoefeeof $135 for the fourth re -inspection and any subsequent re -inspection. The recommended nainSp8cUon fee schedule sets all re -inspection fees to$175.00 [8ganj|esG of how many re - inspections occur. This will streamline the invoicing process for re -inspections by eliminating the Deed totrack the number ofre-inspections for each project. Re -inspections also include an appeal fee currently set to$25O.00. The recommendation iStoincrease the appeal fee to$5OO.00. The chart below displays the current 'fee structure aawell aothe recommended fee structure. Z:\Council Agenda ItemaTinanne0K1x1V mnMomo Fire Department FemGchedulo,docx INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 Re -inspection fees For new construction, tenant improvements orspot inspections rxC*z/6.n00 7nxC?s*813o 7MC/6.42110 nwC/6.46,1sO 7MC 16.48.150 $100.00 (current fee) For company level inspections: TnmC/6,Y6,O80 On the follow-up inspection 3Vdays after the initial company |ee|\An|aUnn. when the inspector finds that the wu|mdonohavenot been corrected =$nn.on Oothe second follow-up inapem1on.wmanthe inspector finds that the �Ao|oUwno havenot been corrected = $85.00 Onthe third follow-up inspection, when the inspector finds that the �io|atiuns have not been corrected ~ $110.00 Fee for the fourth and any subsequent follow-up inspections when the inspector finds that the \fin|ationobmmnot been corrected =$l35.Un APPEALFEE TxmC 16.16.090 rMC/6.4u1r0 TMC/6.41Y50 TnmC 16.46./70 TMC/a48.1ro Re\Ased Fee $175.QOper re - inspection Proposed New Fees In addition to the current fees charged for services provided by the Fire Departnlent, other oen/ioea provided by Fins are not currently supported by fees. The City is recommending that new fees be added to the schedule to recover m portion of the City's cost of providing these services. The table below reflects two new categories offees. The first category are fees bzrecoup costs associated with development, public works, mechanical, and land use permits that are reviewed bvFire personnel. The second category are special fees and include fees for expedited and after- hours plan review and expedited and aftaFh8Oro inepections, both resulting in poeo|b|g overtime costs Unthe City. Other recommended fees in the category inc|ude, but are not limited to, ofae forstarting work before the issuance of a permit and a 5% technology fee for Fire fees only (there will not be a double technology fee charged if there already is a technology fee charged), similar tDthe fee charged by Department of Community Development. DCnunnAgenda kmns\Finnce0G12.19VmnMemo Fire Department FeeSnhedole.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 6 Development, Public Works, Mechanical and Land Use permits reviewed by Fire Wireless Communications Facility $ 150.00 Boundary Line Adjustment: Residential $ 100.00 Boundary Line Adjustment: Commercial $ 200.00 Lot Consolidation: Residential $ 100.00 Lot Consolidation- Commercial $ 400.00 Short Plat Fire Review $ 200�00 Sub Fire Division $ 500.00 SEPxFire Review $ 400.00 Development Fire Review: Residential $15O.Q0 Development Fire Review: Commercial $ 400.00 Public Works Fire Review: Residential $15O.00 Public Works Fire Review: Commercial $ 300.00 Mechanical Fire Review: RogUonUu| s 150.00 Mechanical Fire Review: Commercial $ 300.00 Special Fees Expedited and After -Hours Fire Plan Review S400.00 Expedited and After -Hours Inspection $500.00 New Business Life Safety Inspection $5o.oOp|us Applicable Operational Permit Fees Annual Life Safety Inspection $5V+Applicable Operational Permit Fees Smoke Control System Plan Review S750o0 siuhseSmoke Control System Inspection $500,00 HiqhriseSmoke Control System Inspection $900.00 Reoubmitta|Plan Review Fee S300.00 Emergency Responder Radio Coverage System Te s300.00 Fire Variance Request: Residential s250.00 Fire Variance Request: Commercial S500.00 Fire Appeal Fee $onuoo Fire Suppression and Detection Confidence Test Administrative Fee S1s.00per system Starting work before apermit issuance shall besub ectman investigation fee equal me1OV96ofapplicable permit fees x5v&Technology Fee will ueadded mall Fire Fees Outreach Plan In order to communicate the changes to the Fire Department fee schedule, the City has identified the following steps to notify those affected by the changes in the fee schedule. - Work with Chamber tOhelp notify businesses ofthe pending changes. - Notifications posted VO Cityw8bSite. - Meetings held with hey stakeholders. - Signs of upcoming fees at P8n0i[ Center and Fire Marshal's Office. Fee Schedule Comparison tVOther Jurisdictions Fee schedules for fire services vary significantly from entity to entity. For exGnnp|e, some fee schedules for permit fees are listed as broad categories with a flat fee for each category. Others list detailed categories with flat fees for each or the fee is a percentage based on the value of the permit. Because ofthe complexity and variances between fee schedules, comparison data is provided bytype nfbusiness rather than type of fee. Fees are examples and would vary based onsize and complexity ofthe project. Small Restaurant - Fire Protection Fees $2,833 $2'886 $lOuU $2,074 IDZZ + ' $1'511 $1'295 $1'136 Kent Kirkland Bellevue Tukwila Lynnwood SeaTac Covington Renton VRFA Tukwila Proposed Current ZACouncil AgondokmnoWinance081219hfo Memo ' Fire Department FemSohedulndocx INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 $19,241 $12,594 '"'""'•'•''''''''"'"'"'''''"••"''''''"‘" „„....„„.. „..„„„„„..„.........,..„„,,„ ...................,...„_„........„.„ ....„.......„.„..................... ...................„.„......... ................................. .„.„,„,„..!„...„.„....„,„•„.........„,......„.„,„„‘„,„:„„:„,„:„:„.„:„....„.„,........„,„:„.,„„„„„„,..„.,.....„„:„:„....„.„.„..„;,„„‘„,.,„„:„ • „ „,'....".r.„.‘,,,,,'." .....,...„.....„...„„,,,...„,,,,,„ ..........„.........„..,...,......„..„.„.„ ..............,.......„ „.......„.„„„ ..,.............„ „.........„„.„„„ ...................„.....„.„.........„ ..„....., . ,..... . .........„......„„ .... „.„„...,... ......„.„,.....„........„..........„ . ,..,..... „.„.......„.„.„.„.„....„.„.... • •'•••-'"...'"'"•...."•‘'.•••.•‘'',.• „„,,,.,„.„,•••„„„,...„..,,,,,,...„.,,.,„..„ ...„„.„„„.......„...„,„„„„„.„,.......,„ „......„„„„„„.„..,.„...„......„.„..,....„„ Fire Protection Fees- 5 story hotel $6,509 $6,490 $6,202 $5,356 $4,913 $3,860 $3,192 $2,961 Kent Lynnwood Kirkland Proposed SeaTac Bellevue Renton VRFA Current Covington Tukwila Fees $338 $321 $ 3 2 1 $ 3 0 0 d'e6 .zz` O $268 $258 High PlIefRack Storage- OPERATIONAL $268 $258 $ 2 0 0 $ 2 0 0 $ 1 7 5 $ 1 7 5 6 6 go- ac• `• ' 4 "t 44\\ s‘i - Tukwila $155 $150 ALL OTHER OPERATIONAL PERMITS $125 $ 100 4) ,cocN ecs cbz $200 $200 $175 $175 $175 $155 $150 $125 $100 6 e, ecio cp o e, ‘o -. CR •'••••',•'•"'"'••••,•,•,"••,•••••' ........ .,., .. .. .„.....„.„„„ „.......„....,... ..„.„,...................... „..........„........„......„„ RECOMMENDATION The City Council is being asked to approve the resolution and consider this item at the August 26, 2019 Committee of the Whole meeting and at the subsequent September 3, 2019 Regular Meeting. Z:\Council Agenda Items IFinance108.12.191Info Memo - Fire Department Fee Schedule.docx 7 8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1935 AND ADOPTING A REVISED FIRE DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE. WHEREAS, the City has analyzed current Fire Department fees for various services provided including, but not limited to, permits, plan review and re -inspections; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to recover a portion of the City's costs for processing of permit applications, plan reviews, re -inspections, and other services provided by the Fire Department; and WHEREAS, the City has not reviewed and updated fees charged by the Fire Department for several years; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Repealer. Resolution No. 1935 is hereby repealed. Section 2. Fire Department Fee Schedule. Fire Department fees will be charged according to the following schedule, which shall supersede any previously adopted fire permit fee, plan review fee or re -inspection fee. W:\Legislative Development\Fire Department Fee Schedule 8-5-19 VC:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 8 9 FIRE DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE FIRE PERMIT FEES Fire permits required by the International Fire Code TMC 16.16.080 $150.00 for each permit Construction Permits: $500.00 for high pile storage, flammable and combustible liquids, hazardous materials. $300.00 all other construction fire permits Operational Permits: $300.00 for high pile storage, flammable and combustible liquids, hazardous materials. $175.00 for all other operational fire permits Short term permits (i.e. for food vendors); for events not to exceed 3 consecutive days in duration: - Liquid propane permit - Open flame permit TMC 16.16.080 $25.00 for each permit $250.00. Fee includes one inspection. Temporary / Special Events Permit: TMC 16.16.030 - Commercial - Residential $400.00 $100.00 W:\Legislative Development\Fire Department Fee Schedule 8-5-19 VC:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 10 Page 2 of 8 PLAN REVIEW FEES For alternative fire protoctionsystems TMC16.fGO80 Cnmrnoro1a|: For 15doviceohcsds Bo-.ofee -$28UM devicc/hoodimnexcess of1O sprinkler head in excess of 1G Rcsubmitt3l fee For fire alarm plans TMC 15.10.040 Commercial-. For 1 5 devices Base fee -G2OO.00 device inexcess of1U device F7ecubn7itta|fea $3OO.0Q Forsprinkler systern plan -- ,Commercial: For 5he3do For Sormore h'ads EJng10 family: Base fee -S2OO.OQ MI-egislaUve DevelopmentTire Department Fee Schedule a-5-10 Page 3 of 8 11 Commercial Fire Sprinkler Fees Number of Plan Review (Per Head) Inspection (Per Head) Heads Fee Review Fee Inspection 1 to 10 $300.00 $2.50 $175.00 $1.50 11 to 25 $350.00 $2.50 S200.00 $1.50 26 to 50 S350.00 $2.30 S2250O $1.50 51 to 100 S35ft0O $2.25 $300.00 $1.50 101 to 1,000 $ 50.00 $1.90 $500.00 $1.30 1,001 or More $400.00 $2.25 $750.00 $1 00 Additional Plan Review Inspection Systems Fee Fee Per Riser $100.00 $100.00 Per Fire Pump $150.00 $300.00 13D Sprinkler System Fees Number of Plan Review (Per Head) Inspection (Per Head) Heads Fee Review Fee Inspection 1 to 10 $150.00 N/A $200.00 N/A 11 to 25 $175.00 N/A $250.00 N/A 26 or More S200.O0 N/A $300.00 N/A W:\Legislative Development\Fire Department Fee Schedule 8-5-19 VC:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 12 Page 4 of 8 Fire Alarm System Fees Number of Plan Review (Per Inspection (Per Device) Devices Fee Device) Fee inspection Review 1 to 10 $300.00 $2.25 $150.00 $1.00 11 to 25 S300.O0 $0.75 $250.00 $1.00 26 to 100 $350.00 $1.00 $275.00 $1.00_ 101 o 500 $400.00 $1.10 $500.00 $1.50 501 or More $500.00 $0.85 $1, 00.00 $1.00 Commercial Clean Agent Systems and Commercial Kitchen Fire Protection Systems Plan Review (Per Inspection Fee Device) Fee Review $350.00 $1.00 $150.00 RE -INSPECTION FEES For new construction, inspections or spot tenant improvements, inspections life safety $100.00 $175.00 per re -inspection TMC 16.16.080 TMC 16.40.130 TMC 16.42.110 TMC 16.46.150 TMC 16.48.150 W:\Legislative Development\Fire Department Fee Schedule 8-5-19 VC:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 5 of 8 13 For level inspections: company TMC 16.16.080 the inspector finds that the viobtionc have been - $60.00 not corrected the inspector finds that tho violations have been - $85.00 not corrected On thc third follow inspection, wiaen the up inspector finds that the violations have not been - $110.00 corrected Fee for the fourth subsequent and any follow inspections when the inspector up - $135.00 corrected APPEAL FEE TMC 16.16.090 TMC 16.40.170 TMC 16.42.150 TMC 16.46.170 TMC 16.48.170 $-2-51-0- $500.00 Development, Public orks, rechanicaI and Land Use Permits reviewed by Fire Wireless Communications Facility $150.00 Boundary Line Adjustment: Residential $100.00 Boundary Line Adjustment: Commercial $200.00 Lot Consolidation: Residential $100.00 Lot Consolidation: Commercial $400.00 Short Plat Fire Review $200.00 Sub Fire Division $500.00 SEPA Fire Review $400.00 W:\Legislative Development\Fire Department Fee Schedule 8-5-19 VC:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 14 Page 6 of 8 Development Fire Review: Residential $150.00 Development Fire Review: Commercial S400.00 Public Works Fire Review: Residential $150.00 Public Works Fire Review: Commercial $300.00 Mechanical Fire Review: Residential $150.00 Mechanical Fire Review: Commercial $300.00 Special Fees Expedited and After -Hours Fire Plan Review $400.00 Expedited and After -Hours Inspection $500.00 New Business Life Safety Inspection $50.00 plus Applicable Operational Permit Fees Annual Life Safety Inspection $50.00 + Applicable Operational Permit Fees Smoke Control System Plan Review $750.00 Mid -rise Smoke Control System Inspection $500.00 High-rise Smoke Control System Inspection $900.00 Resubmittal Plan Review Fee $300.00 Emergency Responder Radio Coverage System Test $300.00 Fire Variance Request: Residential $250.00 Fire Variance Request: Commercial $500.00 Fire Suppression and Detection Confidence Test $15.00 per system Administrative Fee W:\Legislative Development\Fire Department Fee Schedule 8-5-19 VC:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 7 of 8 15 Starting work before a permit issuance shall be subject to an investigation fee equal to 100°/0 of applicable permit fees. A 5`)/0 Technology Fee will be added to all Fire fees unless the Technology Fee is already being charged by another City department. Recovery of Hazardous Incident Response Costs TMC Chapter 6.14 Minimum fee for incident response costs = $250.00, plus any "extraordinary costs" as defined per TMC Chapter 6.14. Section 3. Effective Date. The fee schedule contained in this resolution shall be effective immediately. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Kathy Hougardy, Council President Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: W:\Legislative Development\Fire Department Fee Schedule 8-5-19 VC:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 8 of 8 16 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor TO: INFOR ATIONAL EMORANDU Finance Council Committee FROM: Vicky Carlsen, Finance Director Jay Wittwer, Fire Chief Ben Hayman, Fire Marshal CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: July 17, 2019 Updated after July 22, 2019 Finance Committee meeting SUBJECT: Fire Marshal Office Discussion ISSUE Review responsibilities of the Fire Marshal Office (FMO) including current services provided, options for providing services, required minimum levels of service, and liability associated with providing and/or not providing services. BACKGROUND The Fire Marshal Office currently provides several public safety services including: a. Plan review and associated inspections (inspections for new and existing businesses are not currently being done) b. Limited code enforcement c.Fire investigation The office is staffed as follows: Position FTEs Notes Captain 2 Inspectors Battalion Chief 1 Fire Marshal Senior Fire Project Coordinator 1 Plan Reviewer Ad in Support Technician 1 Staffing levels for this office have remained at five since 2011. Prior to 2011, the staffing level was six FTEs. Budget The Fire Marshal's Office is a division within the fire department and the process to develop the budget is the same as for the fire department. Finance staff drafts the budget for personnel costs and fire staff provide budget requests for supplies and services. In addition to the expenditure budget, revenues generated by departments are also budgeted and revenue backed expenditures are trued up at a department level. For example, if a department expects to receive a grant for $10 thousand, the revenue is budgeted and expenditures of $10 thousand are also budgeted so that the net effect on the total general fund budget is zero. 17 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 The chart below shows revenue received specific to the Fire Marshal's Office. The chart also gives the total overtime budget and demonstrates that total revenue generated by this division exceeds the total overtime budget. It should be noted that not all overtime is considered to be reimbursable and not all revenue generated is a result of overtime costs. ' Revenue Generated byFire Marshal's /Office Actua|s Budget 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Operational Permit Fees $ 78.836 $ 44.175 $ 24.825 $ 12.400 $ 10.507 $ 21.400 Plan Re\�evwFees 52,363 46.973 66.895 74.103 78.628 75.000 ReinopectionFeee 1.000 300 300 100 2.000 $130.198 $ 80.448 $ 92.020 $ 86.503 $ 87.235 $ 98.400 Overtime Expenditures $ 78.861 $ 61.330 $ 82.838 $ 89.875 $ 08,356 $ 61.143 Actual and Proiected Budaet for Fire Marshal's Office — Prevention and Investiqlation ' Actuale Budget 2014 2015 2018 2017 2018 2019 Prevention & Investigation $824.802 $815.137 $828'408 $864,092 $907.865 $834.853 Revenues and Fees for Services As can be seen above, the actual revenues and fees for services from the Fire Marshal's Office donot balance with the expenses. Recently, the fees associated with the fire department have been reviewed and research shows that Tukwila's fees have not kept pace with the market. The charts below show o few fees and how they compare with our neighboring cities. There is m recommendation toupdate these fees tVbe competitive with our neighboring cities. Some ofthe fees listed below are increases to existing fees and others are new fees that other cities charge that Tukwila currently does not charge. It should be noted that the fees listed below are approximate and would vary depending onsize and scope ofeach project. Small Remtaurart—Fine Protection Fees $6,]7O SnmaURestauran%-FineProtectionFees $2,833 $2,836 $2,840 �7o74 ~. .,. -_' $1,511 $1,295 $I'I]§ Kent Kirkland Bellevue Tukwila Lynnwood 3eaTac Covington Renton VRFA Tukwila Proposed Current 18 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 The current Small Restaurant fee for Tukwila $1,136, whereas the neighboring cities range from $1,295 up to $6,370 for this similar service. A proposed increase to $2,886 would still be within the average range for these fees. Fire Protection Fees — 5-Story Hotel $19,241 $12,594 Fire Protection Fees- 5 story hotel $6,509 $6,490 $6,202 $5,356 $4,913 $3,860 $3,192 $2,961 Kent Lynnwood Kirkland Proposed SeaTat Bellevue Renton VRFA Current Covington Tukwila Fees Tukwila The current 5-Story Hotel fee for Tukwila is $3,192, whereas the neighboring cities range from $2,961 up to $19,241 for this similar service. A proposed increase to $6,490 would still be within the average range for these fees High Pile/Rack Storage — Operational $338 $321 $300 o4?" cog High Pile/Rack Storage- OPERATIONAL $268 $258 $200 $200 • • ••• ••••"••••'• ••••'• • „ ........., $175 $175 $155 $150 oc,6 a c,° 44\\ •&- •SN) $125 $ID) The current High Pile/Rack Storage fee for Tukwila is $150, whereas the neighboring cities range from $100 up to $338 for this similar service. A proposed increase to $300 would still be within the average range for these fees. Recommendation: Update current fees and permit schedule to current market standards and averages. To act on this recommendation, staff will need to produce a list of current and proposed fees and an ordinance to implement the new fee schedule. Staff would continue the review of our fees and comparison with our surrounding neighbors. 19 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 Current Workload The following table outlines the main responsibilities of the Fire Marshal's Office, this includes Construction Permit Review, Plan Reviews and Construction Permit Inspections. The Fire Marshal is required by statute and TMC 2.24.020 to report all fires of criminal, suspected criminal, or undetermined origin to the State Fire Marshal. Current Workload 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Construction Permit Plan Reviews: Land Use, Public Works, and Mechanical Permits 566 531 542 555 633 Plan Reviews: Sprinkler, Fire Alarm, Kitchen Hood, and UL 300 Construction permits 264 216 259 250 238 Construction permit inspections 703 624 789 744 737 Fire Investigations Conducted 111 66 83 87 68 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Reviews and Investigations 2014-2018 MEAMEMMUM. .VAIMIMMOMMUMMOVML 2014 2015 2016 Construction Permit Plan Reviews: -Plan Reviews: 'Construction permit inspections Fire Investigations Conducted 2017 2018 Current Services Provided As mentioned earlier, the Fire Marshal's office has several duties that need to be reviewed and evaluated as to which services should remain within the Fire Marshal's office, which services and programs need to be streamlined, which areas can be provided in a different fashion (e.g. contracted or as part of a regional service), and which areas need to be reprioritized. These will be addressed more fully at a later date. Services which could be done outside the Fire Marshal's Office Some of the current services provided by the Fire Marshal's office could be done by other parts of the organization or are already being done by other departments. Specifically, these include: 1) City Addressing — This is currently being coordinated through Technology Services/GIS and could be more streamlined to not have the Fire Marshal's office as the lead agency. 20 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 2) New Business License Reviews - The Finance Director is responsible for reviewing our current review process for new business licenses and with the change to State Licensing it maybe an opportunity to reevaluate the need and priority for the Fire Marshal's Office review. 3)Special Event Permit Coordination - Historically, the Fire Marshal's Office has been the project manager for all special event pmrnn|te. e.g. Boeing Celebration and major events. This involves working across several City departments. The City will be reviewing where beat to have this function reside with the Fire Marshal's office providing input, but not being the lead agency. The result of these three changes would be to provide more capacity to our Fire Marshal's Office to meet other higher priority services. Other Services -HiOh Services Inspections ofNew and ExistinqBusinesses and Plan Review Inspections for businesses include annual business inspections, inspections for new businesses, and follow-up on confidence teat reports. Confidence teat reports are reports received by this Office that show deficiencies or malfunctions within o business's fire sprinkler or fire alarm systems. Previously, inspections were provided bv suppression crews but this began tochange in 2014. The change was mainly due to new training requirements and standards set bvthe South County Fine Training ConaonUUOn and was also a policy change because these inspections may not have been the most efficient use of Suppression personnel. This change has left many inspections not being done at this time. /\ key policy question is how best to balance the requirements for inspections, the need and then the cost recovery options for these inspections. According t0the Fine Marshal, there are over 1.700 existing businesses in need of inspections and approximately 700 expired operational permits for activities, orthe sto[aQe of, -such as explosives, hazardous materials storage and production, carnivals and expositions, underground tank removal, compressed gases, .crVoqenic fluids, LP,gases,hot work, propane tank installation, and other activities that are deemed hazardous by the Fire Marshal International Fire Code that should be inspected for compliance. Enforcing critical life safety fire codes in achoo|s, apartment bui|dingo, shopping nna/|e. hotels, .and large industrial or nnaMufacturinq businesses are considered .bythe Fire Marshal to be a high priority. .but due tothe .current staffing nnndei the office is unable toPerform= The following chart shows historical fire preventiondata including inspections performed the last few years and who performed the services. Asnoted hlthe chart, suppression crews performed many inspections 2014 through 2016, but have not been involved inspections since 2017. Life Safety and Operational Permits 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 LifeSafetv|nepectiono- Completed bvFire Suppression Crews 1.388 859 458 Life Safety inapaotions- [|o[np|ehad by Fire Marshal's Office 3 2 Operational Permit Inspections - Completed by Fire Suppression Cravvo 770 461 228 21 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 6 There are ways in which we can prioritize which buildings are necessary to inspect, and how often the inspections The^—'orit« of the occupancies need to beinspected bv certified inspectors, due to the complexitV of manv business operations and the proper application of the fire code. There are also staffing considerations that can be considered to balance the workload. For instance, suppression crews could be assigned to do certain inspections, which did occur in past years. This would raise situational awareness of the structures when crews respond to emergencies. Staff will provide anupdated list of types of businesses and options on how best to provide this service and recover costs for these services. New Business and Confidence Test Reports Per this Office, annually there are approximately 150 new businesses that should be inspected to ensure that new operations are operating safely and complyinq with applicable life safetv codes. Per the Fire Marshal, due to the current staffinq model, the office is unable to inspect these businesses. Additionally, the Office receives approximately 500 confidence test reports each year that show deficiencies or malfunctions with fire sprinkler or alarm systems. —The Fire Marshal believes it is important to follow up on these reports to ensure that the needed repairs are oOmp|ated7 Code Enforcement Fire Code enforcement issues are forwarded to the Fire Marshal from suppression crews or other city staff. Per the Fire Marshal, due to the current staffing model, the office is unable to follow up on the majority offire code issues. Additional data on what types of code enforcement issues and volume of work will be presented ate later date. Genera|Requirements—FlroCodeOfficio| The International Fire Code ) is a modelcod that regulates minimum fire safety requirements for new and existing buUd|ngo, faoiiiUeo, etorage, and processes. The |FC addresses fire prevention, fire protection, life safety and safe storage and use of hazardous materials in new and existing buildings, facilities, and processes. In addition to the|FC, Revised Code of Washington the Tukwila Municipal Code, 16.1O adopted and amended the 2Q15|FC. Public Duty Doctrine As stated abuve, some services currently provided by the Fire Marshal's Office are authorized while other services are required tobeprovided. |ndiscussing services provided bvthis office, it is important to keep in mind what potential liability the City could face in changing oen/iva levels or processes. Under the public duty doctrine, when oobx'sduty iaowed bzthe public adlarge fire suppression and inspection duties), an individual who is injured by an alleged breach of that duty has novalid claim against the City orits officer oremployees. There are certain exceptions to the public duty doctrine, such as in cases where a special relationship is created (such aawhen eOofficer oremployee makes direct assurances toamember ofthe public under circumstances where the person justifiably relies on those assurances); or when an officer or employee, such as mbuilding official, knows about aM'inherently dangerous condition, has aduty tUcorrect it(i.e.law ooy8 that the City "shall" correct the condiUon), and fails to perform that duty.Tay|orv. Stevens 22 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 County, 111 Wn.2d 159, 171-72,759 P.2d 447 (1988). In general, however, governmental entity will not be liable to a private party for failure to perform duties that that are owed solely to the general public (a duty to all is a duty to no one). 23 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 8 Revised Fee Schedule At the July 22. 2018 Finance Committee nneetinq, a discussion was held on the current fee schedule for the fire department. |twas noted that there isanimbalance between actual revenues and fees for services for the fire nnmreha|'o offioe, and that m review ofthe fees phovvn that the current fees have not kept pace with the market and noiqhborinqcities. Staff indicated that they would return to Committee with GM updated fee schedule. An updated fee schedule has been prepared and included onthe oqendafor Auqust12.2O19. Policy Decision hoRemove Life 8afetyInspections from Suppression Crews At the July 22nd Committee meetinq, it was stated that suppression crews previously provided life - safety inspections. Staff was requested to provide additional information as to why suppression crews stopped perforn1inqthese inspections. Per fire department ataff, mupAnsoakJn orevva were doinq inspections duhnq the day but were suspended due to the increased amount of time needed to meet the Firefqhter tr@inimq requirements of the VVashinqton Administrative Code (UV/\C), and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). Additional troininq by the TraininO 'Consortium is raquirad, some of the c|oaaee are considered best prmoticeS, vvhi|o othartuaininq is recommended to heepfirefightera safe while porfornninq the duties oftheir iob. Prior toioiningthe TcaininQ CUnoortiunn, suppression crews were not nnaetinQ the tnainiOq r8qUirmonants, but were doinq conduotinq life safety inspections. CaUvo|unlea|eoincneaoedeiqnUfioantlybmtween2O14and2O17VxithrnoetoftheinoreaoeincoU volume attributed to EK8G oa/ka. Total number of oaUo in �-13 vvon4.7Q9 but by 2017. total call volume was 5.851. o qrovth of22Y6 in three years. With the increase in traininq requirements coupled with the increase in call volume, the workload presented by the inspections was not sustainable. Options h2Address Current Workload A phased approach toaddresoinO the current workload situation in the Fire K8areha|.o Office is proposed. Near -Term 1. /\ddreaanO: To effectively streamline and automate the add[eoojnq pnooeas. TlS and [)C[} will be vvorkinQ jointly with the FK8{]hotransition this work from FW1{]tmT|G. Key elements of the transition include thefo||ovvinq: a. DCD will be responsible for initiatinq additions and chanqes to all addresses. b. T|G\wi||. based on the type ofaddrees'ng requent, make the chenqea tothe sinq|esource addreaoinq laver, and will work with an external supplier to verity emergency access points. T||Swill also send out automated communications to KinO County, E911. Valley ConnnnunioaUona, applicable utility services and US Postal Service. c. Fire Marshal's Office will approve ennerAenoy access points and confirm that the new address makes sense for emenlenoyresponders. 2. New Business License Application Reviews: The current process for ravhexvhlq business 24 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page VVithatremnnUninQ the add prooeno. the business license application process can also be streamlined. The Fire Marshal's Office will classify the business occupancy type.. 3. Special Event Permits: Staff iecommitted torevevvnq this process and daVe|o[inOaprocess that meets the needs ofall departments involved with this process. Staff will beconveninQa meetinq to improve this process. Mid -Term In early 2019. the Fire K8arohm|G from both the City of Tukwila and PuQst Sound ReOiona| Fine Authority (PGRFA)started discussion onthe Possibility ofashared services model. Discussions on a shared service model occurred in the pasd, as early as 2016. but did not qaintngction until early this year. Both the City and P8RF8 perform s|nn||or services to oonln]un|t|oa /n this region and both aqenoiaa deal with similar |eoumo. Both the Qty's fire department and P8RFA believe that oonnbin1nq efforts could meet the needs in both communities. The Fire Chiefs from Tukwila and PSRFA are discussing details reqardinq a shared services model and both are in full support of this concept. Staff recommends this approach and will be returninqwith anirtedoca|aqneementoutlininq the details of service levels to be providod, total costs, and benefits of o shared services model. RECOMMENDATION 25 26 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFOR ATIONAL ME ORANDU TO: Finance Committee FROM: Vicky Carlsen, Finance Director CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: August 7, 2019 SUBJECT: Sources of Revenue — Fire Departments, Fire Districts, and Regional Fire Authorities ISSUE Provide information on how fire departments, fire districts, and regional fire authorities are funded. BACKGROUND Fire services in Washington State can be provided several ways including maintaining a fire department run by City personnel, contract with another city or fire protection district for fire protection services, annex directly to a fire protection district with voter approval, form a fire protection district coextensive with voter approval, or establish a regional fire authority (RFA) with voter approval. Regardless of what method is in place to provide these services, funding can come from a variety of sources. Outlined below are the sources of funding available to cities, fire districts, and RFAs. Also included is a discussion on how Tukwila's fire department is funded, along with historical data. DISCUSSION Fire departments, fire districts, and RFA can be funded from a variety of sources but the main source of funding is from property taxes and the Fire Benefit Charge (FBC). Some sources are only available to cities, while others are only available for fire districts and RFAs. Below is a chart showing available funding options for each method of providing fire services. 27 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 | City Fire | Fire � Revenue Source Primary Revenues �Property Taxes _ Regular Levy Property Taxes - Excess Le\/y Property Taxes - Levy Lid Lift Property Taxes - EMS Levy Fire Benefit Charge Other Revenues Grants X '— -- �ContraotfbrSemioeo Fines and Penalties----- --7---- --- X_- *Fire Impact Fees Local Impro\/ement District Revenue Generated by Fire Marshal *Fire Permit, Inspection Fees | X (*Plan Re\AewFees X j X *Only available todistricts and RFAsUcontracted by City to[ro\Adeservice Regional / FireDepartments Districts Authorities | X � X _ X X Sources of Revenue 1. Property Taxes X X Regular Lev( Cities, districts, and RFAe can levy m regular tax levy but cities have a different maximum levy rate than districts and RFAS. The City ofTukwi|o's maximum levy rate io$3.O25per thousand of assessed value |eoa the regular levy for the library district. However, districts and RFAs are limited t0$1.5Oper thousand ofassessed value. |fthey impose ofire benefit charge, the limit is lowered to $1.00. Regular tax levies are limited to o maximum increase of 196 unless voters approve 8levy lid lift (discussed be|omh. Excess Levy: Excess levies are voter approved and are typically used for capital purposes. Excess levies for capital are used to repay debt proceeds and are levied each year until the debt is paid in full. Excess levies for capital require a super majority and are subject to validation. Levy Lid Lift: Because property tax law restricts the growth of property tax revenue to a maximum of 1 % each year, when assessed value increases, the levy rate for taxing districts decreases. Voters can approve o levy [id lift to increase the regular levy rate limit back tothe nnaXinnunn levy rote anywhere iObebween\. As an example, the City of Tukwila's current regular levy rate is $2,39148. The City could ask voters to approve a levy lid lift to reset the current levy rate to anywhere between our current rate of $2.39148 up to $3.825 |oso the library rate. Levy lid lifts require a majority approval and are not subject to validation. EMS Levy: EMS levies are another voter -approved property tax levy that is restricted to EMS type functions. 28 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 their own EMS levy. Rather, King County collects this levy tofund the Medic One program. The City, along with other participants in this program receive a distribution from this levy. Distribution iabased oncall volume. 2. Fire Benefit {}harge(FBC) The FBCieefee that iobased oOthe benefit ofhaving fire -based services. |tconsiders that those who benefit more from fire protection services should pay more for that service. The charge is applied toimprovements tDreal property but does not apply holand. |tjsofee based Onsize of the atructupe, use, and risk. This revenue source is only available to districts and RFAa. Cities do not have authority toimpose an FB[:. 3. Grants State and Federal grants are available to ciUes, districts, and RFAa to fund o variety of expenditures including capital,equipment, and staffing. Grant funds received are restricted tOthe expenditures specific to the purpose of the grant and cannot be used to supplant other funding sources for expenditures approved bythe grant. 4. Other Taxes and Fees (not specific to fire) Unlike districts and RF/\o, cities have the ability to levy other taxes and fees to fund fire services. For the City of Tukwila, nsNes. admissions, and UU||ty taxao, as well as bus|Oaoo license fees and n1|gCeUaDeouS revenue can be used for any service provided bye oity, including fire services. These taxes and fees are not available todistricts andF{FAs. 5. Contract for Services []U8o districts, and F<FAs, can enter into contracts with other entities to provide fin* and EK88 services. Contracts for services can be used to regionalize services, resulting in economies of ooe|e while still providing a high level of service. O. Fines and Penalties Fines and penalties for fire are typically associated with false alarms. Many fire entities will levy a fine or penalty for false a|amno in an effort to reduce the number of false alarms. False a|a[rO fees are generally not a major source of revenue. 7. Fire |nnpoot Fees Impact fees one used to offset the increased costs of providing services due to development. Impact fees are ofunding option for cities. Districts and RFAScannot levy impact fees, they can only receive impact fees if they provide services within city boundaries. Ei Local Improvement District Local Improvement Districts can be used to fund capital needs within a specific area, typically onarea smaller than the entity's borders. /\nexample where L/Ogcould provide funding would be to construct a fire station. The area that benefits from the fire station would form the LID and provide the funding for the project. 9. Other Revenue Sources There are other revenue sources available to fund fire services but are immaterial in nature. Some ofthese sources include interest earnings, proceeds from sale ofassets, fire insurance premium tax, and rental revenue. 29 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 10. Fire Permit, Inspection, and Plan Review Fees Fire permit, inspection, and plan review fees are charged for a variety of services provided by the fine department and are typically associated with services provided by a Fire Marshal's Office. This iotypically afunction ofacity ercounty but can bmcontracted out toadistrict orRFA- These fees are intended to recover portion, or all, of the costs associated with providing these services. Districts and RFAs do not provide these services on their own but can provide them if contracted with m city Or county to provide the services. Cih/ofTukwila Fire Department Fundinq Funding for the Citv'o fire department cn[nae from property taxes as well as other general fund revenue not assigned or restricted for specific uses. In addition to general revenues, the fire department generates some revenue from services provided. The chart b8|ODv lists revenue generated hythe fire department over the last several years oswell aethe budget for 2O1S. It should be noted that the hazardous materials response is a new revenue source beginning in 2019. The budget for this revenue ie$1QOthousand each year. Todate, norevenue has been received. It should also be noted that, while a fee schedule for fire false alarms has been in place for many years, the fire department has not billed for false alarms since 2014. The fire department is working on o plan to begin billing for false a|mrnlo. Actum|o Revenue Source Budget 2019 EMS Levy (Medic One La\,y) Grants Contract forSenAceo Operational Permit Fees Plan Re\AewFees ReinapechonFeeo *Hazardous Materials Response Reimbursement for Deployments KY|oc Fnea/CnstRecnvery Totals *New charge beginning in2O19 398440 405792 454148 427.501 445880 401.453 74.495 90'894 10,809 12.318 45.415 51.189 45.958 10\775 2.889 76.838 44.175 24.825 12.400 10.507 52.363 45.973 66`805 74.103 78.628 1^000 300 500 100 - ' - 212.561 84.020 80.201 ' 20.624 38.094 98.810 133.076 470,00 2U/511 1,500 21/4DO 75'0UD 2.0}0 100,000 ' 150,000 1,188,068 642.548 719\115 The chart be|Vvv ohovve actual mxpendituree2O14 — 2018 and 2019 budget and how the fire department in funded. For purposes of this diaouaaioO, it has been assumed that the fire 30 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 Fire Department Expenditures by Division Actuals Budget Division 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Administration 848,261 784,462 807,292 896,733 963,811 1,175,610 Suppression 8,489,610 8,892,891 8,793,233 9,151,233 9,311,411 9,173,895 Prev. & Inspect. 824,862 815,137 826,468 864,692 907,865 834,653 Training 447,198 376,402 379,240 443,663 443,176 439,782 Facilities 89,704 98,442 92,391 100,349 99,779 110,860 Special Operations 63,357 30,774 29,038 28,653 20,836 42,291 Rescue & Emerg. Aid 198,453 193,418 246,274 240,478 240,781 265,149 Emergency Mgmt 399,931 532,935 380,405 341,178 368,541 431,147 Total 11,361,376 11,724,461 11,554,341 12,066,979 12,356,200 12,473,387 Fire Department Funding Dept. Generated Revenue 1,188,068 642,548 719,115 718,518 761,399 840,411 Property Taxes 10,173,308 11,081,913 10,835,226 11,348,461 11,594,801 11,632,976 Total Funding 11,361,376 11,724,461 11,554,341 12,066,979 12,356,200 12,473,387 Revenues generated by the fire department are budgeted based on information provided by the department during the budget development process. If data is not received from the department, Finance staff will budget revenue items based on historical trends. If expenditures are revenue backed, e.g., grants, both revenue and expenditures are budgeted so that there is no net impact on the general fund. RECOMMENDATION For information only. 31 32 City f Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor KNFOR ATUONAU ME ORANDU Finance Council Committee FROM: Vicky Car|sem.Finance Director Jay Wittwer, Fire Chief CC: Mayor Ekberg [ATE: July 17, 2019 SUBJECT: FineBudgetCimcumoion—SemiceLeve|s Updated aftmrJu|v 23.2019Finance Cornrmittee88emtinq ISSUE Review current and historical Fire Department budget, staffing,and service levels todetermine a sustainable model which meets the City's financial and policy goals. BACKGROUND As mentioned above, the {}dv is reviewing current and historical information on the fine department. This information is being presented to determine policy direction regarding appropriate budget and eon/ioe levels. This nlenlo will focus on fire department nlininnunn and current service ksva|o, excluding the Flna Marshal's Office. Service levels for the Fire Marshal's — will be discussed in a separate DISCUSSION A policy decision on the table for discussion is related to service levels and will help guide the discussion onappropriate budget for the fire department. Minimum Service Levels While Article X3, Section 11 of the Washington State Constitution provides for general police powers for coundea, cities, and toVyns, but there is not a specific statue that provides that cities must provide fire protection services. However, as a practical rnotter, a city should provide some measure of fire protection. There are several ways in which m city could provide fire protection services: - Maintain afire department run bythe cib/a own personnel - Contract with another city, fire protection district, or regional fire authority for fire protection services - Annex directly toa fire protection district or regional fire authority with voter approval - Form a fire district coextensive with the city ortown with voter approval - Establish o regional fire authority with voter approval While nospecific state law requiresacity toprovide fire protectionaervioeo RC\8/does specify that the legislature does intend for cities to set standards for addressing the reporting and accountability of career fire departments and to specify performance measures applicable to response time objectives. 33 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 8ettinq Service Levels and Performance Objectives Washington State law (Revised Code ufWashington) explicitly states that cities any to set their own services levels and that state law does not limit each city's authority to do so. The Revised Code ofWashington (RC\&)acknowledges three entities for the "organization and deployment of resources for fire departmeOts" 1. International City/County Management Association (|CMA) 2. International Association of Fire Chiefs (|/\FC) 3. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) By formally recognizing these organizations within RCW35A.92, the State acknowledges their research and findings as resource for cities to set policy regarding the or8anizetion, number, and expectedresponse times for acareer fire department. However, adopting the service levels recommended by those organizations is vo|untary, eiDoa RCVV35A.S2.O1Oexplicitly states that "this chapter N/ 35A.A3/does not, and /s not intended to, /nanyway modify 0rlimit the authority of Cities and towns to set hnve/o of service." Therm is no relevant case law addressing RCVV 35A.92, but the City could na|y on the language therein to defend itself should it be faced with claims targeting the City's chosen level of service. State law also requires mcity and/or fire department topublish onannual re rtvvhichindUdeo the department's standards, their performance against those standards, and several other metrics (outlined below). Cities are to Set Their Own Performance and Service Level Objectives RCW Section35A.92 states that every city shall maintain a written statement or policy that establishes the following: 1. The existence cfofire department 2. The services that the fire department isrequired toprovide 3. The basic organization structure ofthe fire department 4. The expected number Qffire department employees 5. The functions that the fire department employees are expected toperform This written statement must also include service delivery and response time objectives for each ofthe following —'or service components, if appropriate: 1. Fire suppression 2. Emergency medical services 3. Special operations 4. .Aircraft rescue and firefighting 5. Marine rescue and firefighting O. VVi|d|2Ddfirefighting In 2005. legislation was enacted that requires each city establish their own response time objectives for the following measurements and states that the city shall establish m performance objective for the achievement ofeach of these measurements: 1. Turnout time 2. Response time for the first arriving engine company and for the deployment of a full first e|8nn assignment at afira suppression incident 3. Response time for the arrival of a unit with first responder or higher -level capability at an emergency nnadioa| incident 34 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 The graphic below displays the different segments of the total response time; from the factors that lead to calling 911 to when initial assigned apparatus arrive at the scene. Cascade of Events Factors iliat lead to 911 Event Initiation Point Divpatelt Time NEPA 1221 PSAP notifies etnerTeney responilv-rs IIrt>etastting Interval NETA, 1710 IFAA 'firm 1FA Tini Initial Arriving Company arrives Rponse Tittle Initial cull alarm asiiignment arrive:. State law also states that each city shall issue an annual written report that evaluates the level of service and deployment delivery and response time objectives. The evaluations shall be on data relating to: 1. Level of service 2. Deployment 3. Achievement of each response time objective for each geographic area within the City. The annual report shall also define the geographic area and circumstances whenever the standards were not met and explain the predictable consequences of any deficiencies and address steps necessary for compliance. Full copies of the applicable RCWs have been included in an attachment to this memo. Current Service Levels Provided by Tukwila Fire Department When service levels provide by the fire department are discussed, the discussion is normally centered around fire and EMS calls. However, there are other types of calls the fire department provides services for. The chart below summaries the number of calls, by type over the last few years. City of Tukwila Service Area Severe Rescue & Hazardous Weather/ Emergency Condition Public Natural Medical Svc Fire Good Intent False Alarm (no fire) Assistance Other Disaster Total 2014 3491 380 398 609 101 137 29 1 5146 2015 3747 379 539 605 97 148 37 3 5555 2016 4057 317 475 631 118 123 28 3 5752 2017 4083 299 469 713 106 145 32 4 5851 2018 4045 313 487 606 86 145 35 0 5717 35 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 In late 2017. the reporting system was changed for EMS calls from Fine RM8 to EGO for EMS calls. In Fire RN18, response time stopped when the unit arrived on scene. On scene means arriving atthe site, not the patient. With ES{].response time stops when the crew arrives atthe side ofthe patient. Because Ufthe change insystems and the change inwhen the response time is oonlp|eted. EMS oo|| response Urneo are only provided through 3017. A new dotauetfor comparison purposes will start with 2O18. Because EMS and fire calls account for 75% of the call volume, the discussion on response times will be focused on these two calls types. From 2014 through 2018 average response times for fire calls has been 5 minutes and 57 seconds. Average response times for EMS calls, 204-207has been slightly less at5minutes and 40seconds. The following tables show average response times by type of incident, by year. Aenoted inthe table, average response time for fire calls declined in2017and again in2O18. However, response times for EMS calls increased slightly in 2017. Fire EMS 2014 0l05:54 0:05:36 2015 8:05:57 0:05j56 2016 0IK6:06 0:05:29 2017 0:05:55 0:05:40 2018 0:05:51 - Avg. for all years 0:05:57 0:05:40 While the average raaponseUnneforbothfineandEK8SoaUsio|eoathan0rninutesforthe5-vaar period analyzed, not all calls have o response time of less than O minutes. Another way tV look at the data is to look at what percentage of call response time is less than a specific standard. The following charts provide summary information on percentage of response times that are less than orequal toOminutes. Charts are provided for both fire responses and emergency medical responses from 2014 through 2018. As the chart for fire oa||o indicates, the number of fire responses within O minutes has been increasing. HUvveVer, the number of EMS oa||o with response times within the Gminutes has declined ebit. 36 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 64.00% 62.00% 60.00% 58.00% 56.00% 54.00% 52.00% 50.00% 70.00% 68.00% 66.00% 64.00% 62.00% 60.00% 58.00% 56.00% 54.00% 52.00% 50.00% 55.97% Fire 2014 65.49% EMS 2014 %<=6 min on Fires 55.41% Fire 2015 55.66% Fire 2016 %<=6 min on EMS 67.01% EMS 2015 59.87% 68.08% EMS 2016 Fire 2017 61.64% Fire 2018 66.14% EMS 2017 37 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 6 By measuring response times within an 8-minute window, significantly more fire and EMS calls are within an 8-minute time frame. The following charts demonstrate that more than 80% of all fire and EMS calls have response times of 8 or less minutes. 90.00% 88.00% 86.00% 84.00% 82.00% 80.00% 78.00% 76.00% 74.00% 72.00% 70.00% 90.00% 88.00% 86.00% 84.00% 82.00% 80.00% 78.00% 76.00% 74.00% 72.00% 70.00% 86.74% Fire 2014 88.20% EMS 2014 %<=8 min on Fires 85.22% Fire 2015 87.11% Fire 2016 88.63% %<=8 min on EMS 89.04% EMS 2015 88.76% EMS 2016 Fire 2017 88.36% Fire 2018 87.88% EMS 2017 At a future meeting, comparison data on response times to other fire jurisdictions will be presented. Public Duty Doctrine 38 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 Under the public duty doctrine, when a city'sd ksowed tothe public adlarge (such as general fire suppression and inspection . an individual who is injured by on alleged breach of that duty has novalid claim against the City Vrits 'officer or employees. There are certain exceptions tothe public duty doctrine, such mnincases where a special relationship iacreated (such aawhen enofficer oremployee makes direct assurances toemember ofthe public under circumstances where the person justifiably relies on those assurances); or when an officer or employee, such as a building official, knows about an inherently dangerous condition, has a duty to correct it (i.e. law says that the City "shall" correct the condition), and fails to perform that duty. Taylor v. Stevens County, |ngeneral, however, governmental entity will not be |iah|8 to a private party for failure to perform duties that that are owed solely to the general public (a duty toall is a duty to no one). New and Updated Information for Auqust12,2O19 At the July 22, 2019 Finance Committee meeting, staff was asked to provide service level information qo\nqback aofar ae2OD5. The foUovvngchart show number ofcalls, broken out bY type, from 2OO5throuQh2O1O. The chart iofollowed byqnophica representation cfthe different types ofcalls over the same time period. City of Tukwila Service Area Severe Rescue & Hazardous Weather/ Condition Public � � atural Medical Svc Fire Good Intent False Alarm (no fire) Assistance Other Disaster Tots I 169 767 um 11 4932 2006 3097 wm pm om 2007 301um oso m^ uuou a000 oru ma rno 2009 3111 289 aoo sya 2010 oo*o xou 284 sso 2011 32*5 zos ezo sca 2012 3386 znV cwo 551 2013 3267 270 aos 610 2014 3*91 000 mm *oo 2015 3747 379 53e 000 2016 ^Onr 317 oro e31 2017 4083 299 *ne 713 2018 4045 313 487 Vcm 140 142 te 145 im 79 104 144 113 ma 129 81 oo 1m ss 106 118 56 76 132 m 1m 137 29 97 148 37 118 123 28 106 145 32 86 145 oo The first graph demonstrates that calls for emerqencymedical services has been inc over time. From 2005throUQh 2015. the increase was fairly Ormdu8|. However, 2014thnouqh2016 shows aoiqnifiomntincrease each year, then |evdinq off after 2O10. 39 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 8 4,300 4,100 3,900 3,700 3,500 3,300 3,100 2,900 2,700 2,500 Rescue & Emergency Medical Svc Rescue & Emergency Medical Svc Calls for fire do show o slight trend upwards while oeUo for hazardous conditions are trending o|iqhUy lower over time. Fire and Hazardous Conditions 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 GO O Fire ~---o--- Hazardous Condition ---^Uneor(Fire) ---, (Hazardous Condition The final chart qnaphioa||ydiopdaymthe ch8nqmover time for non-anlmrgenoiea While the number offalse alarms iotrending down oUqht|y,the total number offalse alarm responses still averages around 1396oftotal call volume. Calls classified aegood intent are trending u,pvvardoover time. 8onnmVMe thinks there* is an ennerqency and does the right thing by calling 911 but when unavvs arriVe, there is no ennenJency. An example of this type of call would be a report of smoke but turns out to not be o fire. Public assistance co||o differ from good intent in that a person does not have on ennarqency but calls 911 fOr'meoietmnce. Crews have been dispatched to shut off water and pump out excess water when 8resident experiences mplumbing problem. 40 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 9 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Good Intent, False Alarms, Public Assistance, Other 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Good Intent Severe Weather/ Natural Disaster, Other False Alarm Public Assistance Linear (Good Intent) Linear (False Alarm) In addition to historical data on types of calls, the following table shows changes in average response time over the same time period. Year Fire EMS 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Avg. for all years 0:06:17 0:05:33 0:05:45 0:05:44 0:05:50 0:05:32 0:05:54 0:05:43 0:06:03 0:05:46 0:06:10 0:06:04 0:06:16 0:05:46 0:06:15 0:05:44 0:06:22 0:05:45 0:05:54 0:05:36 0:05:57 0:05:56 0:06:06 0:05:29 0:05:55 0:05:40 0:05:51 0:06:03 0:05:43 While the average response time for both fire and EMS calls is less than 6 minutes for the period analyzed, not all calls have a response time of less than 6 minutes. Another way to look at the data is to look at what percentage of call response time is Tess than a specific standard. The following charts provide summary information on percentage of response times that are Tess than or equal to six minutes and less than or equal to eight minutes for the same time period. Charts are provided for both fire responses and emergency medical responses. In all four charts, 41 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 10 the number of calls within the time period specified is trending up, demonstrating that response times are improving over time. 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% 80% 78% 76% 74% 72% 70% 88.25% 82.38% %<=8 min on Fires 85.71% 85.12% . 8M? .. ...... 87.29% 88.63%88.38% 86.74%85.22% 83.21%87.11 83.68% % ••••••••,....." ............ ..... ..... 80.14% Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% 80% 78% 76% 74% 72% 70% 87.81% 86.55% 89.00% %<=8 min on EMS 89.04% 88.76% 88.20% 87.88% 86.58% 85'71% 85.73% 86.49% 86.47% 87.27% EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 42 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 11 70% 65% 59.89% 60% 55% 50.00% 50% 45% 40% 62.86% 59.93% %<=6 min on Fires 57.09% 56.27% 55.97% 55.41% 55.66% 61.64% 59.87% 43.90% 50.75% Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 70% 69% 68% 67% 66% 65% 64% 63% 62% 61% 60% 63.63% 63.92% 66.61% %<=6 min on EMS 64.00% .W• 61.76% 62.09% 61.23% 61.27% 60.49% 65.49% 68.08% 67.01% 1C 66.14% EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS EMS 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 RECOMMENDATION For information only 43 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 12 ATTACHMENTS Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35A.92 Fire Departments — Performance Measures: Attachment A: RCW 35A.92.010: Intent Attachment B: RCW 35A.92.020: Definitions Attachment C: RCW 35A.92.030: Policy Statement — Service Delivery Objectives Attachment D: RCW 35A.92.040: Annual Evaluations — Annual Report 44 INFORMATIONAL MEMO PaOef3 Attachment A: RCVV35A.92.010:|nh*nt R[VV 35A.9)2.010 The legislature intends for code cities toset standards for addressing the reporting and accountability ofsubstantially career fire departments, and to specify performance measures applicable 10response time objectives for certain major serxices.Tha|egislatureacknow|edgeS the efforts of the international city/county management association, the international association offire chiefs, and the national fire protection association for the organization and deployment of resources for fire departments. The arrival of first responders with automatic external defibrillator capability before the onset of brain death, and the arrival of adequate fire suppression resources before flash -over is a critical event during the mitigation of an emergency, and isinthe public's best interest` For these reasons, this chapter contains performance measures, comparable to that research, relating to the organization and deployment of fire suppression operations, emergency medical operations, and special operations by substantially career fire departments. This chapter does not, and is not intended to, in any way modify or limit the authority of code cities to set levels of service. 45 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 14 /\ttaohrMentB: RCVV35/\S2.O2O:Definitions RCVV3SA.92.O2O Definitions. The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise. (1) "Advanced life support" means functional provision of advanced airway management, including intubation, advanced cardiac monitoring, manual clefibrillation, establishment and maintenance of intravenous access, and drug therapy. (3) ''Aircraft rescue and firefighting" means the firefighting actions taken to rescue persons and to control or extinguish fire involving or adjacent to aircraft on the ground. (3) "Brain death" as defined by the American heart association means the irreversible death ofbrain cells that begins four tosix minutes after cardiac arrest. (4) "Code city" means a code city that provides fire protection services, which may include firefighting actions, emergency medical services, and other special operations, in a specified geographic area. (5) "Fire departnnent" means a code city fire department responsible for firefighting actions, emergency medical services, and other special operations in a specified geographic area. The department must beasubstantially career fire department, and not asubstantially volunteer fire department. (5) "Fire suppression" means the activities involved in controlling and extinguishing fires. (7) ''First responder" means rnean5 provision of initial assessment and basic first -aid intervention, including cardiac pulmonary resuscitation and automatic external defibrillator capability. (8) "Flash -over" as defined by national institute of standards and technology means when all combustibles inaroom burst into flame and the fire spreads rapidly. (9)"Marine rescue and firefighting" means the firefighting actions taken toprevent, control, or extinguish fire involved in or adjacent to a marine vessel and the rescue actions for occupants using |normal and emergency routes for egress. (1O)"Response time" means the time immediately following the turnout time that begins when units are enroute tothe emergency incident and ends when units arrive atthe scene. (11) "Special operations" means those emergency incidents to which the fire department responds that require specific and advanced training and specialized tools and equipment. (12) "Turnout time" means the time beginning when units receive notification of the emergency tothe beginning point ofresponse time. 46 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 15 /\ttachrnerdC: RCW35A.92.O3O: Policy Statement — Service Delivery Objectives R[yV35A.92.D3O Policy statennent--Service delivery objectives, (1) Every code city shall maintain a written statement or policy that establishes the following: (a)The existence ofafire department; (b) Services that the fire department is required to provide; (c)The basic organizational structure ofthe fire department; (d) The expected number offire department employees; and (e)Functions that fire department employees are expected toperform. (2) Every code city shall include service delivery objectives in the written statement or policy required under subsection (1) of this section. These objectives shall include specific response time objectives for the following major service components, if appropriate: (a) Fire suppression; (b) Emergency medical services; (c)Special operations; /d\Aircraft rescue and firefighting; (e) Marine rescue and firefighting; and /8VVj|d|and firefighting. /3A Every code city, in order to measure the ability to arrive and begin mitigation operations before the critical events of brain death orf|ash-over, shall establish time objectives for the following measurements: (a) Turnout time; (b) Response time for the arrival of the first arriving engine company at a fire suppression incident and response time for the deployment of a full first alarm assignment at a fire suppression incident; (c) Response time for the arrival of a unit with first responder or higher level capability at an emergency medical incident; and (d) Response time for the arrival of an advanced life support unit at an emergency medical incident, where this service is provided by the fire department. (4) Every code city shall also establish a performance objective of not less than ninety percent for the achievement ofeach response time objective established under subsection (3) of this section. 47 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 16 Attachment D: RCW 35A.92.040: Annual Evaluations — Annual Report R[VV35A.92.O4O Annual evaluations —Annual report. (1) Every code city shall evaluate its level of service and deployment delivery and response time objectives on an annual basis. The evaluations shall be based on data relating to level of service, deployment, and the achievement of each response time objective in each geographic area within the code city's'urisdiction. (2) Beginning in3OO7,everycodecitysha||issueanannua|vvrittenreportvvh|chsha||be based onthe annual evaluations required by subsection /1l of this section. (a) The annual report shall define the geographic areas and circumstances in which the requirements ofthis standard are not being met. (b) The annual report shall explain the predictable consequences of any deficiencies and address the steps that are necessary toachieve compliance. 48