CC Minutes - 01/26/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Pap6 asked the City Manager to comment on the Valley River Fire Station and whether funding would be allocated to restore the engine company. City Manager Taylor responded that it would be addressed in the Budget Committee process. He affirmed that it was part of the department's strategy to improve the level of service. Mr. Pap6 called the council's attention to page 82, which discussed the Valley River Station. Mr. Papd asked if the Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighters (ARFF) was included in the graphs on pages 28 and 29. Chief Obadal affirmed that ARFF was included. In response to a question from Mr. Papd, she stated that the numbers could be separated out. In response to another question from Mr. Papd, Chief Obadal explained that the Federal Aviation Admini- stration (FAA) required the ARFF firefighters to remain at the airport when it is open for commercial flights and did not allow them to supplement other fire resources. Ms. Ortiz thanked staff for the document. She asked if it included all levels of transport. Chief Obadal replied that it only included Code 3 transports. Chief Tallon stated, in response to another question from Ms. Ortiz, that different jurisdictions had different levels of EMS, but they could all apply for accreditation. He clarified that a jurisdiction either contracted with a transport service or had its own ambulances, but the call response time was the same. Ms. Taylor was alarmed by the suggestion that goals should be revised. She acknowledged that demand had exceeded resources and, as such, would accept the report but would not support a motion to approve it. She averred that City policies exacerbated the problem by encouraging sprawl and opined that this contributed to the slower response time. Chief Tallon reiterated that accepting the document would meet the intent of the application. Ms. Bettman indicated she would amend the motion, when it was placed on the table, so that it indicated the council ~acknowledged receipt of the report" rather than ~accepted it." She did not wish to allow anyone to infer that the City Council embraced these goals. She did not blame the department and, in fact, thought the department was excellent. She called it a City Council and organizational issue of resources. She felt the organization had campaigned relentlessly for road maintenance funds and asked why there was not a similar relentless advocacy for improved response times. She supported most of the recommendations in the document. She declared she would be looking for funding mechanisms to improve funding for the department and to restore the engine company to Station 9 in the Valley River area. Ms. Bettman pointed out that there were now goals for ambulance transport without the call processing time that seemed long, such as ten minutes 85 percent of the time in Zone 1 and 20 minutes 85 percent of the time in Zone 2. She felt those goals needed revision. Chief Obadal responded that those times and goals were set by Lane County and not the Eugene Fire/EMS Department. Mr. Kelly clarified that the all incident goals and the structure fire goals were set by the City. He commented that he could not underscore enough that the department was great. He acknowledged there were not enough resources. He supported Ms. Bettman's language that indicated acknowledgement of receipt of the document. Mr. Pap6 recommended that the City Council look at the four-minute response time at its annual goal setting MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2005 Page 5 Work Session