By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
Davis, CA – The Davis City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to approve the purchase of the ladder truck and the staffing Option 3, but many council members did so reluctantly—not because they opposed the ladder truck and new staffing, but because they would have preferred the greater staffing option of Option 2.
Option 2 would have added six new firefighters, two per shift, whereas Option 3 ads three new firefighters, one per shift for an estimated cost of nearly $700,000 per year in staffing in addition to the $2 million or so purchase of the apparatus itself from safety impact funds.
The first three years would be presumably paid for out of the ARP (American Rescue Plan) funding but then, after year three, the city would need to use General Funds unless they find an 
alternative source.
Staff recommended Option 3 even though it thought Option 2 “strikes the best balance between staffing levels and budget considerations.”
Staff argued for “pursuing Option 3 with the knowledge that Option 2 could be added at a later date after the economic recovery from COVID is clearer, and after the revenue alternatives analysis noted above is complete.”
“I’m really concerned about going with this Option 3,” said Councilmember Will Arnold. “I think it sort of on paper looks like it’s saving money, but it has a lot of these potential negative effects.”
Councilmember Dan Carson noted that we need to be prudent about making a new fiscal commitment at this time.
“We have this COVID infection exploding,” he said. “Again, we have the campus having delayed its return to town, and we don’t know for sure there won’t be further delays that could have a very significant impact fiscally on our city and on our downtown.”
City Manager Mike Webb responded, “What we’ve done in the staff report is say basically that by starting at the three staff person option, or Option 3, there’s always the ability to ramp up.”
He added, “it’s awfully difficult to go the other way, which is to start on the higher end of the staffing spectrum and work down if we needed to be responsive via budgetary reductions or cuts in some way.”
Mayor Gloria Partida said, “I do also think that we need to be a little cautious as far as the amount that we are putting out right now. So I’m okay with the Option 3.”
“I’m really supportive of us proceeding with the aerial ladder truck,” Vice Mayor Frerichs said. “I see it as an insurance policy. I think we increasingly have seen development of certainly three-but (also) five-, six-seven-story buildings in the past couple of years.”
He added, “We’ve seen need for the UC Davis ladder truck to assist structure fires, in this case at the University Retirement Community and the four-story buildings there.”
Frerichs noted, “I think that seems to be a likely scenario that’s increasing in the future.”
Of the options, he was supportive of Option 3.
“I think it’s prudent for us to address this issue sort of one bite of the apple at a time,” he said. “There’s no question in my mind that the current personnel at Davis fire department has been working a lot, especially a huge amount of overtime. This has been an extremely difficult time for everybody throughout the pandemic and I do think that there’s a need for us to look at the issues around staffing.”
Dan Carson said he was in agreement with Councilmember Frerichs.
“I think that the three-part motion here is fiscally responsible and it strikes a balance,” he said. “Part of the reason we are out to rezone downtown is so that it becomes the economic powerhouse for this community that we want as well as a place for infill housing that will be environmentally sustainable.”
He said, “If we’re going to go up to seven stories as it’s quite possible with this plan, we do have an obligation to make sure that we have the equipment to do so safely.”
He reiterated it was his preference to collaborate with UC Davis on this, “but they have not to this point been willing to join hands with us in this effort.”
Will Arnold added, “I’ve made my opinions on the staffing pretty clear, I’m not comfortable with Option 3. I think it only sort of entrenches our issues that we’ve having with overtaxing our firefighters and incurring more overtime than I think its sustainable.”
Will Arnold put a separate motion that separated the Option 3 from the rest of the motion, that motion carried unanimously and then the motion for Option 3 passed 4-1 with Arnold opposing it.
So what are the actual numbers? How many times per year has the UCD ladder truck actually been needed for the city of Davis?
We previously reported 115 times in the full year of 2020
How many of those were for actual fires?
Cats in a tree?
Etc…
Probably not a lot of cats, but your point isn’t wrong
Seems like you’re not telling us something… could it be that many of those 115 calls for a ladder truck in 2020 were not warranted? I note that your picture does not include the ladder deployed. Could those calls have been unwarranted (like 1 call for a ladder truck every three days?), and a run-up to get more ‘tools’ and personnel?
As Ron G pointed out, perhaps…
I’m a skeptic on this… might be a true need, might not… I am far from convinced (need for ladder truck and additional personnel), particularly when anything built recently, with more stringent building/fire codes, have sprinklers, etc., for both life safety and building/structural safety…
“Seems like you’re not telling us something… could it be that many of those 115 calls for a ladder truck in 2020 were not warranted?”
The data provided was not sufficient to reach that conclusion
Nice pay if you can get the job…
Why did the Council not just replace the existing smaller downtown truck with this ladder truck. This would have given them the ladder truck they (questionably) say they so deperately need but you would save hiring three new fire persons costing a minumum of $700,000/year.
Look at the Council tape when Gloria Partida asked the Fire Chief if the smaller truck still at Station 31 would generally be used for most all downtown call-outs because it is more manueverable, then what are the three firepersons assigned to the ladder truck still sitting at the station doing during that downtime. It was comical because the Fire Chief did almost everything he could to avoid the question and used every double-speak cliche possible to avoid just saying, “not much at all”.
So now combined with with UC Davis the greater Davis Community will have two ladder trucks. I wonder how many communities with the combined populations of Davis and UC Davis have two ladder trucks?
While David was all worried about the cops the firefighters climbed back in the saddle riding herd on the CC.
About ARP funding… I am confused. Someone from Staff or Council said that ARP funding would definitely not be used for any of this, and that the $$$ was coming from other sources with a narrow intended use for safety. Or were they just referring to one part (e.g. the truck) and not the other (ongoing staff costs)??
Image: Split image, with one side of City Council posed with ladder truck, and other side of hundreds of disproportionately lower-income tenants who live in housing without carbon monoxide detectors, fire blankets (for stove fires) and in-unit fire extinguishers.
I don’t know….this isn’t my area of expertise. But correct me if I’m wrong but the city isn’t in the best of financial shape….so now may not be the time to commit to this kind of thing? This may sound off the wall……how about as a stop gap measure requiring all new multi story buildings to have significant fire escape ladders in place (more so than they already do)?
“But correct me if I’m wrong but the city isn’t in the best of financial shape….so now may not be the time to commit to this kind of thing? ”
You’re not wrong.
New(er) buildings and complexes* have dry standpipe-type devices in front of buildings – some of which are not directly accessible by vehicles – inside on all floors in multiple locations, fireproof doors (as long as tenants don’t prop them open) and other features to prevent, warn about and suppress fires. Firefighters can rush in with hoses and attach them immediately to a high pressure water supply… a ladder truck takes some time to come online and doesn’t directly reach interior areas, though it’s useful when fires progress to more challenging levels.
Imagine a new fire code that would require landlords to spend a lot of money on fire safety in certain older buildings.
* My complex was built in the 1970’s and has dry standpipes everywhere inside the grounds. I am not sure that these were mandated at the time, or were later retrofits.
I’m curious, what does UCD pay their firefighters?
Interesting question, but there are two kinds…
Student firefighters… their compensation is in reduced tuition, fees (both hard to quantify), lodging/meals hard to quantify), stipends (actual pay and/or benefits…), and resume value (hard to quantify)
“Career” firefighters… definite, quantifiable salary/benefits… supposedly more easy to quantify…
Beware (given the two) statistics on ‘median’ or ‘average’ reports as to “pay”… you could easily be mislead… apples and aardvarks… suggest you focus your inquiry as to “career”… but can give you a hint… one of the main reasons for not combining the two, was the discrepancy between “career FF’s” comparing UCD folk and City folk… there were several other ‘main reasons’… compensation was maybe 40% of the “mix”… a guesstimate, to be sure…
But valid question, just make sure HOW it is asked, understanding the variables… if it gets answered… I suspect it will not be, in a meaningful way, particularly given ‘politics’…
Spec 1: $30.08 – $36.35 per hour.
Spec 2: $33.37 – $38/65 per hour.
Captain: $54.12 – $65.80 per hour.
https://hr.ucdavis.edu/departments/compensation/salary-scales
Search for “fire”.
Thanks Don, that seems like a Hell of a lot less than Davis is paying its firefighters. If UC DAVIS can staff firefighters at that rate of pay why can’t the city of Davis?
Remember the diff between salary, and total comp… even given that, you may have a good point… just remember the differences…
Just like the two “social worker” positions, or whatever they’re called.
Given what this money is being spent on, one might conclude that there’s no connection whatsoever regarding the reason that this money was supposedly made available to cities. Must be almost no requirements to prove any connection. Seems to be almost a blank, but temporary check given to cities.
Perhaps it was an enormous mistake to give this money to cities in the first place. I guess we’ll see, in three years (and every year thereafter).
I’m also starting to think the same is true regarding the infrastructure bill, given that some now envision it as a way to further subsidize development.
Those are three different issues, with no connection between them.
I wonder if the “powerhouse” will pay the ongoing costs, after three years? The vast majority of Davis has no need for a ladder truck.
Give a city “free money”, and they’ll immediately find a way to use it to subsidize development.
How irresponsible is it, to use temporary money to fund permanent positions?
Doesn’t the city already have a claimed “fiscal crisis”? Roads need paving, etc.? Or, was that all just a fabrication (again, as a justification to support development proposals)?
Should Davis spend millions of dollars on a ladder fire truck? – The Davisite
Thanks Ron. From the article you posted:
I guess that should say less than once/per month.
And, at no cost to the city.
Note the ability to call-in other nearby districts (as needed), as well.
Oh, well – too late now. Let’s hope that the “economic powerhouse” (downtown redevelopment) takes care of all of this, I guess. Of course, that’s what’s creating additional need in the first place. (And, downtown was ALREADY close to UCD’s fire department, I assume.)
In general, it’s always a great idea to create expense, and THEN look for ways to cover it. Don’t you think? 🙂
There’s an almost surreal disconnect here. Like everyone here, and everyone in town I’ve talked to about this issue, are against spending for the ladder truck.
Everyone on the City council are for it.
Does getting elected to City office change one’s views on capital spending for fire equipment, like is there scientific evidence to explain this?
Is that not an argument that UCD ladder deployment is working?
The staffing increase seems like a wise idea if overtime reduction would more than pay for the difference.
But is some of the overtime due to unnecessary truck deployment (and therefore multiple staff) to medical calls?
Robb Davis, back in the day, proposed a smaller van with less deployed personnel for medical calls to save money. One City councilperson who didn’t seem to get fire department spending syndrome (FDSS) when elected.
One problem is that only one person spoke out against the ladder truck, had ten people done it, they might have re-thought it.
I expect CC folk not to just wet their finger and see where the wind is blowing (particularly not on one (or ant given) Tuesday evening!)…
I vote for folk that have sense and principles, and mindful of those in the community (voters or not)… not folk looking for political affirmations… steps toward ‘higher office’
Silly me…
Particularly when my CC vote is constrained to one choice every 4 years… unless I try to promote candidates in other districts with money infusions (that would be a good thing, right?)
Yet, David, you supported not only district elections (to increase your view of “ideal” ‘representation’), but also the JeRkeD measures (though you’ve waffled a bit… but not decisively, even in the waffle)… you should run for CC… you have all the qualifications… except that you’re ostensibly, white, male, and heterosexual… other than that, you can wet your finger with the best of them!
To be fair, DG did recently renounce his support of district elections.
To be fair…
Only when he realized it was going 180 degrees against his premises… live, err, repent, grow… all good…
Wait a second – we tried something (we were compelled to do so by the way), it didn’t work as designed, so I changed my mind. How irrational of me.
One election is too small a sample to know if it is working or not.