City Manager Responds as Firefighters Picket in Front of City Hall

By Steve Pinkerton

Editor’s note:  On September 10, 2013, firefighters’ union President Bobby Weist and two of his members explained to the Davis City Council their concerns about the major changes the department is undergoing under the control of non-firefighters.  They were joined by about a dozen members in the audience. Among their complaints was the amount of overtime.  Mr. Weist told Council, “we just went on a strike team, people were forced to work overtime prior to leaving on a strike team.  They went on a strike team, they were there for ten days, working 16 hours and when they came back, they had to come back to work.”

Prior to Tuesday’s City Council Meeting, Mr. Weist and about a dozen firefighters took to the streets complaining about staffing levels, calls for service, and overtime.  Davis City Manager Steve Pinkerton sent out a lengthy response to the complaints by the firefighters, in response as well to requests for clarification from the city council.  We have reprinted that response in its entirety.

On September 10, 2013, three members from Local 3494 addressed the City Council during the open comment section of the City Council meeting.  They expressed the following concerns relative to their justification for the “No Confidence” vote taken against the Police Chief and Assistant Police Chief:

1.      Members are working an excessive amount of overtime;

2.      The Boundary Drop between UC Davis and the City of Davis is not a true boundary drop with the closest engine responding;

3.      Reductions in staffing have reduced safety to the firefighters;

4.      The City declined to apply for a grant which would pay the full cost for additional firefighters; and

5.      The Fire Department needs to have a professional from the fire service administering operations.

Staff has also received a communication from Yolo County Supervisor, Jim Provenza expressing concern about the reduction in staffing in the Fire Department and potential unintended consequences from choosing to limit our participation in the statewide mutual aid system (email attached).

Response from City Manager Pinkerton

Overtime. As a preliminary matter, it may be helpful to know how overtime is calculated for our firefighters. Unlike the 40-hour week for employees who work a more standard 8-to-5 schedule, firefighters work 24-hour shifts and do not incur “legal” overtime under applicable wage and hour laws unless they actually work more than 204 hours in a 27 day period. Under the City’s contract with the firefighters, however, certain time off is counted as hours worked for purposes of paying “contract” overtime. In other words, if a firefighter uses paid vacation, or sick leave, or compensatory time off, those hours are counted towards the total “hours worked” during any 27-day period, and a firefighter may earn “contract” overtime, but not have actually been on shift for the number of hours that would trigger “legal” overtime. Our overtime records do not distinguish between the two kinds of overtime.

Excessive Overtime – The following chart shows the overtime usage (minus strike team overtime) for the past three fiscal years (based on data provided from Fire Department records):

It is clear that there was a significant increase in overtime in fiscal year 2012-2013.  There are several reasons for this increase.  At the beginning of the fiscal year, the number of personnel at the ranks of captain and firefighter II was reduced from forty-five (45) to forty-three (43) with the promotion of two captains to division chief.  Over the next six months the workforce was further reduced to thirty-six personnel with the promotion of one additional captain to division chief and the retirement of six personnel.

In addition to the reduction in personnel, sick leave usage increased from an average of 3.91 shifts per member in FY 2011-2012 to 4.53 shifts in FY 2012-2013; and, vacation usage increased from an average of 11.90 shifts per member in FY 2011-2012 to 15.93 shifts in FY 2012-2013.  This added over two thousand (2000) hours of leave time from the previous fiscal year even though the work force was reduced by nine (9) personnel.

Coupled with the increase in sick and vacation hours and the drop in personnel, there were a number of wildland fires throughout the state, resulting in a significant amount of strike team overtime in Fiscal Year 2012-2013.

The final component of the increased overtime in Fiscal Year 2012-2013 was the fact that the City Council voted to reduce minimum daily staffing from twelve to eleven in March, however, the actual implementation of the staffing change did not occur until July 8, 2013.  The staffing change resulted in allowing one assigned position per shift off on leave without having to hire back overtime.  Assuming at least one person off on leave per shift, the implementation of the staffing change relieved the overtime burden by twenty-four (24) hours per shift.  Over the course of a year, this will result in a reduction in overtime of eight thousand seven hundred and sixty (8760) hours.  If the staffing change had been in effect for the entire fiscal year of 2012-2013, the overtime usage would have been:

In 1999, prior to the addition of nine (9) personnel to address two-in; two-out, the Department allowed two personnel off on vacation per shift.  When the Department added the nine (9) personnel, they increased the number of personnel authorized to be off on vacation to three per shift.  In December of 2012, the Department completed the reduction of nine (9) personnel, back to 1999 levels, however, they continue to allow three personnel off on vacation per shift.  Reducing the number of personnel per shift allowed off on vacation back to two per shift will also alleviate the impact of working excessive overtime hours.

Strike Teams/Mutual Aid – Since participation in strike team response is not mandatory, the City can withdraw its name from the first call list for strike team response and request that they be used as a last resort.  In conversations between the Fire Department and the OES Area Coordinator, this has been accomplished as of September 11, 2013.  Supervisor Provenza expressed the following concern regarding this decision:

While in-county and local, immediate need requests are a necessary part of the system, personnel, equipment and callback are not reimbursable.  Strike Teams sent through the state mutual aid system, however, are 100% reimbursable for the deployed resources, and as a signatory to the State of California 5 Party Agreement and Master Mutual Aid Plan this would be our contribution to reciprocity for resource requests for large incidents involving East Davis and No Man’s Land area wildfires, and the greater Davis area.  In short, this is a mutual aid system in which you have to give to get.   I know we share the same concerns for public safety response and effective collaboration.

Choosing to change participation in our very effective state-wide mutual aid system from first call to immediate need, will not have any unintended consequences to  our larger community.  The Davis Fire Department has not removed itself from the State-wide Mutual Aid System.  The Department will continue to respond to in-county and immediate need requests, which is the primary focus of the state-wide mutual aid system. Therefore, it will not affect resource availability to address response to the larger fire threat to both agriculture and residential property.

All “campaign” fires begin with a request by the requesting agency for an immediate need response.  This can be in the form of a second or third alarm, or a five engine strike team.  In the case of a fire in the East Davis or No Man’s Land area, Davis Fire would be the requesting agency.  This request goes to the County’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) Area Coordinator.  The County’s OES Area Coordinator determines the need and also determines the closest resources to dispatch.  Once the immediate need resources are dispatched, the County OES Area Coordinator contacts the State OES representative for that area and begins the process of determining if additional resources need to be dispatched.

As a Fire Agency, the Davis Fire Department is part of the Master Mutual Aid Plan, of which response to requests for participation in strike team response is voluntary.  There are several agencies throughout the state who do not respond on strike teams for one reason or another.  There are no detrimental consequences for not responding on strike teams to the larger “campaign” fires.  The contribution to reciprocity resource requests for large incidents is the City’s response to immediate need calls for mutual aid, which the City is still participating in.  In short, the City is giving to the surrounding areas and there is no concern on the part of the Yolo County OES Area Coordinator to be able to address any requests by the Davis Fire Department for mutual aid resources.  The City also shares those same concerns for public safety response and effective collaboration.  The City also has concerns relative to the health and safety of its firefighters; that is why when faced with the concerns expressed by the members of Local 3494, the City took the necessary steps to alleviate their concerns.  The City did so with no negative impact on the State’s Master Mutual Aid System and with the full knowledge of the Yolo County OES Area Coordinator.

Boundary Drop – A full boundary drop, by definition, means that the closest available resource should be dispatched to all calls for service within the two jurisdictions. In reviewing the mapping and actual call times, it has been determined, that except for a few exceptions, the current structure of the first-in districts of the four stations results in the closest resource being dispatched to all calls.  Those exceptions are: 1) Primate Center on the UC Campus west of Highway 113 and the UC Airport, also west of Highway 113.  Due to the infrequency of responses to this area, and the fact that the UC Davis apparatus carries the necessary keys for access, it was recommending that the response protocols remain unchanged for these two addresses.

Other areas involved in the review of response times and mapping included the area northwest of the intersection of Anderson Road and Russell Boulevard; and, the campus buildings fronting A Street.  It was determined that the response times for Engine 31 and Engine 34 to the area northwest of the intersection of Anderson Road and Russell Boulevard were within fifteen seconds of each other.  Additionally, a review of response time data for the past three years relative to campus buildings fronting A Street revealed an average response time for UC units of two minutes and forty-five seconds.  There were only two incidents of Engine 31’s response to addresses on A Street resulting in an average response time of three minutes and nineteen seconds.

City Council has voted to consider relocation of Station 31 within three to five years.  Once this occurs, the response districts for Station 31 and Station 34 will change dramatically.  It was recommended that the current first-in response districts remain unchanged until that time.

The significant change that occurred was the utilization of Engine 34 as the back-up engine when Engine 31 is out-of-district or on a simultaneous call.  This reduces the number of times Engines 32 and 33 are assigned to a simultaneous call in Engine 31’s area and increases the amount of time Engines 32 and 33 remain in their respective first-in areas.

Firefighter Safety – The Eel Street fire that occurred on July 9, 2012 has been the incident used by Local 3494 to support the need for four person engine companies, the potential for unsafe fire operations, and the potential for increases in fire damage.  On July 26, 2013, a similar call occurred on Marina Circle.  This fire occurred after the staffing changes.  The following is a comparison of the two fires:

NOTE: Arrival times taken from actual Radio traffic.  Arrival times of the second through seventh for the Marina fire are longer primarily due to the longer travel distance and the time of call.  The Marina fire reached fifteen personnel on scene two and one-half minutes faster than the Eel fire even though there was a longer arrival time for the second through seventh due units.  If E34 had not been dispatched, complement of fifteen would not have been reached for an additional five minutes.

Similarities:

Differences:

It appears that firefighter safety has not been impacted by the staffing change.  Engine 34 was the second unit on scene, thereby allowing the first arriving engine to enter the structure.  Prior to the changes approved by City Council, Engine 34 was not dispatched on the first alarm.  The number of firefighters on scene has also increased, and firefighters now arrive sooner than before the staffing changes.

SAFER Grant – The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA annually allocate grant funds for the hiring of firefighters by local jurisdictions.  The program is very competitive with over 2500 agencies applying for funding and approximately 300 receiving awards annually.  The grant program’s highest priority is for the re-hiring of firefighters who have been laid off or retention of firefighters facing imminent layoffs.  However, the hiring of new firefighters is an eligible expense as well.  The grant funds pay for up to two years of a firefighter’s salary, and the agency is not allowed to reduce staffing during the two-year period.  The agency is not obligated to retain the firefighters hired under the grant once the grant period ends.

As with all grant opportunities, the City evaluated the time and effort needed to apply for the grant, the likelihood of success, and the legacy costs once the grant period expires.  After reviewing the grant requirements, it was determined that there was a very low likelihood for success and if successful, it was also unlikely that the City would have the financial resources to maintain the enhanced staffing beyond the grant period.

Fire Service Professional (Leadership) – As a result of the Fire Management Audit recommendation dated November 13, 2012, City Council directed City and UC staff to explore the feasibility of entering into a shared management oversight model for management of the City and University Fire Departments.  The presentation of staff’s exploration into the feasibility of shared management oversight is scheduled for the October 15, 2013 City Council meeting.  It is anticipated that City Council will direct staff to either take the necessary steps to implement a Joint Powers Agreement with UC Davis or begin the process of recruiting for a Fire Service Professional to lead the Davis Fire Department.  Based on Council direction, the earliest date for implementation of a JPA or appointment of a City Fire Chief is January 1, 2014.

Email from Yolo County Supervisor Jim Provenza:

On Sep 19, 2013, at 12:28 PM, “Jim Provenza” <Jim.Provenza@yolocounty.org>

As Yolo County Supervisor for District 4 and the East Davis and No Man’s Land Fire Protection District, I write to express my grave concern regarding the current delivery of fire service.  This includes the reduction in staffing at Davis Fire and the perhaps unintended consequences of choosing to end participation in our very effective statewide mutual aid system.  This may not only have consequences for our larger community, but in District 4, affects resource availability to address response to the larger fire threat to both agricultural and residential property, and possibly human lives in the interface and rural areas.

While in-county and local, immediate need requests are a necessary part of the system, personnel, equipment and callback are not reimbursable.  Strike Teams sent through the state mutual aid system, however, are 100% reimbursable for the deployed resources, and as a signatory to the State of California 5 Party Agreement  and Master Mutual Aid Plan this would be our contribution to reciprocity for resource requests for large incidents involving East Davis and No Man’s Land area wildfires, and the greater Davis area.  In short, this is a mutual aid system in which you have to give to get.   I know we share the same concerns for public safety response and effective collaboration.

It’s apparent that the absence of an experienced and respected professional Fire Chief to analyze and address these and other emerging issues compounds the problem.  I agree with the Council’s interest in taking action to move forward with the recruitment and hiring of a professional Fire Chief with subject matter expertise, and I hope to see you follow through with this decision with some urgency.   I do understand the pressures of fiscal constraints and multiple challenges, and I trust that you will ask the hard questions of your City staff to look beyond quick solutions that may ultimately cost much more. I remain concerned, as do many of my constituents, that further problems with public safety are looming.

As always, I look forward to your continued efforts on behalf of the community we serve,

-Jim

Jim Provenza

Yolo County Supervisor, District 4

Categories: