2008.07.08 CC Committee Meetings Agenda PacketAGENDA
City Council Committee Meetings
Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds
July 08, 2008
6:00 p.m.
The City Council Committee meetings are work sessions for the City Council and staff only. The meetings are open to the public but are not
public hearings.
1. Community Services/Development Services Committee
Meeting Room: Council Chambers
A. AM-1654
(15 Minutes)
Discussion on closing Main Street between 5th and 3rd Avenues during summer events.
2.Finance Committee
Meeting Room: Jury Meeting Room
A. AM-1655
(10 Minutes)
Discussion of job titles and descriptions.
3.Public Safety Committee
Meeting Room: Police Training Room
A. AM-1652
(10 Minutes)
Substitute House Bill 1756 Annual Compliance Report.
B. AM-1653
(10 Minutes)
Anti-idling signs.
ADJOURN
Packet Page 1 of 18
AM-1654 1.A.
Closing Main Street Between 5th and 3rd Avenues During Summer Events
City Council Committee Meetings
Date:07/08/2008
Submitted By:Jana Spellman, City Council
Submitted For:Councilmember D. J. Wilson Time:15 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Committee:Community/Development Services
Information
Subject Title
Discussion on closing Main Street between 5th and 3rd Avenues during summer events.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
N/A
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Councilmember Wilson asked that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion purposes.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 01:30 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 07/02/2008 01:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 01:51 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana
Spellman
Started On: 07/02/2008 12:31
PM
Final Approval Date: 07/02/2008
Packet Page 2 of 18
AM-1655 2.A.
Discussion of Job Titles and Descriptions
City Council Committee Meetings
Date:07/08/2008
Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office
Submitted For:Mayor Haakenson Time:10 Minutes
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information
Committee:Finance
Information
Subject Title
Discussion of job titles and descriptions.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
N/A
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Mayor Haakenson requested that this item be placed on the Finance Committee Agenda for
discussion.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 01:30 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 07/02/2008 01:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 01:51 PM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy
Chase
Started On: 07/02/2008 01:27
PM
Final Approval Date: 07/02/2008
Packet Page 3 of 18
AM-1652 3.A.
Substitute House Bill 1756 Annual Compliance Report
City Council Committee Meetings
Date:07/08/2008
Submitted By:Tom Tomberg, Fire Time:10 Minutes
Department:Fire Type:Action
Committee:Public Safety
Information
Subject Title
Substitute House Bill 1756 Annual Compliance Report.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
As was done with the 2006 compliance report, forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a
recommendation to appprove. After Council approval, the current report is posted on the Fire
Department website.
Previous Council Action
On November 28, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1133 adopting performance,
policy, standards, and objectives outlined in the Washington Legislature Substitute House Bill
1756 as the Edmonds Fire Department emergency resource deployment and response time
objectives.
On June 12, 2007, the 2006 compliance report was presented to the Public Safety Committee, and
on June 19, 2007 the 2006 report was approved by the Council on consent.
Narrative
SHB 1756 requires annual evaluation of Council-adopted levels of service, deployment delivery
methods, and response time objectives. Evaluation is based on data relating to the levels of
service, deployment, and the achievement of each response time objective established by Council.
Response time data is extracted from emergency information entered into the Fire Department
records management system by Department personnel using WebFIRS software. The initial
evaluation was delivered to Council and the public beginning in 2007 with comparison of 2006
data against the adopted standards.
Attached is the SHB 1756 Annual Compliance Report for 2007 based on 2007 data. The heart of
the report appears in Sections 3 and 4, pages 6 through 12 of the report.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: 1756 Annual Report - 2007
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 11:37 AM APRV
Packet Page 4 of 18
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 07/02/2008 11:53 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 12:01 PM APRV
Form Started By: Tom
Tomberg
Started On: 07/02/2008 10:23
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/02/2008
Packet Page 5 of 18
SENATE HOUSE BILL 1756 ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REPORT – 2007
BACKGROUND
On November 28, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1133 adopting
performance, policy, standards, and objectives outlined in the Washington Legislature
Substitute House Bill 1756 as the Edmonds Fire Department emergency resource
deployment and response time objectives.
SHB 1756 requires annual evaluation of Council-adopted levels of service, deployment
delivery methods, and response time objectives. Evaluation is based on data relating to
the levels of service, deployment, and the achievement of each response time objective
established by Council. Response time data is extracted from emergency information
entered into the Fire Department records management system by Department personnel
using WebFIRS software. The initial evaluation was delivered to Council and the public
beginning in 2007 with comparison of 2006 data against the adopted standards.
Below is the SHB 1756 Annual Compliance Report for 2007 based on 2007 data. The
heart of the report appears in Sections 3 and 4.
2007 COMPLIANCE REPORT CONTENTS
As required by SHB 1756, the 2007 Compliance Report includes four Sections:
• Section 1: Council Resolution 1133
• Section 2: Five Policy Statements that prove the existence of the Fire
Department, describes services the Department provides, the Department’s
organizational structure, the expected number of Department employees, and the
functions those employees are expected to perform.
• Section 3: Comparison of 2007 response times to each adopted response
standard.
• Section 4: An explanation of why Council-adopted standards are not met the
predictable consequences of failing to meet the adopted standards, the steps
necessary to correct deficiencies in order to achieve compliance.
SECTION 1……………………………………………………………………………..2
SECTION 2……………………………………………………………………………..5
SECTION 3……………………………………………………………………………..6
SECTION 4……………………………………………………………………………..10
1
Packet Page 6 of 18
SECTION 1
RESOLUTION NO. 1133
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE PERFORMANCE POLICY,
STANDARDS AND OBJECTIVES OUTLINED IN
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1756 AS EDMONDS FIRE
DEPARTMENT EMERGENCY RESOURCE DEPLOYMENT
AND RESPONSE TIME OBJECTIVES.
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Fire Department is legally established as a fire
department through Ordinance No. 254 approved by the City of Edmonds City Council
on October 16, 1912 to provide for the prevention of and protection from fire in the city
and whose emergency services now include fire suppression, emergency medical
services at the basic life support-defibrillator and advanced life support levels, hazardous
materials response, technical rescue response, marine rescue and fire suppression, and
disaster preparedness and response; and,
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Fire Department has a mission statement and
goals and objectives to guide the organization in providing emergency services that
include fire suppression, emergency medical services at the basic life support-
defibrillator and advanced life support levels, hazardous materials response, technical
rescue response, marine rescue and fire suppression, and disaster preparedness and
response; and,
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Fire Department has a basic organizational
structure which includes elected officials, Chief Fire Officers, Fire Officers, Firefighters,
Firefighter/Paramedics and Firefighter/EMTs; and,
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Fire Department has a certain number of
members now and in the future who perform the tasks required to accomplish the
response objectives; and,
2
Packet Page 7 of 18
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Fire Department is required by state law to
establish turnout and response time goals for the emergency services is provides; and,
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Fire Department has evaluated the elements
identified in SHB 1756 and included those provisions deemed appropriate in the
Department’s emergency service delivery; and,
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Fire Department has developed written
response coverage objectives required to comply with applicable provisions of SHB
1756; and,
WHEREAS, the response coverage document is in furtherance of the City
of Edmonds duty to the public at large and does not create a specific duty to any
individual in the event of an emergency response; and
WHEREAS, each emergency response occurs under a unique set of
circumstances and competing emergency needs may impact response in any specific
situation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds obligation to respond to emergency
incidents consistent with the Fire Department emergency resource deployment and
response time objectives may be impacted by circumstances and competing emergency
needs, the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees shall have no duty to
respond according to any specific response standard, and shall incur no liability
whatsoever for failing to do so; therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council of the City of Edmonds hereby adopts the response
coverage document attached as Exhibit A as the Edmonds Fire Department’s official
policy for determining emergency medical, fire and rescue resource deployment; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
3
Packet Page 8 of 18
The adopted response coverage document officially
defines the Edmonds Fire Department’s written policies and procedures that establish
the distribution and concentration of fixed and mobile resources of the department; and,
This resolution was adopted at a regularly scheduled public meeting of the Edmonds
City Council for the Edmonds Fire Department on November 28, 2006.
RESOLVED this 28th day of November 2006.
APPROVED:
Gary Haakenson
MAYOR, GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Sandra S. Chase
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 11/28/06
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 11/28/06
RESOLUTION NO. 1133
4
Packet Page 9 of 18
SECTION 2
POLICY STATEMENTS
The Fire Department maintains written policy statements that establishes the
following:
1. The existence of the Fire Department is verified by Resolution No. 1133.
__X__meets requirement_____does not meet
2. Services that the Fire Department is required to provide are addressed in Resolution
No. 1133.
__X__meets requirement_____does not meet
3. The basic organizational structure of the Fire Department is as depicted in the
organizational chart adopted by Council as part of the 2007-08 biennial budget on
November 15, 2005, and the 2007-2008 budget adopted by Council on November
21, 2006.
__X__meets requirement_____does not meet
4. The expected number of Fire Department employees for 2007-2008 is 54 as adopted
by Council as part of the 2007-08 biennial budget on November 15, 2005, and the
2007-2008 budget adopted by Council on November 21, 2006. A breakdown by
position appears in Appendix E.
__X___meets requirement_____does not meet
5. The functions Fire Department employees are expected to perform are listed in
Edmonds Fire Department SOP 501.01 Mission Statement.
__X___meets requirement_____does not meet
5
Packet Page 10 of 18
SECTION 3
STANDARDS OF RESPONSE COMPARISON (STANDARD OF COVER)
To measure the ability to arrive and begin mitigation operations before the critical events
of “brain death” or “flashover” occur, the Fire Department is required to establish
response time objectives, and compare the actual department results on an annual basis
against the established objectives. The comparison began in 2007 with a comparison of
the established response objectives against actual 2006 response times for the levels of
response. This year, actual 2007 response time data is compared against the originally
established, Council-adopted 2006 standard. This section provides that comparison.
1. Turnout time for all emergency incidents
Turnout Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a turn out time
standard of 2:45, which the department should meet 90% of the time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did not
meet the turn out time objective 90% of the time; 90% of the Fire Department
incidents experienced a turn out time of 2:46 minutes/seconds.
2A. Response time off the first-arriving Engine Company to a fire suppression
incident
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 6:30 for the arrival of the first engine company at a fire
suppression incident, which the department should meet 90% of the time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did not
meet the response time objective 90% of the time; 90% of fire suppression
incidents had the first engine arrive at the scene within 6:48 minutes/seconds
of response time.
2B. Response time for the deployment of full first alarm assignment to a residential
fire suppression incident
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 7:45 for the arrival of the full complement of a first alarm
response to a residential fire suppression incident, which the department
should meet 90% of the time. The Fire Department has adopted a first alarm
response of 15 firefighters.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did not
meet the full deployment response time objective 90% of the time; 90% of fire
suppression incidents had the full deployment of first alarm responding
personnel and equipment arrive at the scene within 9:20* minutes/seconds of
response time.
* This is measured from the residential fire suppression incidents that
assembled 15 responders on the incident.
6
Packet Page 11 of 18
2C. Response time for the deployment of full first alarm assignment to a
commercial fire suppression incident
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 9 minutes for the arrival of the full complement of a first alarm
response to a commercial fire suppression incident, which the department
should meet 90% of the time. The Fire Department has adopted a first alarm
response of 18 firefighters.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did
meet the full deployment response time objective 90% of the time; 90% of fire
suppression incidents had the full deployment of first alarm responding
personnel and equipment arrive at the scene within 5:17 minutes/seconds of
response time.
3. Response time of the first-arriving unit with a first responder (BLS) or higher
level capability to an emergency medical incident
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 5:15 for the arrival of the first emergency medical unit with
appropriately trained personnel on board (BLS) to an emergency medical
incident, which the department should meet 90% of the time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did not
meet the response time objective 90% of the time; 90% of emergency medical
incidents had the first-arriving first responder (BLS) arrive at the scene within
5:22 minutes/seconds of response time.
4. Response time for the arrival of an advanced life support (two Paramedics) unit
to an emergency medical incident.
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 6:45 for the arrival of an advanced life support unit with
appropriately trained personnel (two Paramedics) on board to an ALS
emergency medical incident, which the department should meet 90% of the
time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did not
meet the response time objective 90% of the time; 90% of emergency medical
incidents had the Advance Life Support (two Paramedics) unit arrive at the
scene within 6:56 minutes/seconds of response time.
5A1. Response time of the first-arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Hazardous Materials Operations level personnel on board to a
hazardous materials incident.
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 6:30 for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately trained
and equipped Hazardous Materials Operations level personnel on board to a
7
Packet Page 12 of 18
hazardous materials incident, which the department should meet 90% of the
time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did not
meet the response time objective 90% of the time. 90% of hazardous materials
incidents had trained and equipped Hazardous Materials Operations level
personnel arrive at the scene within 6:35 minutes/seconds of response time.
5A2. Response time of the first-arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Hazardous Materials Technician level personnel on board to a
hazardous materials incident.
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 12 minutes for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately
trained and equipped Hazardous Materials Technician level personnel on
board to a hazardous materials incident, which the department should meet
90% of the time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: No reportable incidents.
5B1. Response time of the first-arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Technical Rescue Operations level personnel on board to a technical
rescue incident.
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 6:30 for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately trained
and equipped Technical Rescue Operations level personnel on board to a
technical rescue incident, which the department should meet 90% of the time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did
meet the response time objective 90% of the time; 90% of technical rescue
incidents had trained and equipped Technical Rescue Operations level
personnel arrive at the scene within 5:32 minutes/seconds of response time.
5B2. Response time of the first-arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Technical Rescue Technician level personnel on board to a technical
rescue incident.
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 12 minutes for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately
trained and equipped Technical Rescue Technician level personnel on board to
a technical rescue incident, which the department should meet 90% of the time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: No reportable Incidents.
6. Response time of the first-arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Marine Rescue and Firefighting personnel on board to a marine
incident.
Response Time Standard: The Fire Department has adopted a response/travel
time standard of 6:30 for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately trained
8
Packet Page 13 of 18
and equipped Marine Rescue and Firefighting personnel on board to a marine
incident, which the department should meet 90% of the time.
Actual Department Comparison for the Year 2007: The Fire Department did not
meet the response time objective 90% of the time; 90% of Marine incidents had
trained and equipped firefighting personnel arrived at the scene within 6:34
minutes/seconds of response time.
.
9
Packet Page 14 of 18
SECTION 4
COUNCIL-ADOPTED STANDARDS NOT MET
SHB 1756 requires an explanation when Council-adopted standards are not met, the
predictable consequences of failing to meet the adopted standards, the steps necessary
to correct deficiencies in order to achieve compliance. The seven performance
standards not met are described below:
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS NOT MET
Of 11 Council-adopted performance standards, two were met, seven were not met, and
two standards had no reportable incidents to evaluate.
1. Turnout time for all emergency incidents
Established: 2:45 Minutes/Seconds
Actual: 2:46 Minutes/ Seconds
Discrepancy: :01 Seconds
2A. Response time off the first-arriving Engine Company to a fire suppression
incident
Established: 6:30 Minutes/Seconds
Actual: 6:48 Minutes/Seconds
Discrepancy: :18 Seconds
2B. Response time for the deployment of full first alarm assignment to a residential fire
suppression incident
Established: 7:45 Minutes/Seconds
Actual: 9:20 Minutes/Seconds
Discrepancy: 1:35 Minutes/Seconds
3. Response time of the first-arriving unit with a first responder (BLS) or higher level
capability to an emergency medical incident
Established: 5:15 Minutes/Seconds
Actual: 5:22 Minutes/Seconds
Discrepancy: :07 Seconds
4. Response time for the arrival of an advanced life support (two Paramedics) unit to an
emergency medical incident.
Established: 6:45 Minutes/Seconds
Actual: 6:56 Minutes/Seconds
Discrepancy: :09 Seconds
10
Packet Page 15 of 18
5A1. Response time of the first-arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Hazardous Materials Operations level personnel on board to a hazardous
materials incident.
Established: 6:30 Minutes/Seconds
Actual: 6:35 Minutes/Seconds
Discrepancy: :05 Seconds
6. Response time of the first-arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and equipped
Marine Rescue and Firefighting personnel on board to a marine incident.
Established: 6:30 Minutes/Seconds
Actual: 6:34 Minutes/Seconds
Discrepancy: :04 Seconds
PREDICTABLE CONSEQUENCES
Predictable consequences for the deficient standards above include potential for greater
deterioration in the patient/victim’s medical condition, death, and increased property
loss. Although response times are measurable as a risk factor, other less measurable
inherent and varied risk factors also play a large role in outcomes, for example:
• Time lapse between the onset of the emergency, discovery, and reporting
• Dispatch center receipt of call and processing
• Distance traveled
• Weather and road conditions
• Access
• Out-of-service / unavailable status of emergency units due to training,
mechanical, or other emergencies
• Patient medical history and lifestyle
• Presence of bystanders able to assist
• Emergency devices that allow bystanders to assist
• Built-in fire detection and protection equipment
• Type of construction
• Square footage
• Fire load
• Building condition
The list of variables that directly and indirectly influence the outcome of a specific
emergency incident are not only numerous but come in various gradations and degrees.
Despite various factors that affect outcomes that are outside the control of emergency
responders, response times are one significant factor in the medical chain-of-survival
and structure fire time-temperature curve that governments can affect.
Predictable consequences in six of seven unmet standards above are difficult to predict
because the time differences of between one and 18 seconds constitute a deficiency
spread that can be considered nebulous. Also, when working with a 90th percentile, only
10 percent of the emergency calls fail to meet the time standards. At best, a mild
11
Packet Page 16 of 18
increase in property loss could occur on fire-related responses, and a delay in treatment
for medically-related incidents may occur.
The 2B standard with the 1:35 second deficiency – Response time for the
deployment of full first alarm assignment to a residential fire suppression incident – is
attributable to the arrival of automatic aid units from other fire service jurisdictions and
beyond practical control of the Edmonds Fire Department.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
The following is a list of actions currently underway in the Department and
recommendations for City Council consideration at the appropriate time to improve
overall performance:
o Paging: Evaluation of the SNOCOM notification system is being performed and
appropriate changes will be recommended. The Department continues to look
at new technology that allows personnel to be notified of emergency incidents in
shorter periods of time, or that may be closer to the incident.
o MDCs: Mobile data computers have been purchased and are being used on a
regular basis. This equipment allows the Department to get more accurate
travel time data as the en route time is not reliant on a SNOCOM Dispatcher.
o Training: Training is primarily being performed at Station 17, the most central
fire station in the City. This has been helpful with regard to responding units, but
more must be done. The only way to combat extended response times caused
by training is to keep the assets in its first-due response area. Technology
solutions with the City Information Technology Division and partnership with
Edmonds Community College are being explored for possible benefits.
o Critical Data Evaluation: Data continues to be scrutinized for possible response
time benefits to include determining whether or not current ¼ mile by ¼ mile
grids are assigned to the fire station that can respond the fastest. The
Department is also evaluating whether the current deployment of the Medic Unit
from Fire Station 17 is the optimal available location. Changes will be made if
data supports a decrease in response times for this resource.
o Station Location: Station Location is the mostly costly change for the City but
provides the most significant response time benefit. Currently, all three fire
stations are not located in optimal response locations. Site determination for a
training facility with enough room for a new fire station would create a win-win
for both Firefighter training and response location. Initial evaluation of the data
suggests the most feasible location for a replacement Station 20 (constructed in
1952) is a site near Highway 99 at 228th Street. The second replacement choice
is to move Station 17 closer to 212th Street SW and 84th Avenue W (Five
Corners).
12
Packet Page 17 of 18
AM-1653 3.B.
Anti-idling Signs
City Council Committee Meetings
Date:07/08/2008
Submitted By:Jana Spellman, City Council
Submitted For:Councilmember Bernheim Time:10 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Committee:Public Safety
Information
Subject Title
Anti-idling signs.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
N/A
Previous Council Action
Councilmember Bernheim brought an anti-idling ordinance before the Public Safety Committee
on April 8, 2008. The Committee suggested that a public education program be started as the
anti-idling ordinance might prove too cumbersome to enforce.
Narrative
Councilmember Bernheim asked that this item be placed on tonight's agenda to ask the Committee
to view the anti-idling educational signs he has from the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to find
out if they are suitable for placement in the City's right-of-way.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 01:30 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 07/02/2008 01:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 07/02/2008 01:51 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana
Spellman
Started On: 07/02/2008 12:11
PM
Final Approval Date: 07/02/2008
Packet Page 18 of 18