Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-04-22 - City Commission Workshop Meeting MinutesCITY OF TAMARAC CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MONDAY, APRIL 22, 1996 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Abramowitz called the Workshop to order on Monday, April 22,1996, at 9:30 A.M. in Conference Room #1 of Tamarac, City Hall, 7525 Northwest 88th Avenue, Tamarac, Florida. PRESENT: Mayor Norman Abramowitz Vice Mayor Larry Mishkin Commissioner Sharon Machek Commissioner John E. McKaye Commissioner Joseph Schreiber ALSO PRESENT: Robert S. Noe, Jr., City Manager Mitchell S. Kraft, City Attorney Dina M. McDermott, Assistant City Manager Stanley Hawthorne, Finance Director Phyllis Polikoff, Office Specialist Tape 1 1. 1995 Audit T Madsen, Sapp, Mena, Rodriguez and Co. Tom Evans of the Auding firm discussed the audit and thanked the Finance Department for their assistance. He said Tamarac complied with all accounting standards and the DMG study and job reviews in his recommendations were implemented. Discussion followed on the catastrophic insurance reserve fund. 2. Emergency Medical Services Mr. Noe referred to his April 19, 1996 letter (Attachment 1), negotiations with Broward County, Tamarac's Fire Department, Medics Ambulance and Lifefleet, private Advance Life Support, first responder and response time. Tape 2 He discussed emergency calls, the need for more Firefighter/Paramedics, supervisors, City Commission Workshop April 22, 1996 Page 2 additional ambulances, subscription costs for services, proposed revenue and recommended the City contract with Medics Ambulance. Discussion followed on Medics' violations and audit, Tamarac's lawsuit and non -ad valorem assessments. There were additional comments regarding a third ambulance used as backup, contradicting statements made by Broward County's Attorney and Administrator and new Firefighter/Paramedics would not be trained by October 1, 1996. Tape 3 Mr. Noe said Lifefleet could not contract with Tamarac and discussion continued on subscription costs and zoning integrity. 3. Announcement of Vacancies on Redistricting Committee Mayor Abramowitz announced the vacancies and said there were 28 people in District 4. Comm. Machek said the deadline for appointments was April 26 and the announcement would be made on Wednesday, April 24. 4. Private Property Rights - Margate City Commission Mayor Abramowitz recommended reviewing Margate's Resolution 8037 (Attachment 2) for discussion at the next Commission Workshop. 5, Referendum Issues - Charter Mayor Abramowitz suggested reviewing the Ordinances for discussion at the next Commission Workshop. Comm. Schreiber commented on Sections 2-272 and 2-274 of the Code and City Attorney Kraft said he would review and advise. 6. Computer Training - Dates Mr. Noe requested dates and times for computer training with Glenda Christian and Comm. Machek suggested the sessions be held in Conference Room #1 immediately following the next Workshop. 1 City Commission Workshop April 22, 1996 Page 3 With no further discussion, Mayor Abramowitz Adjourned the Workshop at 11:00 a.m. Carol A. Evans, CIVIC City Clerk 1 �OF TA"'q� OR% Robert S. Noe, Jr. City Manager City of Tamarac 7525 N.W. 88th Avenue, Tamarac. Florida 33321-2401 Telephone: (954) 724-1230 • Facsimile (954) 724-2454 April 19, 1996 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission 7525 N.W. 88th Avenue Tamarac, Florida 33321-2401 Mr. Mayor and Members of the Commission: Ile V s�o,4 After Broward County announced that the provision of emergency medical services (EMS) would be substantially changed, the City began a process to determine how the City should proceed. We have examined joining the County Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU), having the City provide the entire EMS function, contracting with a private provider the emergency transport element, and dividing advanced life support (ALS) 1 st responder and ALS transport between the City Fire Department and a private provider. I believe that the most cost effective approach balances cost with quality and level of service. This balance has been the most prominent factor in evaluating the RFP responses received from potential providers and the negotiations that occurred later. As best I can determine, the most cost effective approach at this time combines City first responder and ALS transport units with units from the private sector. The approach that I am recommending allows the City to offset some of the costs of addressing existing Fire Department staffing needs, identified by the Fire Chief, with emergency transport revenue. By adding the thirteen positions with the FY 96 Midyear Budget Amendment, the Fire Department's staffing deficiencies have been addressed and the capacity added to operate two ALS emergency transport units. The estimated annualized cost of these changes is $890,000 which will be partially offset by $400,000 in revenue collected by a third party on behalf of the City. Thus, the City will be able to respond to the majority of emergency medical calls in Tamarac. In my judgment, the remaining number of emergency medical calls (approximately 1,200 out of 7,000) are not sufficient to warrant an additional fire department unit at this time. Further, the private sector is able to provide the equivalent of this unit at no cost to the City with no discernable loss in quality or level of service. For the past several months, we have negotiated with Medics Ambulance Service and LifeFleet Atlantic Ambulance, after determining that the Broward County proposal is the most expensive one being offered. Based on our discussions with the two potential providers, LifeFleet and Medics, I believe both are capable of providing Equal Opportunity Employer 4 4k- The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Commission Page 2 April 19, 1996 the required supplemental emergency medical service to Tamarac. Both providers offer supplemental service at no cost to the City. Both providers have similar units, staffed with similarly trained and experienced personnel, have agreed to post $100,000 cash performance bonds, appear to be financially sound, and have committed to operate according to City requirements. The only quantifiable difference directly related to quality is that LifeFleet is unable to commit to a six minute response time 90% of the time (fractal measurement) for first responder calls. The two companies have some differences that staff has been unable to quantify to my satisfaction, but do deserve some mention. LifeFleet is the largest ambulance company in Florida and a subsidiary of one of the largest ambulance companies in the United States. By contrast, Medics is a locally owned operation that serves mainly Broward County. Historically, LifeFleet has no prior dealings with the City, whereas Medics has. In the past three years LifeFleet has not had any reported regulatory violations whereas Medics has had reported incidents of sub -par performance in Palm Beach County and OSHA violations related to exposure to blood borne pathogens (please see attached memo from the Finance and Policy Officer). Medics is Broward County's designated ambulance provider for the Tamarac area, which may provide them with some geographical advantage. One remaining difference of note is that Medics has offered to cover City residents with a subscription service that will cover out-of-pocket ambulance transport costs for those who subscribe to this program. The rates are still being negotiated but currently range from $15 to $50 annually, depending on the number of people covered. Medics estimates approximately $250,000 in revenue from this service, part of which is proposed to be used to offset the debt service on two City owned ambulances. This program has not been approved by the state insurance commission and if approved, there is a chance the program may not be successful. At this date, due to the uncertainty surrounding this program, I recommend the City not depend on any financial contribution from this service. If it is partially successful, the first funds received will support the expenses of the program. As this letter goes to print, there is a fundamental disagreement about a very important component. Some interpret actions by the Broward County Commission as mandating "zone integrity." If true, the City must contract with Medics. Broward County staff have held that the City is free to contract with any ambulance company, according to the attached letter from Assistant County Attorney, Patrice Eichen. Attached is a copy of a portion of the agreement between the ambulance companies and the County. Reading this and Ms. Eichen's letter delineates the dispute. In addition, Mr. Cohen of Medics, has told me that his interpretation is that the City must contract with him and Mr. Eismann of LifeFleet has told me that he cannot contract with the City. A final The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Commission Page 3 April 19, 1996 determination has not been received from Broward County. Therefore, in conclusion, if the choice is reduced to Medics and LifeFleet, the important factors are these: 1) both will provide the service we want - ALS 1 st responder to the 1,200 plus calls each year and ensuing ALS transport - at no cost to the City, relying on what they collect through insurance payments; 2) LifeFleet has not had the regulatory problems that Medics has had and LifeFleet is a larger company with the corresponding greater resources; 3) The City had to sue Medics over a prior agreement and collected a $60,000 settlement; 4) Medics is offering a subscription service, which, if successful, will assist in paying for two City ambulances; if unsuccessful, the City will be exactly where it would be if we contracted with LifeFleet - the City purchasing the ambulances; 5) During my two plus years as Tamarac City Manager, I have received less than five complaints about Medics, and, notwithstanding problems they have had in Palm Beach County, no similar problems have been reported to me. Therefore, it becomes a choice between 1) selecting a small, family owned company that has had several documented violations in Palm Beach County and with OSHA and who is attempting to sell a subscription program and thereby assist the City in paying for two ambulances and 2) a larger, more substantial company with only a few documented violations, without the subscription program and therefore, no offer of assistance with paying for two ambulances. Based on all of this, my recommendation is to select Medics. The EMS process has been long, emotional, and shifting. The Director of Finance, Stanley Hawthorne, and Finance and Policy Officer, Tim Hemstreet, have provided valuable analytical and staff assistance throughout the process. Mr. Hemstreet rode a shift with Medics, LifeFleet, and the City Fire Department, and is a resident staff expert on EMS. We have been assisted substantially by Fire Chief Jim Budzinski, particularly as the options were examined. They do not necessarily agree with my recommendation, but they are a very effective team on this issue. We all look forward to an in depth discussion of this issue with you. Very truly yours, Robert S. Noe, Jr. attachments C: City Attorney Fire Chief Director of Finance �1� 6 c%wm� 1+7 4al7--. A City of Tamarac Emergency Medical Services Proposals - Request for Proposals (RFP) Responses _ September 1995 Full Service LifeFleet Medics Fire MSBU Department Cost to City $825,000 $359,000 $595,523 $1,200,000 to $3,400,000 Transport Only LifeFleet Medics Fire MSBU Department Cost to City $0 ($90,000) $595,523 $1,200,000 • City's goal is a quality service at the lowest price • Level of Service = Response Time (6 minutes/1st response and 10 minutes/transport) • City estimated transport revenue at $600,000 for 3 units • County MSBU is a separate taxing unit - no direct cost to City • RFP responses considered different levels of service, making comparisons difficult Current Proposals (Negotiations) - Two City Units With Private Sector Support Public/Private Partnership LifeFleet Medics Fire County Department (Interlocal) Cost to City I $0 $0 $490,000 $1,200,000* 0 LifeFleet proposal meets City requirements • Medics proposal meets City requirements and offers subscription program which should aid in debt service payments on ambulances Both proposals consider non -dedicated units which would supplement Fire Department capabilities • City estimates $400,000 in transport revenue for 2 full-time units • City may not join MSBU until FY 98, but can enter into an interlocal agreement for County services for FY 97 if desired "The actual County cost for this scenario may be lower, based on the City Fire Department providing the majority of transport services. f-; x City of Tamarac Emergency Transport Implementation - 2 Units Estimated Revenues and Expenses FY 1997 Revenues: Emergency Transport $400,000 City projection based on 2 units with 3rd party collection Appropriations: Total Personal Services: $404,000 9 Firefighter/Paramedics $302,000 4 Managerial Positions Total Operating Expenses: $109,000 Expenses associated with emergency transport Total Capital Outlay: $75,000 Five Year lease/purchase payment on three ambulance units which spreads out potential cash payment of $327,000 Total Appropriations: $890,000 Net Cost ($490,000) " Expenses of $890,000 minus Revenues of $400,000 "This amount is proposed to be offset by an EMS assessment for FY 97. 1 Medics Subscription Program - Detail All items are still subject to negotiation Proposed Rates - $15 per person, $25 per couple, $35 per household Medics Estimates $250,000 in annual revenues (Avg. Subscription = $25) - of this amount the City would receive $70,000 in revenue and $50,000 for ambulance debt service Medics proposes the following breakdown of the $250,000 - • First 1/3 to Medics - $83,333 - Administrative Costs - Debt Service on Two City Ambulances - Annual Audit of Subscription Program • Second 2/3 to be Split Between City and Medics - $116,667 - Coverage for Nonemergency Transports to Medics - $50,000 - Coverage for Emergency Transports to Medics - $46,667 - Coverage for Emergency Transports to City - $70,000 1 1 1 1 10-1�1h-r city Manager Mayor Arthur J. Bross ,7F M 9 = j(ZxI q6 ck �ii0�5`i Leonard Golub Deputy City Manager vice Mayor Frank 6.Talenco ,0 417-/t6�14ICN,r George Mudd _ ' 'CRy'Attorttey Commissioners � • ' * = Eugine M. Steinteld Mitch Anton DonovanQ��►�� R D F F City ClarkPam Shy ey J. Baughman Joseph Varsallone - C'Tttu of fflttrgatz, 7foribra March 25, 1996 yc� � ca TO: All Broward County City Clerks FROM: Shirley J. Baughman, CMC, City Clerk RE: Margate Resolution No. 8037 - Private Property Rights The enclosed Resolution expressing opposition to proposed constitutional amendment SJR 762, that would require government to pay for the fair market value loss of real property resulting from a govemmental action or regulation, was approved by the Margate City Commission on March 20, 1996. Please forward a copy of our Resolution to your Commission or Council members. Their consideration and support of the Resolution would be appreciated. Shirley J. Baughm MC City Clerk 5790 MARQATE DOULEVARA MARGATE, FLORIDA 33063 • TELEPHONE (305) 972-64541 FACSIMILE (305) 988.2982 x� 1 CITY OF MARGATE, FLORIDA RESOLUTION NO. 8037 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MARGATE, FLORIDA, EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, SJR 762, REGARDING PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS. WHEREAS, Senator Charles Williams has proposed legislation, SJR 762, for an amendment to the Florida Constitution, which would require government to pay for the loss in fair market value to part or all of real property resulting from a governmental action or regulation; and WHEREAS, the proposed legislation, if adopted, could impose a severe financial burden on local governments in the State of Florida; and WHEREAS, the proposed legislation, if adopted, could restrict the ability of communities to regulate the use of lands in the best interests of the public health, safety and welfare as well as in the interests of environmental protection; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MARGATE, FLORIDA: SECTION 1: That the foregoing preamble is hereby ratified and confirmed as true and correct by the City Commission of the City of Margate, Florida. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 8037 SECTION 2: That the City Commission of the City of Margate, Florida hereby expresses its opposition to proposed SJR 762 and strongly urges the members of the Broward County Legislative Delegation to vote against the adoption of such a measure. SECTION 3: That a copy of this Resolution shall be forwarded to all members of the Broward County Legislative Delegation, the Board of County Commissioners and all municipalities in Broward County. SECTION 4: That this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS__2MILday of MARCH 1996. ATTEST: CIT L ;YOR AR J. BROSS RECORD OF VOTE Donovan NO Anton Talerico AYE _ Bross AYE 1