Travis County Commssioners Court
May 11, 2004
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 25
We do have most of you here, so let's call up the fire marshal's office. That is number 25, consider and take appropriate action on the fire marshal business plan and data reposetory system. (indiscernible). . We signed those agreements as we came in.
>> we skipped 21.
>> thank you very much. Good morning, I知 danny hovy, emergency services coordinator. To my right is the interim fire marshal, simon broussard. I'd like to take this opportunity to go ahead and introduce some guests we have here with us this morning that have come out this rainy day, and in support of what we're doing today. So if I could, simon, if you wouldn't mind introducing them at this time.
>> court and Commissioners, here is the chief of Pflugerville and the -- (indiscernible) dan smith is the chief of Travis County fire control. Bill miller is the district chief, Travis County fire marshal for esd 6. John murphy is the assistant chief for Travis County fire control esd 4. Don fillmeyer is the district chief at esd 4 fire control. (indiscernible) is the chief of the (indiscernible). Raymond penterson is the chief of the fire and rescue. He is -- captain gomer is with the westlake fire department. And also, do you know -- (indiscernible).
>> welcome to all of you.
>> we're here today to consider and take action on the fire marshal business plan and the data reposetory system. On April the 22nd we were here in a work session with you and went over in detail what we considered to be the main components of this plan. And we also had a recommendation, and that's what i'd like to discuss with you today, is that face r. Phased in recommendation. First of all, the department of emergency services in coordination with the fire marshal's office and fire safety agencies of which you were introduced today and others that aren't here today that are also with us and going forward. We request and recommend to you, the Commissioners court, that we approve the fire marshal business plan and data reposetory system. But it be in recommended steps, phases. As you know, the plan itself outlines some eight operational proposals, which we feel like will be improvements and enhancements to the overall fire safety program. I attached as part of this backup the executive summary again. And in that you will see that there's a new approach to investigations. There's a new approach to inspections. There's a new approach to arson investigations. There's a new approach to hazmat. There's a new approach to collecting data and information regarding our office as well as the fire safety agencies throughout Travis County. You'll see that there's an approach -- a new approach. There's already -- on fireworks stands and groups that are associated with all that. And then, of course, there's a new approach which has not been at this time adopted, and that is a fire code. And as I explained in the work session, we have been working with other agencies in Travis County to where now it appears that we're all headed towards the same fire code. And that's international. The international fire code. Today I would like to, if I could, answer any questions that you might have. And also outline for you that phased in approach. First is the technical side, and that's the data reposetory. Syd, I enjoyed her presentation and the video, but one of the comments that she made with that, and i'll quote, is technology will have a big influence on how we conduct business. And that's true not only in her area and all the folks that she works with, but especially in nj services and fire safety. We kind of like that it's -- we keel like it's time to put in the backbone of technology that will allow us to share information and to be able to have that data that will establish operational improvements, but also future proposals for how we conduct fire safety. The data reposetory system, of course, is not something that's elaborate. It's something that you see in the backup, it's fairly simple, but is available now based upon the other backbone that we have, and that's the connectivity through the combined center, the new combined center. Called ctech. We now have been working with the city of Austin as well as the fire safety agencies in the development of the fire marshal being the reposetory of where information would be coming as well as going out to the various groups. We feel like that need to be in place first before you go in and bring on the fire code. And so we are proposing that that be adopted or that that be approved today. And you'll see in the second page of the agenda request that the costs of that data reposetory is $33,113. And I知 asking you for a contingency of one thousand dollars just for the fact that things might come up that we don't anticipate. And so there you see a total of $34,113. I知 recommending that we take it out of the remaining car funds that I have in my budget, and I was planning on rolling that over for rdmt connectivity issues that might come up that we don't know about now. But I知 -- I do not feel right about asking you for new monies when I have this money already in my fund. I would, though, indulge you to consider that if there is something that does come up at a later date, that I be able to come back and discuss that with you in regards to rmt. But those fun r. Fund are available and I think you will see that through pbo a letter that they've written that they're not having a problem with using that fund source. The next piece of this, of course, is getting into the resources and the personnel that are going to be needed to actually implement the plan. And mostly with the fire code. Because when you adopt the fire code, then that does mean you have to have the personnel and resources in order to be able to meet those requirements. And so we're proposing that you recommend that the option 2, which is splitting the employees into '05 and '06, whether it be three employees or resources that would be approved in 2005, but we're not asking you to approve that today, beer just asking you to put it in the preliminary budget. And if you need to us come back in a work session to explain exactly those positions, as you know, we're working with hr now with linda and her staff in developing that organizational chart as I presented it to you on the 22nd. So that's now being developed. And I知 just asking that that be placed in the preliminary budget for your consideration. And then in '06, of course, finishing out the plan, there's a recommendation for two additional fire professionals. There you see the dollars and totals. And of course some of this is one-time costs, but it's building up of the resources that are needed for the personnel. And then also you see in the back page hopefully you will see that the cost analysis brings forth the revenues that would be generated as well. It would offset some of the costs. Now, in the '06, however, I put a little note, and that is that during '05 we would -- doing a review and analysis to see if indeed we needed to add those staff and resources. That's another, I think, good reason as to why you would to phase things in such as this when you're doing major change, when you're doing a totally different path than what you have in the past. That is you do a slow approach to make sure you look at everything, make sure you're covering all the bases and make sure you're successful in the endeavor. What makes me feel good about the overall plan, though, is that plan is centered around using the resources around us. And those are the good folks that you see -- professionals you see in the audience. And that is that we no longer are living in an environment of where what's mine is mine, what's yours is yours. It's now turning from I to we. It's now turning from we are a resource for each other, not that we're going to try to subsidize each other. We stand independent and I think each one of these fire chiefs will tell you that they stand independent and they run the organizations well. But they also will tell you that we're living in a time where it does benefit the citizen, it does benefit the community that work together and to share when needed the resources to get the job done. Our environment today is totally different in emergency services based on a lot of things and I won't go into all of those because you know what they are. But there are more important than they used to be. And the seriousness of what we're dealing with is a little bit different than what has been in the past. So we stand ready to say today in the fire marshal's office to tell you that we're ready to go on a path of maintaining what we consider to be stability in the fire safety community by putting in place those things which we feel will ensure the safety requirements for fire safety and buildings and property. We also stand ready to be with our partners that are in this audience as well as others that aren't here today that will provide them a support and a resource. And they're asking for that now. That we be a support to them as we will expect them to be a support to us, where it's a true partnership that allows things to flow better, allows information to be gathered. And technology is a wonderful thing. Through technology we're releasing a lot of the barriers that used to be there as far as turf. Through technology, through the radio system. You'll see some of these folks now coming on to the new regional radio system. What does that do? Through communication you're now communicating by voice. And now with this proposal today with fire safety, we want to community by also data. So when you connect both of those, you're connected. So you no longer just have a closeness, you now have a community of fire professionals that are working together and sharing information together. And you can't produce a wonderful product. So i'll stop on that point and ask for your questions or considerations.
>> judge, my question is more of a procedural one. And let me just say up front, I have every intent of supporting this when it gets to the proper time in the budgetary process, but I don't know if that day is today in the sense of the type of vote to take. Because we've had a lot of folks come here trying to ask for things that weren't put in the budget. And generally speaking, at this point, may 11th, of the budgetary process for who '05, when there are plans and permission to move forward through the budgetary process, through pbo, but I can't think of anything where we have it this early in the date before we've even gotten into budget to preapprove something for the budgetary process other than things that were left over from last year. And the one that comes to mind is that we know we will be opening a new park at east metro we knew thaftion on our radar screen a year ago. And it is prebooked into the preliminary budget. So I am very hesitant at this point to say that today with the vote there is instructions to pbo to make it fit at this stage in the preliminary budget as opposed to what we've normally done with new initiatives, and that is to say you have preclearance to move forward as we go through the budgetary process because this is all for next year anyway. In the meantime, we can still do the car thing because that's something that needs to happen now no matter where we go. And the business plan needs to be approved, but I have every intent of voting for this once we get to budget, but we have an awful lot of other departments that have come here looking for preclearance. And we were given nods and that sounds encowrnling, but' -- encouraging, but we're not in the budget process yet, so I would hate to say this one gets a preclearance and a stamp of approval in may versus when we're in budgetary markup. I知 telling you right now, I intend to get this thing done in the budget process, but procedurally I will have problems doing a preapproval into the preliminary budget today because the precedenting it would set with other departments.
>> and the other thing is we've kind of considered in the past that we take that step to get into the fire code. And I think that will also -- I guess one of the things that I知 waiting to hear, are we ready to take that step this time?
>> my recommendation is that we do. If we do what we have before us, basically we are approving it.
>> that is correct.
>> about 15 or 16 specific recommendations, only one of which is basically the f.t.e. Issue.
>> and I guess that's what I知 waiting for, for us to approve that step. And then I think the rest falls in place.
>> well, I think it's not really dependent on the money. There is the budget process we still have to go through. But you need the plan for us to start moving towards implementation of (indiscernible). With the understanding that during the '05 budget process there will be a specific budget request that if approved will be implemented post October 1.
>> that is correct. The actual plan would not be implemented until after October. And so what we would be doing between now and then is putting in the data reposetory, put ng the proper steps that need be put in place so you can actually begin to activate after okay.
>> okay.
>> like I said, I知 there on the car, use of the car imbedded already in your budget. That's something I can bless today. I知 there on the plan, but the only piece of it you laid out there is somehow this is instructions to pbo to include in the preliminary budget and that's where I stop short to say the plan will move us in that direction, but it not a preblessing in the preliminary budget, it will be there along with a lot of other things that have been brought to us for preclearance into the budgetary process that are new initiatives. That's the only difference.
>> yeah. Assuming the department's admission for the budget.
>> yes, sir.
>> any other questions about specific recommendations? There are a lot of them. Many of which are contingent upon finding a funding source. Move approval if we can.
>> second.
>> with the understanding that budget request for '05 will be part of the budget submission to pbo.
>> judge, will you take as a friendly permission for danny at this moment to use the $33,113 in car fund he already has in today's '05 budget for the use of the reposetory, which is a preliminary step to all of this?
>> pbo would recommend that strategy.
>> it would really be throw thousand -- 34,000.
>> I move --
>> christian smith said the pbo is now supportive.
>> and we need to talk to danny about the rdmt.
>> anything else we need to note.
>> no, sir?
>> any comments from any of our visitors? We appreciate the fine job you're doing in collaborating with -- I do think we're headed in the right direction. Thank you from the people of Travis County. Any other comments? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
Last Modified: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 7:23 AM