Special/Study Session
January 27, 2010

CALL TO ORDER: 5:00 p.m.


Paul Loomis, Mayor
Bill Garner, Vice Mayor
Kenneth Carter, Councilmember
Barry Gillaspie, Councilmember
Al Kunisch, Councilmember
Salette Latas, Councilmember
Patricia Spoerl, Councilmember

Pursuant to ARS §38-431.03, legal advice discussion or consultation with the attorneys for the public body regarding Arizona Supreme Court Turken v. Gordon opinion

A MOTION was made by Councilmember Kunisch and SECONDED by Vice Mayor Garner to go into an Executive Session at 5:05 p.m. to obtain legal advice and to consult with the attorneys for the public body regarding Arizona Supreme Court Turken v. Gordon opinion.  MOTION carried 7 - 0.

Mayor Loomis stated that in addition to the Town Attorney, Town Clerk, Town Manager and Assistant Town Manager, Economic Development Manager Amanda Jacobs and Communications Administrator Mary Davis would be joining the Executive Session.

A MOTION was made by Councilmember Kunisch and SECONDED by Councilmember Carter to go out of Executive Session at 5:55 p.m.  MOTION carried 7 - 0.



MOTION: A motion was made by Councilmember Kunisch and seconded by Mayor Loomis to authorize and direct the Finance director to release and disburse all funds that have been held since January 2009 together with the current interest under all existing economic development agreements to which the Town was a party.

MOTION carried, 7-0.



Click here for attachment

MOTION: A motion was made by Vice Mayor Garner and seconded by Councilmember Latas to appoint Susan Simms to serve on the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Public Advisory Committee

MOTION carried, 7-0.


MOTION: A motion was made by Vice Mayor Garner and seconded by Councilmember Kunisch to adjourn the Special session at 6:05 p.m.

MOTION carried, 7-0.


CALL TO ORDER - at 6:05 p.m.


Paul Loomis, Mayor
Bill Garner, Vice Mayor
Kenneth Carter, Councilmember
Barry Gillaspie, Councilmember
Al Kunisch, Councilmember
Salette Latas, Councilmember
Patricia Spoerl, Councilmember


Discussion of Performance Measures Development Project Final Report

Click here for Item 2

Mayor Loomis moved Item 2 ahead of Item 1.

Interim Assistant Town Manager and Finance Director Stacey Lemos reviewed the background of the item. She stated that the goal was to develop more meaningful performance measures. She noted that Paul Wenbert of PW Consulting Services had been contracted to conduct the assessment. She stated that Mr. Wenbert had met with directors to develop performance measures for each department.

Ms. Lemos explained that there were fiscal impacts associated with implementing the performance measures and with joining with the International Cities/Counties Management Association (ICMA). She stated that citizen satisfaction with services and programs was one of the focus areas to be measured. She noted that the program recommended conducting public survey. She explained that it may be necessary to phase in various measures over several fiscal years due to the costs involved.

Mr. Wenbert presented the project objectives:
~Create more sophisticated performance measures
  *Efficiency and outcome effectiveness measures
    -Efficiency defined as how to provide a service for the least amount of resources
    -Effectiveness defined as the quality of the service
~Track Strategic Plan community indicators
~Program review

He stated the reasons for performance measures:
~Duties that are measured are performed
~Transparency and accountability to stakeholders (residents, outside organizations ie bond rating agencies, grant agencies - often require performance statistics)
~Data-driven decision making
~Best practices

He presented his Six Recommendations:
~Join ICMA Center for Performance Measurement (CPM)
~Select benchmark cities
~Conduct regular community surveys
~Collect recommended measures
~Research Best Practices
~Reduce number of programs

He stated that the ICMA began in 1912. He explained that the CPM benefits were:
~200 members
~18 service areas
~1300 + performance measures

Mr. Wenbert listed the benchmark cities used for comparison:
Casa Grande Flagstaff
Fountain Hills Prescott
Gilbert Sierra Vista
Queen Creek

He stated that the National Citizen Survey was used by CPM in order to compare data received from the survey with other cities. He noted that this allowed for better comparison of data (apples to apples). He also recommended conducting the survey every two years. 

He reviewed a timeline to process, establish, collect and report measures:
~Measurement goals included in 2010-’11 budget
~July 2010 - September 2011
  *Departments collect their 2010-’11 results and measures from benchmark cities
    -Staff will need to contact non-CPM cities for data
    -Staff will need to contact CPM cities for data on items such as Transit
~October 1, 2011
  *Report measures to CPM

He stated that CPM would provide a report that included all ICMA members that would aid researching Best Practices among members. He noted that the report would enable the Town to benchmark with local and national cities. He stated that the Town would benchmark with the ten cities in the report, the Center for Performance Measurement and the Arizona Performance Measurement Consortium.

He recommended reducing the number of programs. He noted that the Town’s budgets were rather detailed. He stated that he had recommended to four departments to collapse some of the programs to have a more appropriate number for analysis. He noted that work could be lessened by reducing the amount of detail and administrative burden.

He noted that less than 1% of city governments were in the CPM. He stated that the Town would be comparing itself with the best cities and counties in the country.

Discussion ensued regarding:
~Staff directors could research and return with information on other performance tracking organizations.
~Quality to citizens has been measured by workload; predominantly in the Town’s budget
  *Workload data can be helpful when determining efficiency and effectiveness measures
~ICMA defined the measures and participants used ICMA’s template.
  *Allowed for more accurate comparisons with other cities.
~Cities in the consortium were located all over the country.
~The 2007 Town of Oro Valley survey was not reviewed by Mr. Wenbert, though it was referenced in conversations with staff.
~Non-CPM cities were surveyed because they were comparable in population.
  *The Town could wait until the second year to include non-CPM cities if implemented incrementally
~Performance measures currently tracked by departments would be used so as not to add to workloads.
  *The greatest amount of time spent would be when the data is collected for submittal.
~A tangible benefit for participants would be seminars offered by the CPM in Arizona.

Oro Valley resident John Musolf stated that the Six Recommendations should be considered for adoption. He stated that Council should move forward and go further with a company like Six Sigma. 

Mayor Loomis stated that this item should continue to move forward, and that the costs associated with measuring performance should be recognized. He emphasized that all measurements must have meaning, be measurable and lead to efficiency and the outcome effectiveness.

Vice Mayor Garner recommended that Staff could evaluate, based on workloads and costs, if three recommendations could be evaluated during the first year.


Discussion of cooperation between Fire Districts and review of Performance Standards

Click here for Item 1

Oro Valley Police Chief Danny Sharp provided the background on this item. 

Mayor Loomis asked the fire chiefs to address whether they were meeting performance measures for the Town.

Chief John Fink of Golder Ranch Fire stated that with regard to performance measures adopted in 2004 and modified in 2007, his office had submitted quarterly reports to the Town Manager’s office. He stated that the response time measurement for Emergency Medical Service (EMS) calls was five minutes or less
and for fire emergencies, 6 minutes or less 90% of the time. He noted that the response time was total response time which encompassed from the time the call was received to the time of arrival on the scene. He stated that:
~90% was difficult for any fire department to achieve.
~The standards were high, appropriate and did not warrant adjusting.
~Annexations have required expansion of services, personnel and stations
  *During the transition period, it is difficult to meet the standards
  *The transition period is nearly complete
  *Golder Ranch Fire District annexed south to Hardy Road.
  *Mountain Vista Fire District annexed one and a half square miles from the Town’s southern border up to Hardy Road
  *La Cholla Airpark was the only area in Oro Valley not covered for fire services
    -Golder Ranch will soon endeavor to annex that area.
  *Lambert Lane and La Canada station was completed
  *Linda Vista Boulevard and Oracle Road station was in the process of being built
~Demographics play a role in response times
  *Speed bumps
  *Security gates
~As a standard, Golder Ranch averaged in the low 80th percentile
~At the request of Vice Mayor Garner, a modified template was created to include false alarms when tracking calls if the fire truck arrives at the scene prior to learning it was a false alarm 
  *Gained six percentage points by adding cancelled calls when the fire team arrived at the destination within in the response criteria timeframe

Chief Fink reviewed the standards in Exhibit A of the Council Communication:
~Standard B.3. In unhydranted areas of the Town of Oro Valley, fire service providers shall supply certified engines and water tenders on scene sufficient enough to maintain a 250 gallons per minute water supply for a minimum of two (2) hours.
  *A necessary standard though not requested by the Town to provide the statistic.
~Standard B.5. Ninety percent (90%) of the time, an Advanced Life Support (ALS) transport capable of unit shall arrive on scene of a medical emergency within eight (8) minutes from receipt of the call by the responding units, within a single reporting month.
  *In compliance
  *Included in quarterly report
~Standard C.1. The minimum number of state certified firefighters assigned to an engine and ladder-company designated to serve the Town of Oro Valley shall be four (4)
  *In compliance
~Standard C.2. The firefighters assigned to an engine and ladder company shall include at least one supervisor and one certified paramedic and one qualified driver/engineer
  *In compliance
~Standard C.3. The minimum training level of personnel assigned to ambulances shall be one certified emergency paramedic and one emergency medical technician
  *In compliance
~Standard C.4. Each fire service provider shall assign a minimum of one ALS engine company or one ALS ladder company to every fire station within the Town of Oro Valley
  *The standard is met by both agencies
~Standard C.5. Each fire service provider shall assign a minimum of one ALS ambulance to at least one fire station within the Town of Oro Valley
  *The standard is exceeded; there are more than two ambulances in the Town
~Standard C.6. Each fire service provider shall keep a minimum of two National Wildland Coordination Group (NWCG) certified (red card) firefighters assigned to one or more fire station(s) within the Town of Oro Valley
In compliance
~Standard C.7. Each fire service provider shall keep a minimum of one type six brush truck assigned to one or more fire station(s) within the Town of Oro Valley
In compliance
~Standard C.9. Fire service provider shall perform annual inspections on all existing commercial occupancies within the Town.
In compliance
  *Not included in quarterly report 
~It was noted that the Response Time criteria was the only item currently reported to Council, though other items could be provided in the report.
~Standard C.10. Each fire service provider shall maintain engines, ladders, and tenders in compliance with ISO standards
  *In compliance
  *Maintained an ISO rating of 3 while building services to meet the needs of the annexed areas
  *A rating of 3 means that residences are within 5 miles of a fire station
    -Aids homeowners with insurance ratings; A lower rating lowers premiums

He stated that departments with a rating of 2 or 3 were in the top 2% of the 44,000 fire departments nationwide. He noted that being an urban rural department that achieved a rating of 3 was a great accomplishment. He continued reviewing the list of standards:

~Standard C.11. Hazardous material responses shall be provided in compliance with local, state and federal regulations
  *In compliance
~Standard C.12. Mandatory non-emergency services, public education and fire prevention services...
  *Standard is exceeded
~Standard C.13. Reasonable documentation that confirems compliance with thes performance standards shall be provided within two working days of request, to include, but not limited to:
  *Equipment inventory
  *Hose and pump rest records
  *Hydrant test and maintenance
  *Commercial fire inspections
  *Ladder certification tests
  *Duty rosters
  *Personnel status and certification
  *Mutual aid agreements
  *Training and dispatch records
These items have not been requested by the Town but could be provided.

Chief Fink stated that all of the standards were appropriate and recommended maintaining the high standards.

Chief Scott Butler of Northwest Fire District stated that:
~He did not have reports for the 1.5 square mile area
~Rural Metro officials stated that their percentage goals had been met.
~Northwest Fire District was not an ambulance provider
  *There is an ambulance in the Magee station though it may not always be available.
~Northwest Fire recognized that Golder Ranch was the key provider to the Town.
  *Northwest Fire augmented Golder Ranch’s services.

Discussion reviewed the number of stations under construction:
~Shannon and Hardy Roads location
  *Purchased at 1176 West Magee
  *20,000 square foot facility
  *Permits from Pima County expected in early summer 2010
  *Construction process anticipated at ten months
~Linda Vista and Oracle Roads location will be completed in June 2010

Chief Fink listed the current completed stations in Oro Valley:
~La Canada and Lambert Lane
~Woodburne Avenue in Rancho Vistoso 
~Sun City

He noted that with regard to Saddlebrook Ranch:
~An ambulance station will be staffed April 1, 2010
~1 station in Saddlebrook
~1 station in Saddlebrook Reserve
~Main station in Catalina

It was noted that:
~The facility on Palisades Drive was not a fire station as the building was currently vacant.
~Golder Ranch had two ambulance units to support Southwest Ambulance

Vice Mayor Garner suggested that inspections could be included on the quarterly report.

Chief Fink informed Council that monthly public safety meetings convened to address issues and devise resolutions for the Town.

It was noted that:
~Golder Ranch and Rural Metro were not on the same radio frequency
  *Currently Golder Ranch used the City of Tucson’s system by camping on to Northwest Fire Department’s agreement with the City
~Mountain Vista Fire Department was inquiring about joining the agreement

Mayor Loomis requested to have explanations provided when standards were not met. He stated that the Town could address problems and possible impediments to safety vehicles. He stated that he wanted to proceed further to understand how the Mountain Vista Fire District would provide ambulance services as criteria needed to be met. He stated that a discussion could be held at another time.


Future Agenda Items

Council Member Latas requested an item for the February 17, 2010 agenda to discuss and possibly take action regarding an Industrial Development Authority. The item was seconded by Councilmember Gillaspie.

Councilmember Spoerl an item for discussion in April regarding the $250,000 donation from Wal-Mart designated for the Naranja Town Site. She stated that she would like to review how the money could be spent at the location and how the project could utilize employees and resources. The item was seconded by Councilmember Latas.

Mayor Loomis requested an item regarding funding Economic Development. The item was seconded by Councilmember Kunisch.


MOTION: A motion was made by Councilmember Carter and seconded by Councilmember Latas to adjourn the meeting at 7:35 p.m.

MOTION carried, 7-0.