Speaker 4: Item 12 Communication from Councilman Al Austin, Councilwoman Geri Ship City Councilmember Steve Neal. Recommendation to request the City Manager to provide to the City Council a status report on the implementation of the Rapid Medic Deployment Staffing Model Report on the current status of the Fire Department Fiscal Year 14 budget and consider providing further direction to the City Manager regarding the implementation of the R&D model, including whether to delay the implementation until a full discussion can be had as part of fiscal year 15 budget process.
Speaker 3: Mr. AUSTIN.
Speaker 0: I'd like to turn it over to to staff to follow up on this simply back to us. Thank you, Mayor. Council members, as you know, we've been discussing the R&D model for a couple of years now. It was included in the fiscal year 14 budget and we have provided the Council with updates on the status of implementation on several occasions as requested. I'm going to have our Finance Director, John GROSS discuss the financial impacts on the fire department's budget. Then I will have Fire Chief Mike Terry discuss the public benefits of the R&D program. First, however, I want to show a slide that depicts the state of the industry in California regarding the staffing model . The Blue depicts the OEM's local agencies granting alternatives to two paramedics per ambulance mandate. There's basically 33 local EMS agencies in California. 29 have allowed this. There's four left that haven't. As you can see, the L.A. County and Orange County are significant in that picture where they've not allowed that at this time. I do want to note that the city of Los Angeles has recently commissioned a fire services study that indeed recommends that the City of Los Angeles Fire Department look at their staffing model. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to John GROSS for the finance. And thank you. Manager West. I'm going to start first with a little background on the current fiscal year for R&D fiscal year 14 Art. The R&D program is in the FY14 budget, but its start was delayed. We don't anticipate it to start until some time in July, but nonetheless I anticipate that the fire department will be within budget in fiscal year 14. Regardless of that delay, the fire department is able to be within the budget because the fire department used a little over $500,000 in one time funds originally intended for a start up for Engine eight and Rescue 12, which did not happen. And it's also able to be within budget because the fire department had one time salary savings due to attrition, a substantial amount of which will not reoccur in FY 15 the next fiscal year. And I'm going to switch to next fiscal year, the fiscal year that is going to be considered by city council in the next few months. That proposed fiscal year 15 budget will include the RMD program. One reason for that is that the city managers has a stated goal that the 515 budget will retain retained city services if the IMT program is eliminated for FY 15. Ambulance service costs would increase of necessity. There would then be need to be a reduction in other fire services to keep the fire department budget balanced. The R&D program costs about 1.4, saves about $1.4 million annually less, and it costs less than our current ambulance service by that same amount. If the city eliminated the RMD program in FY 15. The city would need to reduce the 515 fire department budget in other areas by that $1.4 million. Well, it isn't known what the fire chief would choose to cut in his budget if the department were directed to eliminate the R&D program. The size of the required cut amounts to about 70% of the operating cost of a fire engine. And that concludes the finance report. Turn it over to the fire chief. Mr. Mayor. Council members. So the question is, why are we going why are we doing RMD? And as you can see on the map, this is a system of deployment that is widely used throughout the state of California. There are 33 local EMS agencies in the state. Of the 33, 29 of them already authorize and have functioning systems in place that are similar to what we have proposed in an industry where seconds count . This program will place a paramedic on the scene. One point. 5 minutes faster. On average, citywide emergency medical service in Long Beach accounts for nearly 84% of the overall workload of the Long Beach Fire Department. Currently, we have 17 fire engines and only nine of those engines have a paramedic on board. This program converts out of all of our existing 24 hour ambulances to ALS or advanced life support ambulances, adding resources to Station three, Station 12 and Station 22. Municipalities that currently operate this program are not limited to just rural areas. They include large metropolitan cities such as San Francisco, Sacramento and San Diego, as well as many medium sized cities in the state with populations over 100,000 people. As the Director of Finance just said, implementation of this program does also provide for budget savings. As he has clearly pointed out, that I stand ready to answer any questions. Thank you, Chief Terry and Mr. GROSS. In conclusion, as you can see, the staffing model puts paramedics on the scene faster than the model that we use today. It is also going to save money, which allows us to maintain the fire department's services that will be impacted if there is a decision to not go forward with the staffing model. That said, you heard from Mr. GROSS that the fiscal year 14 fire department budget should come in on target because of the one time dollars in attrition. You also heard from Mr. GROSS that R&D is included in the fiscal year 15 proposed budget, and that because the R&D program costs less than our current ambulance program, it allows the city to provide more fire services than would otherwise be possible. So tonight, the Council can choose to continue to move forward with the implementation of the R&D staffing model this summer, or because the fire department budget is expected to come in on target if and for fiscal year 14. If we hold off on implementation until October 1st and there is a decision to eliminate the R&D program in the fiscal year 15 budget. We will have to identify $1.4 million in other fire service reductions to keep the fire department budget balanced. So thank you very much. We stand ready to answer questions.
Speaker 3: Mr. AUSTIN.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much for the report, and I'd like to thank my colleagues for joining me on this item. Council Member Leo and Shirkey, we talked about the you talked about the the need to cut from the FBI, the fire budget, should the R&D program not be implemented. We did just have a fire academy class and we graduated 20 to 28 firefighters. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Okay. How many vacancies were budgeted? Firefighters positions do we currently have? We believe right now we have about nine vacancies. Okay. And as I understand it, if implemented, the the R&D model will result in seven fewer firefighters on duty at any given time or 20 working fewer firefighter positions. Is that correct? Yes, sir. So. If implemented, how will the elimination of those positions be handled? Councilmember those positions when this when the R&D was put into our budget in 2013. That budget. Our budget today is reflective of what was done in 2013. So if this program were put in place today, it would not result in a physical elimination of any people that are currently employed by Long Beach Fire. So if we actually did that R&D, we probably would. Need a fire academy. Is that correct? Councilmember No, that's not correct either. We were doing some numbers earlier today. We anticipate through regular attrition and sending people to paramedic school and regular promotions that we anticipate in the next few months. We would still need to have a fire academy going forward. We do expect up to 20 to 30 vacancies will exist probably by the end of this calendar year. Okay. Moving on, what was the approval given by the L.A. County Emergency Medical Services Commission? Was it for a full implementation of the R&D model or for a one year pilot study? The Councilmember The entire discussion with the local EMS agency has been about engaging in a pilot program. And at the end of the pilot program, the agency would make a determination as to whether or not it should be considered as policy within the county. So a pilot program. Was there a term specific to a pilot program? We we have two specific terms have been considered a one year term and a two year term. When they finished the discussion with the IMC agency last month, it was a two year term. Okay. There. In the criteria, was there any additional criteria that you would be looking to evaluate on how the program was working? Councilmember No, there was no additional stipulations or criteria that the agency gave to us at the last meeting. It was all the criteria that had been vetted throughout the process over the last couple of years. Nothing new. Okay. Is there going to be additional training required to implement this? Yes, sir. As part of the program, we are required to offer training to our existing firefighters and paramedics in order to launch the program. And have you done a cost analysis to see what that would be cost us? We don't believe there's additional costs. It's part of a regular it would be absorbed as part of our regular continuing education recession training that we currently do today. And as you know, currently today, when it when we said to implement the new model, the councilmember the letter that we sent to the EMC Agency suggests that an implementation start date of July 10th, 2014. So that would be full implementation throughout the city of Long Beach. Yes, sir. Okay. And if R&D is fully implemented, will all fire engines and trucks have a firefighter and paramedic on board? Or will there be some engines and trucks that will not have a paramedic assigned to them? Specific to that question, Councilman Randy Clarke, clarification. All fire, all fire engines and trucks will have firefighters on board under R&D. Every engine company in the city would have a firefighter, paramedic, as well as one truck company, and the city would have a firefighter paramedic. So there will be no no variation in any way that the variation would be in the other three truck companies in the city would not have a firefighter paramedic on board. Q Does it make a difference from implementing from an implementation perspective whether armed was implemented in July or at the beginning of the 515 fiscal year in October from. No. Okay. And then given that we've heard that the fire department is currently within the FAA budget, 14 budget, and is expected to meet their budget under the current configuration at the FAA, that the R&D model was proposed to the City Council in 2012 as a budget savings measure. I believe that it's more responsible to have a discussion of the R&D budget savings as part of a more comprehensive discussion of our budget priorities for the fire department and the overall general fund. Therefore, I'm making a motion that we direct the city manager to delay the implementation of the R&D program until fiscal year 2014 and presented as part of the overall budget discussion and approval by the City Council. Thank you, Mr. Neal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had a couple of questions, Mr. Chief, in regards to the implementation of the R&D, it's going to require numerous changes to the existing policy and procedures. Is it your intent to meet and confer on the policy changes prior to implementing? Council Member We believe that, yes, and anything that would require a meeting confer, we will engage in good faith with the Firefighters Association to do that. Okay. Thank you. And with the current R&D budget shortfall or if there is no shortfall for your budget this year? Correct. Councilmember Fire Department is, we're estimating to close our budget on on target for fiscal year 14. Okay. And with that. Should your pilot project fail? What are the plans to revert back to the existing system? Council Member That becomes a very similar to the regular annual budget discussion. If the pilot program were to fail and we needed to realize $1.4 million or more in savings, we would engage that number in the same way we have done in previous deficit years and determine, based on data, what would be the best place to look across the organization to to create that efficiency. So it could result in a reduction in number of apparatus, some place or number of personnel assigned to apparatus in some place. And in regards to monitoring the success or failure of this program. What are the plans of doing that and reporting back to this body? The Councilmember. I don't know that we've had any specific plans to report back to the Council specific to the success of the of the program. But we are required by the County EMS Agency to provide them with biweekly data that they will monitor for quality assurance and quality improvement purposes and make recommendations on the program as it moves forward and to rework. Why was the date of July 10th selected to for the initial start date? It at the time the EMS Commission gave us the green light to move forward. IT We needed to set a date far enough out to facilitate the training required to get the organization up to speed. We did not want to implement something right at or before the 4th of July holiday, knowing that that's a busy time for us. So the next logical date was that week after. So it gave us enough time to get the training facilitated. Thank you too. Sure.
Speaker 3: Any further questions? We have a motion in the second on now call for public comment. And remember, the public was just a council on this item who's come forward to identify yourself when you see the light, there's 20, 30 seconds remaining.
Speaker 4: Thank you. My name is John Makowsky and I have been a resident of Long Beach, homeowner of Long Beach for since 1971. We've been talking budgets and numbers. The human element. Two years ago, on Father's Day, 6:00 in the morning, my husband began experiencing difficulties. He tried to get up and fell out of bed and went to try to pick him up. And he was perspiring profusely. I knew something was wrong and I called the paramedics. They were there in just a very short amount of time. They did some tests and took him to the hospital. I followed in my car and by the time I got there, he was already in surgery. So I did not get to see him or the surgeon until after the surgery was finished. When the surgeon came out, after he told me to stop crying, he said my husband was fine. He was going to be okay. And he pointed his finger. I mean, he said, you did the right thing. Minutes mattered. He had no damage. He had had a heart attack. He's doing wonderfully today. As I said, we've been residents, homeowners since 1971. That was our first experience with calling 911. And I can't tell you how much it meant to us to have such a talented team. I'm I'm wearing their t shirt. I am not an employee of the fire department. I'm one of their biggest fans. And I appreciate the work that they do on a daily basis. And that was our first encounter. I hope we never have to go through that again. I expected that when we retired we would move someplace where there was a lake and big trees. After that experience, we've had to rethink and there is no way I want to live anyplace else but in a city that provides such great emergency services. In addition to all the other services provided citizens of Long Beach, I urge you, do the right thing. Don't make these cuts. Don't make these changes to the fire program and the paramedic program. And thank you to all of you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next, please.
Speaker 0: Rex Pritchard, president of Long Beach Firefighters. Just a couple of comments with regards to the map that was displayed at the beginning of the meeting. Within the state, to my knowledge, I don't know of a single fire department that deploys a model with a sworn and non sworn on the same ambulance. The map you're referring to is showing what private industry does. Private ambulance companies do it tonight in relation to fire department, fire based EMS. So that's a large distinction. Secondarily. This was a solution to a budget deficit we had two years ago that we no longer have today. And the need to bring forward when we're on budget this year and cut sworn firefighters at a time when we don't have that need anymore. I hope we take hesitation in that. Secondarily, we have a lot of educators on the council, and sometimes it's hard to understand in the realm of the fire service and what we do , but in essence, what you are proposing, bringing forward. Bringing forward is replacing. And I'm going to use a correlation to teach and I used to be a school teacher is you're replacing teachers with substitute teachers. And in essence, that threat is occurring here. We're replacing sworn firefighters with non sworn, single functioning EMT and all this firefighter who can operate on fires, water rescues, structure fires, car extrication and replacing them with a non sworn single function, not all risk employee. And that's not efficient. And it is. But the biggest thing I think to take away and again going to that map in relation if you were to take that map and plug in. Fire department, EMS systems operate like this. You will see the reverse. I don't know of a single one in the state who operate with sworn in on sworn on an ambulance. Oh, and lastly, just please remember, we have 13 ambulances in the city transporting every single patient to the hospital. Please don't forget we're going from 13 ambulances to 11 call volumes. Keep going. We are going to have fewer ambulances. And I promise you, 11 ambulances in the city are not sufficient to get all our patients to the hospital. 13 We run two ambulances on a regular basis. We go to. 11. I promise you, this issue is going to come back to you quickly because we're not going to have enough ambulances. Again, this was a creative solution to a budget deficit we had two years ago that we no longer have the day. And I encourage you to allow the next just be a discussion and a 515 budget. Thank you. Hi. I'm Tartakovsky. I live on Green Metal Road. I'm in the fifth district. You heard my wife talk about how important it was when I had my heart attack to get me to the hospital. Quickly, I heard the chief say that we'll be getting there more quickly, but it's not a matter of fact. Not only getting there quickly and getting me to the hospital quickly, but it was the amount of service that I received in my home that I think really made the difference. It's like sending a firefighter to a fire quickly, then handing him a little garden hose to put out the fire. It takes a team. It takes more than one just paramedic at times to do the job. I'm not saying all emergencies are definitely the same, but in my case I needed both. I remember the few times when I was coherent. They were both working. It wasn't a matter of when, but standing there taking notes and the other one working. I would also ask that if you've ever had emergency, which would you rather have the model you have now where you have two paramedics doing your service? Or would you rather have one of your loved ones only have one paramedic I also get a little irritated when I hear budget constraints or budgets instead of talking the human element out of the equation. You know, I hate to say that I'm going to the Long Beach Municipal Band concert, but in order to do that, if three people had to suffer because the budget constraints I enjoyed the concerts in the park, but I'd really hate to think that that came at the cost of firefighters. They provide the safety, the police department. I'd hate to think that we're sacrificing the safety and the health of the community strictly for the budget. And just because Johnny up the street has gone to this R&D type of model doesn't mean we should. Anyway, I I'm starting to ramble now. I'm not used to this, so thank you very much. Thank you. Keep it the way it is.
Speaker 3: Thanks.
Speaker 4: Hi, everybody. My name's Deidre Girardi. I live in the fourth district on San Vicente Avenue, and I'm the mother of a three year old, and he has a severe seizure disorder of genetic origin that causes him to have life threatening seizures. I just want to give you a small sample of the number of times we have called 911 at our house. That's what this small pile is. And it's not even all of them are a hallmark of my son's seizures. His may seem like a typical cute little three year old when you see him, but once a seizure hits, he oftentimes goes into respiratory failure. And what I have witnessed with the amazing paramedic services we have here in Long Beach is oftentimes three paramedics in the back working on my son as it travels to the hospital, somebody trying to get an IV line on him, somebody trying to draw meds and somebody bagging him so that he can continue to breathe until we get to the hospital. I have been nothing short of grateful for the response and respect I have received from the fire department, and I have often times called 911 for my son once a week, twice a week. We've gone through some pretty traumatic periods of time and I am really nervous about the lack of discussion about the human element here, that lives are a big part, saving lives are a big part of what the fire department does here in Long Beach. And I really hope that you consider the collaborative effort of more than one paramedic, the working on an infant or a three year old, or your husband or your wife or your sister while a trauma is happening, it's not something I ever thought I would experience in my life. But, you know, here I am trying to describe to you the the scene I've seen many times. And I would just like to thank the fire department because I honestly owe my child's continual life and that he continues to thrive because the paramedics are staff the way they are right now. Sir, thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Anyone else who wishes to speak.
Speaker 0: James Farley, vice president, long firefighters. I empathize with the position that you guys have been in over the last few years. You guys were served a difficult time, a time when the budget wasn't coming up to par and you were the fire chief to come up with a solution. And he did what he could to come up with a solution. Let's look back two years. When we stood in the first DHS meeting, the deputy chief got up in front of the DHS group and said, Listen, this is why we have to implement this, because we've cut fire engines, because we've cut trucks, because we've cut rescues , and it's still not enough. We have nowhere else to look. That's almost a quote. So it's a budget issue. And so that's where this sprung from. And it's not about times. If it was about times, if it was about a minute and a half, then we would just take a paramedic and put them on every corner and they would walk in and they'd be there, but they'd be without equipment, they'd be without their partner, they'd be without the ability to call the base station and talk to the doctors there. So it's not just about times. It's about arriving at it in a fashion where you have a team that's capable of performing standing behind me. These are the men and women of the firefighters. There's hundreds, if not thousands of years of experience right there. I hope that that impresses upon you that you've asked them on a daily basis to go out and put their badge on and quietly and honorably, go out and serve the public and take care of their safety and their medical conditions. And they do this day in and day out. And the reason that they're staying there right now is they want you guys to maintain the tours and they need to serve the public to serve the citizens of Long Beach. They're not here asking for a pay raise. They're not here asking for a pension. They're here because they want the tools to go out and do their duties. It's not worth $1.4 million to cut them when this was voted. There was no way that any of you could have known what it would even look like. And I doubt that everyone knows exactly what it would look like today because the first six policy didn't even exist back then. Had the healthy discussion in October. That's what's right. You guys need to vet this thoroughly because it's a huge change. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Next was.
Speaker 0: Very good. You could the address and we'll revisit the issue and it goes to the. I want to make sure that all of the fire operations, fire departments, operations that are on the tidelands area are being 100% funded from Tidelands. And if there's a shortage there, I want to make sure again that we stop the urination of money that early reference to like wasting it on that bike path racing at our front the word for the for the convention center and wasting it for so many things like the $300,000 that the vice mayor wanted to give to a few select residents. There's ample money in this city. If we have competent management. Our problem is we don't have the competent management on the 13th floor of this city council. This city. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. We'll. We'll take it behind the rail. Oh, up there, please. To state your name.
Speaker 7: I'll address is on file. I would be one that would echo what's been said already. I've had to use the tremendous abilities of the Long Beach Fire Department to come to my aid several times, and I cannot see any way that any cutbacks should be made. If there are budget issues that have to be dealt with much dealt with, let's deal with them somewhere other than cutting certain fire services.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember Lowenthal.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If I could ask the fire chief, I had a question about something that Mr. Pritchard mentioned in reference to the map that was up on the screen. He indicated that those were reflective of only the private ambulance services versus the public. And if Chief Drury could clarify that for me that appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Councilmember, the map that you saw up on the screen is a map that we got from the state of California EMS Agency. It breaks down by geographic district, the local EMS agencies, of which there are 33. In each one of those EMS agencies. The staffing is left up to the local municipality to determine based based on policy from the local EMS agency on how they want to do it. So it's a it's a mishmash. And depending on which municipality you go to, some have private providers, some have public private partnerships, some are fire based. What that map is meant to show you is that those local EMS agencies authorize a staffing model that is different than what is authorized in Los Angeles County. But how they do it locally is left up to the individual municipality.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Chayefsky.
Speaker 4: No, actually that was the question, because I had asked Mr. West earlier, because that was my research that indicated that many of those that are pictured on that map, that there are no cities who have their own fire department that utilize that model unless they're contracting out for their paramedics. So I think that should be worrisome for the citizens of the city of Long Beach. Not only do you pay taxes, but you are billed for the services that you do receive. So I would hope that we could, because of the budget information we were given, that with this vote tonight, that we can enable the incoming council to revisit this and to make the decision based upon the information that they're given at that time. My other concern is I understand that the county said in terms of the conditions and you said, Chief, that the conditions were still in place. What happened about the electronic medical records? And I thought that was going to be a requirement for us to be able to implement this program. And I understand we're not there yet.
Speaker 0: Councilmember The EMS Commission received a report from the Data Safety Monitoring Board, which was the the group that was looking at electronic patient care reporting. That group recommended to the full commission that electronic patient care reporting not be included in this study so as to make the prospective data that's captured mirror, if you will, the retrospective data that was provided at the outset of the discussion. So the Data Safety Monitoring Board took the PCR out of the equation and then the full EMS commission agreed with the recommendation.
Speaker 4: My understanding is Medicare, though, requires in terms for billing that electronic medical records be implemented. So is that happening?
Speaker 0: The High Tech Act does not specifically mandate that provider agencies such as fire based EMS or local EMS providers. We are not mandated to implement electronic patient care reporting to be reimbursed for ambulance billing. For ambulance billing.
Speaker 4: All right. The other requirement on there was that the city was supposed to indicate that it had adequate money, I understand, budgeted so that if the pilot does not is not positive, that the city has indicated that does have the money available to reinstate the older current model. Was was that how was that communicated to the county council member?
Speaker 0: The county accepted the response that we gave them that this was kind of a simple budgeting question. They agreed that we did not need to have a set dollar amount of money set aside in kind of an escrow account that if we were faced with a reversion to our existing program, with that reversion would come a $1.4 million question that we would address the way we do typically through deficit budgeting.
Speaker 4: Okay. But if you wait two years to reinstate it, certainly it's going to be a much more than 1.4 million because the cost of salaries, benefits and other things, particularly with the PERS additions that are coming, it's going to be much more than 1.4 million. So they they, in essence, waived a lot of the conditions they initially had.
Speaker 0: Yes, ma'am. Go forward.
Speaker 4: On this.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 4: God help us. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Mr. Armstrong. Excuse me. I do want to point out that there definitely are many cities in California that do have this model. So that statement is wrong. We'll get in and get you a list of that. But there are many cities.
Speaker 4: I do respect Mr. West. We've been asking for this for quite a bit about who else was using it and what their experience was, and that has never been provided to the Council. So for that reason I would ask that we support the motion and put this off so that the Council can get the information it needs to really make an open and transparent decision.
Speaker 3: Mr.. DAWSON.
Speaker 0: Yes, I did have some clarification based on Councilmember long thought and subsequent questions regarding the the MSA decision, the map. Just just to clarify, do the agencies that you have outlined, the 33, do they have jurisdiction over both public sector and private sector ambulance services? Councilmember Yes, sir. The local EMS agency sets the policies for that specific geographic area that they're responsible for. And any agency, public or private, that functions in in this arena is required to adhere to those policies. So, yes, they set the standard for everybody in that area. So as a subject matter expert, can you give us an example of a private sector kind of situation where you would have a, quote, one and one ratio? A private sector? Yes. Example, Sacramento Metro Fire Department privatizes there. They contract out for their paramedics and they have one paramedic and one EMT that are non sworn employees. They carry out that duty. So the paramedic is non sworn enemy. The EMT is not sworn correct? Yes, sir. Okay. And so the paramedic does it. Is he qualified to fight fires either? That's correct. Okay. Just want to be clear on that, because I think there's a real distinction here. Our paramedics are firefighters. All right. With two firefighters on an ambulance, we have a greater capacity to deal with the most egregious calamities that that may face the city. I don't want to water that down personally, but I do think this merits a further discussion and a discussion in for the 2015 budget.
Speaker 3: Thanks, Mr. Dawn.
Speaker 0: Well, you know, the most.
Speaker 5: Surprising thing I heard this evening was that the $570,000 of sidewalk money remained in the fire department. So just to refresh everyone's memory, you know, and that first came out in the budget conversation. There was a decision the council made at a recommendation of the BRC and Vice Mayor Garcia to take some a sidewalk money and loan it to the fire department for two months to restore engine eight and rescue 12 and then it be repaid with GMT revenue. And then there's the GMT. Revenue did not become clearer over the next 30 days or so. There there's an additional council action to defer that decision another 30 days to give more time for clarity. And then when it came back that in fact, the GMT anticipated revenue was not going to measure it, we had hoped for it is going to be significantly less. There is then a council action not to restore Engine eight and Rescue 12 because there is no identifiable long term funding source. So shame on me. But. But I assumed that when we eliminated the use of those monies, it was always to be alone. It would go back to its original bucket. So, you know, we can certainly follow through online. But but I don't it's not clear to me where the authority is that if council sets aside as a loan, a certain amount of funds for a specific purpose, and then that disappears, that where the authority like to then automatically reprogram those funds without any council approval to do so. And again, I don't expect that to be decided tonight, but I would like to get a little further education on how that happened. I don't understand how that happened. Additionally, it's not clear to me why the $570,000 is required for the fire department. Because I did go back and look, and on November 5th of last year, there was a motion that was a policy that was adopted by City Council to set aside those one time GMT revenues to make up for the delayed R&D deployment. So I don't understand and we can we can certainly come back on that, but I understand why that wasn't fully funded. So therefore, the $570,000 shouldn't be necessary. And that motion was made by me in Sacramento by Councilmember Johnson. But nevertheless.
Speaker 0: Chief Tory.
Speaker 5: If you could elaborate a little bit on the comments I heard during public comment was that we're reducing from 13 to 11 ambulances. So could you share does that concern you? If so, why? Or is is this this new model to provide more efficiency, 11 ambulances? But could you comment on that, please?
Speaker 0: So currently in Long Beach Fire, we have eight paramedic rescue ambulances. We staff 324 hour basic life support ambulances with two non sworn EMTs. We also staff to pick road staffed ambulances, basic life support ambulances with non sworn EMTs for a total during peak load times throughout the week of 13 transport capable units under the RMD program , the number of ambulances would go from 13 to 11. All 11 would be 24 hour ambulances staffed with one firefighter, paramedic and one emergency medical technician. The the data decision the decision was made based on the data in 2012 as we went into the fiscal 2013 budget discussions. The data suggested at the time that by having those ambulances on duty 24 hours a day, we would be able to meet the call volumes that we expected for that year.
Speaker 5: So do you anticipate the remaining 11 ambulances to have higher call volumes, or do you think that the total call volume load for ambulances will decline because some of those calls will be handled differently?
Speaker 0: Councilmember. Ultimately, by having a paramedic on every engine. We believe that what will happen is we will see in some cases a lesser incidence of transport to the hospital because those engines that have a paramedic would be able to evaluate a patient and potentially downgrade a patient to a to non transport level. However, it's important to note that the ambulances that that remain will be transporting both ALS, advanced life support and basic life support patients. So it's something that we would monitor very closely as we move forward to determine whether or not we were meeting the needs of the community with the ambulances that we had.
Speaker 5: Okay. I appreciate that. All right. Well, given that I would make a motion to receive and file the item second.
Speaker 3: Moving second to receiving file. Okay. No further discussion. We'll have a substitute motion to receive and file members. Cast your votes on that.
Speaker 5: But.
Speaker 4: Motion is a tie.
Speaker 3: Okay. We'll go to the original motion, which is to on Mr. Austin's motion. Cast your votes on the original motion by Mr. Austin.
Speaker 4: Motion is a tie.
Speaker 3: That we have do not have sufficient votes to add. That measure is still with us. Thank you. Move to item 13 cookery support.
Speaker 0: Point of order, Mr. Mayor. Quick question. So by this motion being a tie in both instances, what what happens now?
Speaker 3: You don't have any. You'd have there's not sufficient votes to pass it.
Speaker 0: So so many members of the council. So that sort of effectiveness is that it fails. So there is no action taken. So you move forward as.
Speaker 3: As as planned.
Speaker 4: As previously counsel directed.
Speaker 0: That that's correct. That there was no action taken on this item. So the previous authorization by the council would stand until some other action would be brought forward by the Council.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Parker. Item 13. Clever.
Recommendation to request City Manager to provide to the City Council a status report on the implementation of the Rapid Medic Deployment staffing model, report on the current status of the Fire Department's FY 14 budget, and consider providing further direction to the City Manager regarding the implementation of the RMD model, including whether to delay implementation until a full discussion can be had as part of the FY 15 budget process.