Loading...
03-12-2001 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES March 12, 2001 Supervisors in Attendance: Mrs. Renny B. Humphrey, Chairman Mr. Kelly E. Miller, Vice Chrm. Mr. Edward B. Barber Mr. J. L. McHale, III Mr. Arthur S. Warren Mr. Lane B. Ramsey County Administrator Staff in Attendance: Mr. Steven Calabro, Dir., County Airport Ms. Marilyn Cole, Asst. County Administrator Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, Dir., Intergovtl. Relations Ms. Rebecca Dickson, Dir., Budget and Management Ms. Lisa Elko Clerk Chief Stephen A. Elswick, Fire Department Mr. David Goode, Public Affairs Officer Mr. Bradford S. Hammer, Deputy Co. Admin., Human Services Mr. H. Edward James, Dir., Purchasing Mr. Louis Lassiter, Dir., Internal Audit Ms. Mary Lou Lyle, Dir., Accounting Mr. Steven L. Micas, County Attorney Mr. F. O. Parks, Dir., Information Systems Tech. Mr. Paul D. Patten, Assessor Mr. William Poole, Asst. Dir. of Planning Mr. Francis Pitaro, Dir., General Services Ms. Cindy Smith, Asst. Dir., Risk Management Mr. James J. L. Stegmaier, Deputy Co. Admin., Management Services Mr. B. R. Wilkinson, License Inspector Mrs. Humphrey called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 5:43 p.m. Ms. Curtin came forward to provide an update on the status of the adoption of the State's FY2002 budget. She stated that Governor Gilmore released his plan today for balancing the State's budget and indicated that most of the areas of concern for the County -- direct aid to public education, transportation and all human services, have been exempted from budget cuts in the Governor's plan. She further stated that there are still approximately $25.5 million in reductions to State grants to localities and indicated that these cuts are anticipated in areas such as House Bill 599 revenues, Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) profits and others. She stated that she anticipates receiving specific locality numbers for these budget reductions 3/12/01 01-249 in the next two days. When asked, Ms. Dickson stated the County receives approximately $6 million in House Bill 599 revenues for the Police Department's budget. Mr. Ramsey stated that he does not feel the $6 million in House Bill 599 revenue is at risk, but feels there will not be any additional State funds for areas such as education. Ms. Curtin noted that the House Bill 599 distribution formula is tied to growth in State revenues -- therefore, as State revenues decline so does House Bill 599 revenues. 1, WORK SESSIONS 1,A. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S FY2002 PROPOSED BUDGET Ms. Dickson presented an overview of the County Administrator's FY2002 Proposed Budget. She reviewed Percentage Increase in Demand for Services for FYgl-FY2000; FY2000 Employees for 1,000 Population in General Government; FY99 Expenditures Per Capita in General Government for FY99; and FY2002 Proposed Budget Tax Rates. She then reviewed the Total FY2002 Proposed Budget totaling $738,072,000 and stated that this represents approximately a four percent increase over the adopted FY2001 Budget. She noted that the percentage breakdown among the various budget components for the Proposed FY2002 Budget is essentially the same as the FY2001 budget. She reviewed two slides related to FY2002 Estimated Revenues vs. FY2001 Adopted Revenues with personal property tax reflected as State revenue in one slide and as property tax revenue in a second slide. She stated that there is not much change among the various revenue categories. When asked, Ms. Dickson stated that there is an increase of $20.6 million in total property taxes, $13 million of which is attributed to real estate property taxes. She then reviewed FY2002 Estimated Expenditures vs. FY2001 Adopted Expenditures. She reviewed highlights from the Proposed FY2002 Budget that support the County's Strategic Goals. There was brief discussion relative to the increased contribution to the Greater Richmond Convention Center because of additional projected revenues in the occupancy tax. Ms. Dickson stated that the Proposed Budget includes 33 new positions -- 23 of which are funded with local taxes and ten of which are fully funded with either user fees or state revenue. She reviewed FY2002 General Fund Sources and stated that total revenue projected for FY2002 is $20.5 million. She then reviewed FY2002 General Fund Uses tied to the County's Strategic Goals. She stated that there are no fee increases in the Proposed FY2002 Budget in the General Fund and noted that the fee increase for Utilities continues the phase-in of a planned water connection fee increase. She further stated that there are Other Priority Items not included in the FY2002 Proposed Budget and stated that the County Administrator has requested that, if the results of operations are positive, staff will bring these items back to the Board in the fall of 2001 for possible funding consideration. She then reviewed the unfunded Other Priority Items including the remainder of the Breathing Apparatus for the Fire Department; Vehicles for the Police Department; Body Armor for the Sheriff's Office; Base Materials and Electronic Resources for the Libraries; and Furniture at Central Library. She stated staff is requesting that other items for Fire and Emergency Medical Services listed 3/12/01 01-250 as Priority Items not included in the Proposed FY2002 Budget be addressed through Revenue Recovery. When asked, Ms. Dickson stated that any surplus that might occur in FY2001 has not been included in the Proposed FY2002 Budget. She further stated that staff believes they have been conservative in factoring in State revenue into the Proposed FY2002 Budget. When asked, Ms. Dickson confirmed that increased real estate tax assessments due to reassessment and new construction amount to more than $1 billion. Mrs. Humphrey expressed concerns relative to the uncertainty of House Bill 599 funding. There was brief discussion relative to increased real estate tax assessments and the impact of sales activity on assessments. When asked, Mr. Stegmaier stated that State Code mandates that the County maintain assessed values close to the sales market. He further stated that the County-wide average assessment is approximately five to six percent below the sales market and noted that 1999 sales data was used to evaluate Coumty properties during 2000 for the 2001 assessments. He stated that he anticipates there will be increased assessments in some County neighborhoods in 2002 based on 2000 sales data. There was brief discussion relative to significant increases in rural localities. 1,B. MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIVISION Mr. Stegmaier presented an overview of the Proposed FY2002 Budget for Management Services totaling $68,381,400. He stated that the budget includes $6,865,100 in the Community Services area; $20,107,500 in the Courts and Criminal Justice area; and $41,408,800 in the Financial and Support area. There was brief discussion relative to the number of homes served through the County's leaf vacuuming service; the cost of service; and alternatives for the service. Mr. Stegmaier reviewed the FY2001 Adopted and FY2002 Proposed Budgets for the Airport, Registrar and Solid Waste Management. He then reviewed the FY2001 Adopted and FY2002 Proposed Budgets for the Circuit Court, Circuit Court Clerk, Commonwealth's Attorney, General District Court, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, Magistrate, Riverside Jail and Sheriff's Department. He presented an early preview of the new cover page for the County's web site. Mrs. Humphrey requested that the photographs used for the web site be taken of actual County residents. Mr. Stegmaier reviewed FY2001 Adopted and FY2002 Proposed Budgets in the area of Financial and Support including Buildings and Grounds, General Services - Administration, Management Services, Risk Management, Assessor, Commissioner of Revenue, License Inspection, Treasurer, Communications Maintenance, Construction Management, Print Shop, Vehicle Maintenance, Accounting, Internal Audit, IST and Purchasing. He reviewed Strategic Accomplishments of Management Services during FY2001 in the area of customer service including completion of new Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, Chester and LaPrade Libraries; installation of a new 3/12/01 01-251 communications system; and lowest-ever wait times for in-person service in the Treasurer's Office. He then reviewed Strategic Accomplishments during FY2001 in the area of excellence in government including completion of system requirements for new Finance and Human Resource/Payroll Systems; re-engineering Fixed Asset Accounting System to save 1700 man-hours per year; successfully implementing video arraignment; and Airport revenues covering over 100 percent of operating costs. He stated that the cost of operating the Real Estate Assessment Office has declined over time as a percentage of the total value of real estate assessments. He noted that the process improvement savings in the Accounting Department from FY96 through FY2001 are the equivalent of three and one-half positions. He reviewed Strategic Accomplishments in the area of Being an Employer of Choice including 176 Management Services TQI University graduates; employee development; supervisory assessments; and organizational climate assessment. He then reviewed the Strategic Focus for the Future including full compliance with new Government Accounting Standards for 2002; implementation of new finance and Human Resource/Payroll system; analysis of long term workers compensation liability; study of future solid waste service delivery; redistricting impact on the Registrar's Office; renovations and construction of facilities; and Electronic Government. He stressed the importance of Electronic Government as the pressure for 24 hours a day/7 days a week customer access grows, and noted that there will be significant issues involved with this project. Mr. McHale stated he feels the County is moving in the right direction by setting aggressive goals and comparing its own standards with the standards of national organizations. Mrs. Humphrey requested a five minute recess. Reconvening: 1.C. FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Chief Elswick presented an overview of the Proposed FY2002 Budget for Fire and Emergency Medical Services (EMS). He reviewed accomplishments in 2000 including 25,880 total responses; addressing Phase I of fire staffing issues; beginning to realistically assess the existing and future staffing capabilities of the Fire and EMS system; starting of the Fire and EMS integration workgroup; and starting of the volunteer recruitment and retention workgroup. When asked, Chief Elswick stated that the Recruitment Officer position has been vacant for a couple of years, but indicated that he anticipates filling the position in the next 30 to 60 days. Deputy Chief Frank Edwards came forward and stated that it is anticipated the Fire and EMS Recruitment and Retention workgroup will provide its findings to the Board in the Fall of 2001. Mr. McHale requested that the Board be updated prior to the Fall of 2001 relative to emerging results of the workgroup's study. Chief Elswick continued to review accomplishments in 2000 including placing an additional 24-hour ambulance in service at the Clover Hill Fire Station in cooperation with Manchester Rescue Squad; the Fire and Life Safety Trailer has reached 3/12/01 01-252 approximately 12,000 children; and increasing the number of women and minorities in the organization by 17 percent since Fall 1999. He reviewed Fire/EMS performance measures and the initiatives used to accomplish lowering of the value of property lost due to fire; the average Fire/EMS response time; and death rates from unintentional injury. He then reviewed Customer Services Provided by the Emergency Operations Provider, Support Staff and Volunteer Rescue Squads. He reviewed Annual Responses and stated that there has been a 107 percent increase in responses since 1990, the EMS workload comprising the majority of the increase. There was brief discussion relative to the percentage of the Fire and EMS Budget which is used for EMS and the percentage used for firefighting. Chief Elswick stated that it is very difficult to determine the percentage of the Fire/EMS budget devoted to EMS, but noted that the consultant who conducted the EMS fee-for-service feasibility study indicated that approximately $5 million -- or 20 percent -- of the total Fire/EMS budget is directly devoted to EMS. He further stated that 70 percent of the workload is EMS related. He stated that volunteer fire personnel were asked to respond to 17.2 percent of the total dispatched fire calls in 2000 and responded satisfactorily (within four minutes) to 36 percent of those calls. He reviewed increased workload over the past ten years and stated that Fire Department EMS responses increased 200 percent; non-EMS responses increased 73 percent; and total Fire Department workload increased 107 percent. He then reviewed Countywide EMS Responses and stated that the Rescue Squads handled 29 percent of the 25,880 responses in 2000 and the Fire Department handled 71 percent. He reviewed EMS Transports from 1990-2000 and stated that the Rescue Squads provided 40 percent of the transports in 2000 and the Fire Department provided 60 percent. He then reviewed ambulance staffing history from 1989 through 2000. Mr. Ramsey stated that the rescue squads have provided an exemplary service, but noted that the tremendous growth in the demand for EMS services is presenting a challenge for the future. When asked, Chief Elswick stated that 11 percent of the County's over 60 population made up 34 percent of the Department's EMS calls in 2000. There was brief discussion relative to the number of calls that are considered Priority 1 (life threatening) dispatches and qualifiers for Medicaid reimbursement of transports. Mr. Warren expressed concerns relative to the percentage of total calls that would qualify for insurance reimbursement. Chief Elswick stated that he does not currently have that information, but will provide it to the Board at a later time. Mr. Miller stated that he feels the Fire Department could trim taxpayer costs by developing standards as to what constitutes an emergency transport. Chief Elswick stated that the County's Operational Medical Director has been instructed to look at what constitutes an emergency call and what does not. He noted that non-emergency calls make up only a small portion of the Fire Department's total calls. Mr. McHale questioned the increased anticipated call load projections for the volunteer rescue squads beginning in 2005. 3/12/01 01-253 There was brief discussion relative to the retention program providing additional volunteers to the rescue squads. Chief Elswick stated that two of the volunteer rescue squads have indicated the desire to increase staffing in the future and the other two squads have expressed the desire to maintain current staffing levels. Mr. Warren stated that volunteers have saved the County a tremendous amount of money over the years. Mr. Miller expressed concerns relative to specific plans of the rescue squads to accomplish their staffing goals and stated that he feels the rescue squads have carried the burden for the County for many years until the population increase has made it almost impossible for them to continue. Chief Elswick stated that the EMS System is not meeting its Priority 1 (life threatening) six minute response goal within the Urban Corridor 90 percent of the time as adopted by the Board. He further stated that the response goal was only met 45 percent of the time in 2000 because of lack of locations to adequately meet the goal, increased call load, and the impact of road network. He reviewed the plan for improving the response goal including evaluating calls from the time the citizen dials 9-1-1 until the time the unit arrives on location; and requesting that the Board fund a pilot program on a quick response vehicle plan for one year to see if the six- minute response goal can be impacted. He stated that areas in the County where the response goal is not being met have been identified. Mr. Miller questioned the possibility of the quick response pilot plan screening some of the less severe calls. Chief Elswick stated that the quick response initiative will be ~xplor~d by the EMS Advisory Council in developing the plan for improving the response goal and will also be used in the Advisory Council's review of screening for non-emergency calls. He further stated that the daily apparatus staffing is insufficient to manage the daily Fire and EMS workload because of the necessity to shift firefighters from fire apparatus to ambulances over the years; firefighters routinely being taken off of the fire apparatus to provide Advance Life Support (ALS) in volunteer ambulances; Federal OSHA standards relative to staffing; and declining volunteer fire apparatus responses. He reviewed Annual Responses versus Medical Assist Calls. He stated that there is no County-wide EMS Quality Management program to measure and improve patient outcomes. He further stated that he feels a single Operational Medical Director would ensure standard medical protocols, consistent training standards, and a standard quality assurance program. He stated that a Quality Management Program would provide the ability to quantify patient outcome and noted that a Quality Administrator would ensure quality within the EMS System. He further stated that the EMS System has a tremendous future challenge dealing with increased call load as the County's population increases and ages. He reviewed future growth and call load projections. Mr. Warren suggested that statistics to determine how voluntarism substantially. staff review Virginia Beach they were able to increase Mr. Ramsey stated that an independent consultant will ibe going to Virginia Beach with a list of questions relative to their voluntarism efforts. He further stated that the consultant's information will be shared with the Board as soon as it is available. 3/12/01 01-254 Chief Elswick summarized the critical issues of the EMS System including increased workload; response times; apparatus staffing~ quality issues; and future call load/growth. He then reviewed staff's recommendations to address the issues including placing a fourth firefighter on engines that routinely respond with squads at a cost of $500,000; a Quick Response Vehicle (QRV) Pilot Plan at a cost of $525,000; and EMS System Enhancements at a cost of $639,800. When asked, Chief Elswick stated that the funding for staff's three recommendations is not currently in the Proposed FY2002 Budget. When asked, Deputy Chief Paul Shorter came forward and stated that the six areas identified where the six-minute response goal is not being met are the Belmont/Newbys Bridge Road area; Salem Church Road area on the north side of Centralia Road; Woodlake; Lucks Lane from midpoint between Courthouse Road and its intersection with Coalfield Road; the northern end of Salisbury closest to Powhatan; and Buford Road along the edge of the City of Richmond between Huguenot and Rockaway Roads. Mr. Ramsey stated that the FY2002 Budget Proposal includes proceeding with EMS revenue recovery to address the critical needs. Mr. Warren stated that it appears the recommendations involve enhancing an already effective system rather than addressing the volunteer rescue squads' inability to keep up with the demand for emergency services. Mr. Ramsey stated that staff does not feel the rescue squads have declined in performing an excellent service. He further stated that the critical issues have evolved because of growth in service demand in the County and inability to meet the six- minute response goal. Mr. Warren stated that he feels revenue recovery fees will have a negative impact on the rescue squads and that staff should focus on meeting the needs of the Fire/EMS Department without having a negative impact on the rescue squads. Mr. Miller stated that he feels the County should explore ways to increase voluntarism in the rescue squads. Mr. Barber stated that, because staff assumed that the Board was not interested in increasing the tax rate nor channeling revenue from other departments to the Fire Department, revenue recovery became the option for funding the critical issues. He noted that Forest View Volunteer Rescue Squad has had no loss of voluntarism or fundraising because of revenue recovery in the City. He stated that his main concern is the delivery of service and indicated that he feels the Board would be remiss not to investigate the option of EMS revenue recovery. Mr. Miller stated that revenue recovery is a very complex issue and expressed concerns relative to increased insurance premiums. Mr. Warren stated that he feels the Fire Department needs to get to a level where all citizens are protected within the six- minute response goal. Mr. McHale stated he feels the recommendations will address the issues raised. He stressed the importance of a paramedic arriving within six minutes on a Priority One call. Mrs. Humphrey suggested that the Budget and Audit Committee provide insight for addressing the critical issues other than 3/12/01 01-255 through revenue recovery. Chief Elswick stated that the Proposed FY2002 Budget for Fire/EMS totals $27,806,500 and noted that the increase from the Adopted FY2001 Budget provides for partial funding for a breathing apparatus; minimum staffing for Forest View and Enon; 18 new firefighters approved in December; four percent merit increase and Public Safety salary issues; and career development positions. He reviewed FY2001 Fire Department cost per capita for Chesterfield, Richmond and Henrico. Mrs. Humphrey stressed the significance that, even though the County serves twice the square mileage of Henrico County and offers EMS service in addition to firefighting, its cost per capita is still below that of Henrico. Chief Elswick reviewed the additional funding requests for Fire/EMS including career staffing for Winterpock Fire Station for three months; minimum staffing costs for 18 firefighters approved in December 2000; career development; Virginia Retirement System (VRS) Volunteer Length of Service Program; computer equipment for the Fire Marshal's Office; increased fire instructor rates to match State instructor rates; and annual audit of Fire and Rescue Departments. He then reviewed additional funding requests for volunteer rescue squads including a new ambulance and Advanced Life System (ALS) training for Ettrick-Matoaca; and a County donation increase to Forest View. When asked, Mr. Ramsey stated that it would take at least six months from a public hearing date and the Board's direction to move forward with revenue recovery before any revenue would be generated. He further stated that staff recommends that a public hearing be held on April 25, 2001 or May 23, 2001. Mr. Barber requested that staff bring an agenda item forward to set a public hearing date for the EMS revenue recovery issue. Mrs. Humphrey stated that she feels the Board should hold a public hearing relative to revenue recovery, but would prefer to wait until after adoption of the budget. She expressed concerns relative to a possible delay in adoption of the County's budget because of uncertainties with adoption of the State's budget. She requested that staff bring forward an item at its April 25, 2001 meeting to set a public hearing for May 23, 2001 to consider the revenue recovery issue. 2. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board adjourned at 8:42 p.m. until March 14, 2001 at 3:30 p.m. Ayes: Humphrey, Miller, Barber, McHale and Warren. Nays: None. L~ B. Ramse~ ~' / County'Administrato~ Renny Bush Humphrey Chairman 01-256 3/ 2/0x