Laserfiche WebLink
The document's author(s) have done a good job in highlighting <br />how capital intensive and labor intensive it is to provide fire and <br />emergency services to our community. Indeed, the point is made <br />that the costs are not only high, but the required capital is used <br />rarely (thankfully) since we need to be prepared to handle even <br />the most extreme events. The problem is, services with those <br />characteristics can ALWAYS benefit from economies of scale... <br />larger cities have lower per capita costs while smaller cities have <br />larger ones. However, your Course of Action (COA) analysis <br />presents the pooling of resources through partnerships (a Joint <br />Powers Agreement, Page 51) as the MOST expensive course of <br />action. The notion that scale would make fire services more <br />expensive rather than less expensive tells me one thing: the <br />analysis suffers either from someone not trying hard enough or <br />from built-in bias. (Sadly, I suspect the latter given the stated <br />"cons" to COA 2. More on that later.) Whichever it is, the fact is <br />that the greatest opportunities for efficiencies should come with <br />scale (partnerships) rather than through your recommended "go <br />it alone and hope for contracts" approach -- particularly since no <br />contracts are guaranteed to be consummated. (And, quite <br />frankly, they might not be so easily achieved given the current <br />administration's strained relationship with neighboring <br />communities.) <br />The bottom line is, you should go back and rethink this. Aim for <br />the proper level of service, but approach it with the goal of <br />achieving the economies of scale from which such a large project <br />can clearly benefit rather than with the hubris indicated in the <br />rejection of COA 2, which states, in part, that it "would require <br />agreement between the cities served or WORSE YET convincing <br />an independent board" (CAPS added for emphasis), as if <br />agreements between cities are a bad thing and -- "gasp" -- <br />independent oversight of emergency services is unthinkable. You <br />will find that cooperation and the lowered costs and improved <br />service that it can provide is not the negative route that you make <br />it out to be. <br />Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.