CC 2021-08-10_11a FCFA Service Delivery Models and Cost Analysis
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: WHITNEY McDONALD, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDER REPORT REGARDING FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY
SERVICE DELIVERY MODELS AND COST ANALYSIS
DATE: AUGUST 10, 2021
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Consider and receive a report on the results of a cost and service delivery model analysis
conducted by the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA).
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
Receipt of the report will not create any fiscal impacts to the City. City staff assisted in the
preparation of the data and analysis provided to the FCFA. Under the terms of the Third
Amendment to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement governing the FCFA, costs to the
City for fire and emergency response services are fixed at $2,580,955 per fiscal year
through at least June 30, 2022. If the Oceano Community Services District (OCSD) is
successful in passing a new special tax measure in 2022, the new funding formula set
forth in the Third Amendment will take effect on July 1, 2022. This new funding formula
will result in a slight decrease in costs to the City based on increases in the OCSD’s
contribution rate. If the 2022 ballot measure fails, the City’s costs will remain at current
levels through a one-year wind down period that will end on June 30, 2023.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the report from the FCFA
regarding fire and emergency service delivery models and an analysis of associated
costs.
BACKGROUND:
The Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) was formed on July 9, 2010, through a Joint
Exercise of Powers Agreement (JPA) entered into by the City of Arroyo Grande (City),
the City of Grover Beach, and the Oceano Community Services District (OCSD). The
FCFA is a consolidation of three individual fire departments, operating out of the three
existing member community fire stations. Together, the FCFA provides integrated and
efficient fire and emergency medical services to the three communities, serving
approximately 40,000 residents.
In 2017, the FCFA Board of Directors adopted a five-year Strategic Plan. The Strategic
Plan outlines the investments that were deemed necessary to replace obsolete capital
Item 11.a. - Page 1
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDER REPORT REGARDING FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY SERVICE
DELIVERY MODELS AND COST ANALYSIS
AUGUST 10, 2021
PAGE 2
equipment, including fire engines and self-contained breathing apparatus, and to provide
staffing levels needed to ensure appropriate levels of service for the three member
agencies.
In June 2019, an amendment to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (Second
Amendment 1) was approved that altered the funding formula used to determine each
member community’s share of the FCFA’s costs and ensure funding consistent with the
Strategic Plan. These alterations would go into effect if OCSD was successful in passing
a special tax measure in 2020 to raise additional revenue for its fire and emergency
service costs. To account for the time that was necessary for OCSD to seek additional
revenue through a special tax measure, the Second Amendment included a “transitional”
funding formula to be used through at least June 30, 2020. Applying this transitional
formula to FCFA’s Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget, the Second Amendment then identified
specific funding amounts required of each party as follows:
A. City of Arroyo Grande $2,580,955
45.01%
B. City of Grover Beach $2,015,115
35.14%
C. Oceano Community Services District $1,138,148
19.85%
Table 1 depicts the funding impacts of the transitional and final revised formulas provided
in the Second Amendment:
Table 1
Example Funding Amounts Applying Original, Transitional, and Final Revised Funding
Formulas Using FY19-20 Budget
Original Transitional
(Current)
Final Revised
Arroyo Grande $2,728,142 $2,580,955 $2,501,964
Grover Beach $1,943,693 $2,015,115 $1,936,123
Oceano $1,062,383 $1,138,148 $1,296,131
Total $5,734,218 $5,734,218 $5,734,218
Percentage Allocation
Arroyo Grande 47.6% 45.0% 43.6%
Grover Beach 33.9% 35.1% 33.8%
Oceano 18.5% 19.9% 22.6%
1 The First Amendment was a Memorandum of Agreement approved in May 2018, which was intended to
facilitate a negotiation of the existing cost sharing methodology in light of the increased investment called
for in the Strategic Plan.
Item 11.a. - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDER REPORT REGARDING FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY SERVICE
DELIVERY MODELS AND COST ANALYSIS
AUGUST 10, 2021
PAGE 3
The Second Amendment also identified a defined “wind-down” process and timeline
should the OCSD ballot measure fail or should a member community leave the JPA or
the JPA be dissolved.
As required under the Second Amendment, OCSD placed a special tax measure on the
March 2020 ballot. Although over 66% of Oceano voters supported the measure, it fell 10
votes short of the 66.67% necessary to enact the special tax and the measure failed. As
proposed, the special tax measure would have raised approximately $422,000 annually
for the OCSD to use for emergency and fire services to the Oceano community. This
amount would increase up to 2% annually.
Following the outcome of the OCSD’s 2020 ballot measure, the parties approved a Third
Amendment to the JPA in July 2020 through which the OCSD committed to seek a new
special tax measure in 2022. The Third Amendment continued the funding formulas set
forth in the Second Amendment, including the transitional formula that specified the
parties’ funding amounts based on the FCFA’s Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget. The Third
Amendment also included the following terms:
• Should the OCSD’s 2022 ballot measure pass, the same modified funding formula
identified in the Second Amendment will be implemented beginning July 1, 2022.
• Should the OCSD’s 2022 ballot measure fail, the following provisions apply:
o The same “transitional” funding formula and fixed cost allocation will apply
through June 30, 2023, continuing the City’s fixed contribution of
$2,580,955 per fiscal year through this time.
o A wind-down period (and related work program) will result in the OCSD no
longer being part of the JPA effective June 30, 2023. Work program
elements of the wind-down process include:
A determination as to the distribution of equipment and physical
assets by October 1, 2022 (effective June 30, 2023).
An estimate as to the distribution of debt, employment liability,
pension/PERS and other post-employment obligations by February
1, 2023 (effective June 30, 2023).
An estimate as to the distribution of all other assets by March 1, 2023
(effective June 30, 2023).
During Council’s consideration of the Third Amendment on July 14, 2020, staff reported
that, following approval, staff of the FCFA and the three member agencies would evaluate
options for the future delivery of fire and emergency services, including the following:
Item 11.a. - Page 3
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDER REPORT REGARDING FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY SERVICE
DELIVERY MODELS AND COST ANALYSIS
AUGUST 10, 2021
PAGE 4
Following approval of the Third Amendment, the Fire Chief worked with the FCFA
Treasurer (Arroyo Grande’s Administrative Services Director) and Grover Beach’s
Administrative Services Director during Fiscal Year 2020-21 to analyze the estimated
costs, and the associated operational impacts, of certain service delivery options. The
findings of this analysis were then reviewed with the member agencies’ managers and
presented to the FCFA Board of Directors on July 16, 2021 (see Attachment 1).
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The staff report presented to the FCFA Board of Directors on July 16, 2021, provided in
Attachment 1, details the outcome of the cost analysis conducted regarding the following
service delivery models:
• FCFA “Status Quo” – Current staffing levels as reflected in the FY 2020-21 budget.
• FCFA “Fully Staffed” – Three-person staffing at all stations, elimination of the
Reserve Firefighter position, and completed transition of overhead staff (Battalion
Chief, Fire Marshall, Administrative Manager).
• FCFA “Fully Staffed and Stand Alone” – Reflects an independent JPA that does
not rely on member agency staff for support (“Fully Staffed” plus Accounting Clerk,
contract HR, IT and Payroll services).
• CAL FIRE Local Government Contract – Reflects permanent three-person staffing
and added administrative/overhead positions.
Two models were not presented, including the FCFA “Contract Customer” and fire
protection district models, for the reasons explained further in the report. The FCFA’s
Fiscal Year 2020-21 costs were used to project and compare costs for each model. The
Five Cities Fire Authority
Potential Options for Service Delivery
Current JPA Structure (3 Communities)
Amended JPA Structure (3 Communities)
New JPA (i.e. 2 Communities)
New JPA with “Contract Customer”
Individual Fire Departments
Contract with County / CAL FIRE
Creation of Fire District (Long Term)
Item 11.a. - Page 4
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDER REPORT REGARDING FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY SERVICE
DELIVERY MODELS AND COST ANALYSIS
AUGUST 10, 2021
PAGE 5
report also evaluates cost and service delivery implications for single-station/individual
fire department models, including information regarding current calls for service at each
station. In addition, CAL FIRE contract costs were estimated using current and projected
increases to evaluate the costs and benefits of a CAL FIRE contract service delivery
model for the three FCFA agencies.
The report concludes that the current three-station model utilized by the FCFA provides
the most cost-effective and efficient service to residents, businesses, and visitors in
Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Oceano. In light of this information, it is recommended
that the current three-station JPA model be retained and the current provisions of the
Third Amendment be utilized to allow OCSD to seek additional funding through a special
tax measure. If the OCSD ballot measure fails, the City and its FCFA partners may desire
to pursue one of the alternatives discussed in the report following completion of the wind-
down process.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Receive and file the report from the FCFA providing an analysis of service delivery
models and associated costs;
2. Do not receive and file the attached report; or
3. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Receipt and consideration of the report of the FCFA’s service delivery models and cost
analysis will provide relevant and timely information regarding the City’s fire and
emergency service provider. This information will be particularly helpful in the event that
the OCSD special tax measure is unsuccessful and the parties are required to wind down
OCSD’s involvement in the JPA. At that time, the parties may wish to pursue one of the
other options identified in Attachment 1 for the future provision of fire and emergency
service to their communities.
DISADVANTAGES:
No disadvantages are identified to receive and file the attached report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
No environmental review is required for this item.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with
Government Code Section 54954.2.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. July 16, 2021 Staff Report to FCFA Board of Directors
Item 11.a. - Page 5
STAFF REPORT___________________________________________________
TO: Chair and Board Members MEETING DATE: July 16, 2021
FROM: Stephen C. Lieberman
SUBJECT: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach
Contract
___________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board receive and file the staff report.
____________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
The member communities approved a third amendment to the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA)
Joint Powers Authority (JPA) agreement in July 2020. Related to the execution of the
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), the Fire Chief, along with the Administrative Services
Directors of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach were requested to analyze various fire and
emergency response models including a review of the CAL FIRE / City of Pismo Beach contract.
There existed interest in potential alternative models to the existing JPA structure included a
reduced number of community partners and the consideration of contracts for service. The Fire
Chief reviewed response data and has included a summary to reflect potential operational impacts
associated with changes in service delivery models. This report does not address known staffing
needs or other capital investment.
Current JPA Structure (3 Communities)
Amended JPA Structure (3 Communities)
New JPA (i.e. 2 Communities)
New JPA with “Contract Customer”
Individual Fire Departments
Contract with County / CAL FIRE
Creation of Fire District (Long Term)
Attachment 1
Item 11.a. - Page 6
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 2
July 16, 2021
Process
The Fire Chief met with finance staff from Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach on multiple occasions
to discuss the analytical process, secure financial information from Arroyo Grande, and to receive
assistance related to capital replacement funding options, and finally validation of the analytical
process the Fire Chief utilized for this project.
Pismo Beach / CAL FIRE State Contract
The City of Pismo Beach contracts for fire and emergency services directly with CAL FIRE (as
opposed through the County of San Luis Obispo). The current 4-year contract will expire June 30,
2021. The contract defines specific services that will be provided by CAL FIRE, and also defines
specific operating expenditures that Pismo Beach would be responsible for that are not included
in the contract. The Pismo Beach contract does not include apparatus and capital equipment
replacement funding, or operating expenses as that obligation falls to the City. In essence, the
CAL FIRE contract with the city provides personnel for fire and emergency services response,
fire prevention, administration and dispatch services (along with some funding for uniforms,
personal protective equipment, and communications).
The FCFA Fire Chief met with the former County of San Luis Obispo / CAL FIRE Unit Chief to
review the current contract, and subsequently validated the analysis with the current County /
CAL FIRE Unit Chief. The State of California “Amador Agreement” was removed from the contract
to maintain a more consistent comparison, and the Unit Chief also shared that any future “Local
Agency” contract would require additional CAL FIRE supervisory staff that are not included in the
existing contract with Pismo Beach.
Assumptions
• Cost Basis – Costs were based on the FCFA FY 20-21 budget and the projected costs of
the final year (FY 20-21) of the Pismo Beach contract.
• Capital Equipment Funding/Replacement – These costs are not reflected in the models
presented. Estimated annual costs that should be anticipated for FCFA (not currently
budgeted) are approximately $240,000.
• Operating Expense – as the CAL FIRE contract does not fully identify other operating
costs for a fire department, the analysis uses those costs as identified in the FCFA FY
2020-21 budget. Operating expenses were allocated to a “single station” estimate.
• Automatic Aid Agreements – Automatic Aid agreements are intended to provide “like
resources” for larger incidents that challenge the capabilities of the requesting fire
department. These agreements are not intended for “routine” calls for service, and must
be equitable in frequency between the participating agencies.
Item 11.a. - Page 7
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 3
July 16, 2021
Models Presented
• FCFA “Status Quo” – Current staffing levels as reflected in the FY 2020-21 budget.
• FCFA “Fully Staffed” – Reflects 3 person staffing at all stations, elimination of the
Reserve Firefighter position, and completed transition of overhead staff (Battalion
Chief, Fire Marshall, Administrative Manager).
• FCFA “Fully Staffed and Stand Alone” – Reflects an independent JPA that does not
rely on member agency staff for support (“Fully Staffed” plus Accounting Clerk,
contract HR, IT and Payroll services).
• CAL FIRE Local Government Contract – Reflects permanent 3 person staffing and
added administrative/overhead positions.
Models Not Presented
• FCFA “Contract Customer” – Assuming that a jurisdiction wished to have the FCFA
provide contract services (as opposed to being a JPA partner), staff would work with
the interested party to determine what specific services were being requested and to
quantify a cost estimate based on both the potential jurisdictions funding limitations,
and FCFA actual costs for response personnel and administrative support. Depending
on the scope of the request, additional FCFA staff and equipment could be required.
• Creation of a Fire Protection District – Dating back to the initial discussions and
planning for the creation of the JPA, the eventual formation of a self-sustaining fire
protection district was discussed. The analysis required for this study exceeds the
capacity/capabilities of the Fire Chief and would require the services of a consultant.
The formation of a fire protection district would result in the permanent transfer of a
defined level of property tax revenue from the identified jurisdictions to the district,
along with the formation of an elected Board of Directors. The district would also use
the election process to request future additional funding.
Item 11.a. - Page 8
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 4
July 16, 2021
ANALYSIS
The results of the analysis identify the economies of scale realized by sharing/spreading
administrative and shared operating expenditures over a number of fire stations. For example, a
single fire station requires Fire Chief, Battalion Chief, Fire Marshall, and administrative
management positions, along with the funding to cover operating expenditures. These “fixed
costs” can be shared/spread over multiple fire stations/communities, which creates the benefit of
shared services. While a cost analysis is a critical component when contemplating service levels,
response patterns and calls for service data presents an accompanying perspective. Operational
data is presented later in this report.
Five Cities Fire Authority (Status Quo)$2,516,360 $4,220,775 $5,898,598
Five Cities Fire Authority (Fully Staffed)$3,106,410 $4,815,574 $7,450,740
Five Cities Fire Authority (Fully Staffed Stand Alone)--$7,731,097
CAL FIRE - Local Government Contract $3,744,371 $6,056,373 $8,368,376
$ Increase/(Decrease) - FCFA vs CAL FIRE (Status Quo)$1,228,010 $1,835,598 $2,469,778
$ Increase/(Decrease) - FCFA vs CAL FIRE (Fully Staffed)$637,960 $1,240,799 $917,635
$ Increase/(Decrease) - FCFA vs CAL FIRE (Stand Alone)--$637,279
Single Station
Cost
Two Station
Cost
Three Station
Cost
Item 11.a. - Page 9
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 5
July 16, 2021
Service Delivery Models
Single and Multiple Fire Station model comments are based upon the total call volume as reflected
below, with a focus on 2020:
Single Fire Station Fire Department
The single fire station fire department model is intended for a community that experiences call
volume that can be handled by a single engine company, or multiple crews responding to incidents
from the same fire station. This analysis is based upon a single fire station having one crew of
three personnel plus administrative oversight and support. Listed below are charts reflecting the
response patterns of each of the three FCFA fire stations (2018-2020):
Arroyo Grande Station 1
The Arroyo Grande fire station
responded within the city limits
nearly 85% of the time, providing
limited coverage to Grover Beach
and Oceano residents (5%). “Aid”
relates to Automatic and Mutual Aid
requests along the Highway 101
corridor and into East
unincorporated Arroyo Grande.
Yr.FCFA Change AG Change GB Change OCE Change Aid Change
2018 3520 1856 1098 566 164 3684
2019 3406 -3.2% 1814 -2.3%
1049 -4.5% 543 -4.1% 199 21.3%3605 -2.1%
2020 3719 9.2% 1963 8.2%
1077 2.7% 679 25.0% 263 32.2%3982 10.5%
Yr.AG GB OCE
2018 52.7%31.2% 16.1%
2019 53.3%30.8% 15.9%
2020 52.8%29.0% 18.3%
Total Call Volume
% of Incidents per Community
Total Incidents
Arroyo
Grande 84.2%
Grover Beach
3.3%
Oceano 1.9%Aid 10.6%
Station 1 Response by Community for First Due
Item 11.a. - Page 10
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 6
July 16, 2021
Grover Beach Station 2
The Grover Beach fire station
responded within the city limits 56%
of the time while covering Arroyo
Grande (34%) and Oceano (6%)
residents for a combined 40% of
total station response. Aid related to
Pismo Beach Highway 1/101
corridors, and incidents in the
dunes area between Oceano and
Grover Beach. It should be noted
that response into Arroyo Grande
and Oceano increased in 2020
related to the increased Oceano
station “brown-outs.”
Yr.AG % of Calls GB % of Calls OCE % of Calls Aid % of Calls
2018 1247 87.4% 63 4.4%
27 1.9% 89 6.2%
2019 1143 88.1% 51 3.9%
19 1.5% 84 6.5%
2020 1119 84.2% 44 3.3%
25 1.9% 141 10.6%
Station 1 Response by Community for First-Due
Total Station Calls
1426
1297
1329
Yr.AG % of Calls GB % of Calls OCE % of Calls Aid % of Calls
2018 256 21.3% 877 72.8%
33 2.7% 38 3.2%
2019 314 26.4% 781 65.6%
46 3.9% 50 4.2%
2020 516 34.0% 848 55.9%
98 6.5% 55 3.6%
Total Station Calls
1204
1191
Station 2 Response by Community for First-Due
1517
Arroyo
Grande 34%
Grover Beach
56%
Oceano 6%
Aid 4%
Station 2 Response by Community for First Due
Item 11.a. - Page 11
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 7
July 16, 2021
Oceano Station 3
The Oceano fire station responded
within CSD limits 49% of the time,
while covering Arroyo Grande
(29%) and Grover Beach (16%) a
combined 45% of total station
response. Aid requests were
related to the dunes area between
Oceano and Grover Beach, along
with a portion of the Nipomo Mesa.
This chart depicts the efficiencies of
having multiple stations with
response patterns focused on
having the closest available unit
respond without regard to
community boundary. Comparing
2017 to 2020, each community
experienced an increase in having
neighboring stations respond into
their communities. It should be
noted that the metrics related to the
increase in Oceano is attributed to
the increased instances of station
brown-outs related to the current
Memorandum of Agreement.
Yr.AG % of Calls GB % of Calls OCE % of Calls Aid % of Calls
2018 353 33.5% 158 15.0%
506 48.0% 37 3.5%
2019 357 32.1% 217 19.5%
478 42.9% 61 5.5%
2020 328 28.9% 185 16.3%
555 48.9% 67 5.9%
Total Station Calls
1054
1113
Station 3 Response by Community for First-Due
1135
Arroyo
Grande 29%
Grover Beach
16%Oceano 49%
Aid 6%
Station 3 Response by Community for First Due
2017
ARROYO
GRANDE
2020 2017
GROVER
BEACH
2020 2017
OCEANO
2020
64.4%57.0%
80.7%78.7%94.7%81.7%
35.6%43.0%
19.3%21.3%5.3%18.1%
COMPARISON OF CALLS HANDLED BY
COMMUNITY VS. OTHER COMMUNITIES
Community Station Other Communities
Item 11.a. - Page 12
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 8
July 16, 2021
Multiple Fire Station Department
An emergency response organization with multiple resources is able to respond to both
simultaneous and “multi-company” requests for emergency services. Examples of multi-
company incidents include vehicle accidents, wildland and structure fires, hazardous materials,
and rescue incidents. Having multiple resources available for the initial response provides a
more effective “time and weight” benefit to the member communities as opposed to a single
station relying on the availability and time of response of automatic aid resources. Additionally,
the added resources including staffing, water distribution systems, fire engines and a ladder
truck all contribute to a better ISO rating (Insurance Service Office), which results in lower fire
insurance rates for community members.
The chart to the left reflects the
instances of simultaneous calls for
service by community.
Within each community, the
percentage of simultaneous calls
for service as compared to total
calls for service are listed below
(2020):
Arroyo Grande 36%
Grover Beach 35%
Oceano 41%
Comparison of Response by Community and Other Community Coverage
Yr.AG Other GB Other OCE Other
2018 1247 609 877 221 506 60
2019 1143 671 781 268 478 65
2020 1119 844 848 229 555 123
Comparison of Response by Community and Other Community Coverage
Yr.AG Other GB Other OCE Other
2018 67.2%32.8%79.9%20.1%89.4%10.6%
2019 63.0%37.0%74.5%25.5%88.0%12.0%
2020 57.0%43.0%78.7%21.3%81.7%18.1%
by Percentage
Item 11.a. - Page 13
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 9
July 16, 2021
The chart to the left reflects the
instances of calls for service
requiring multiple FCFA resources
by community. These types of calls
reduce capacity for subsequent
requests.
Within each community, the
percentage of calls requiring
multiple FCFA resources as
compared to total calls (2020):
Arroyo Grande 6.2%
Grover Beach 6.4%
Oceano 6.8%
Arroyo Grande
37.6%
Grover Beach
21.4%
Oceano
14.3%
Aid
26.7%
Multi-Company Incidents by Community
Yr.FCFA AG % of Calls GB % of Calls OCE % of Calls Aid Total
2018 9.6%168 9.2% 97 8.8% 52 9.2% 33 298
2019 9.4%153 8.4% 82 7.8% 46 8.5% 57 338
2020 8.1%121 6.2% 69 6.4% 46 6.8% 86 323
Yr.Arroyo
Grande
Grover
Beach Oceano Aid
2018 56.4%32.6% 17.4% 11.1%
2019 45.3%24.3% 13.6% 16.9%
2020 37.5%21.4% 14.2% 26.6%
Yr.Arroyo
Grande % of Calls
Grover
Beach % of Calls Oceano % of Calls Aid % of Calls FCFA
2018 170 9.3% 62 5.6% 15 2.7% 31 18.9%
16%
2019 736 40.6% 399 38.0% 185 34.1% 94 56.6%
39%
2020 699 35.6% 379 35.3% 278 41.1% 173 84.8%
38%
Multi-Company Incidents
by Community Percentage
Multi-Company Incidents
Simultaneous Incidents
Item 11.a. - Page 14
___________________________________________________________________________________
Staff Report: Fire Station Cost/Data Analysis and Comparison to CAL FIRE Pismo Beach Contract Page 10
July 16, 2021
FINDINGS & CONSIDERATIONS
Staff analyzed the current cost structure of the FCFA as well as the Pismo Beach CAL FIRE
contract, focused on providing a comparable product. Given input from the current and former
CAL FIRE Unit Chiefs, modifications to the existing Pismo Beach contract were reflected in the
analysis. With an increased call volume (10% increase in 2020), staff believes that this financial
analysis affirms the efficiency that exists by “sharing” operating costs, specialized equipment,
and a response design that is not defined by community boundaries in the provision of
emergency services. The data clearly identifies the regional benefit by having multiple stations
in the service area. As an example, the City of Arroyo Grande has a single fire station that
responds within its city limits nearly 85% of the time. The Grover Beach and Oceano fire
stations provided faster service to Arroyo Grande residents or covered a simultaneous
emergency call for service to over 40% of Arroyo Grande’s calls for service in 2020. This type of
organization allows any one of the member communities to avoid the expense of building and
staffing a second fire station. The Five Cities Fire Authority will require additional investment in
staffing and capital equipment in order to appropriately protect the service area, but remains a
cost effective example of regional partnership.
FISCAL IMPACT
None at this time.
ALTERNATIVES
The following alternatives are provided for the Board’s consideration:
1. Receive and file report.
2. Provide other direction.
ATTACHMENTS
None
PREPARED BY
Stephen C. Lieberman, Fire Chief
Item 11.a. - Page 15
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 11.a. - Page 16