Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIR 7169 INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7169 , 'AA SI SI T 101.14 T To the Mayor and Members of the City Council February 3, 1987 Vs X Subject: PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICE TO WESTWORTH VILLAGE raze AND WESTOVER HILLS Several months ago, the Fort Worth Fire Department was contacted about the possibility of providing fire coverage on a contractual basis to Westworth Village and Westover Hills. In reviewing these requests, the Fire Department staff has attempted to devise a for- mula that can be used for any jurisdiction making a similar request in the future by calculating a fee based on protecting various types of properties. In considering a contractual arrangement , the staff attempted to devise a system that would meet the following criteria: Be fair and just to the citizens of Fort Worth who own the equipment and pay the salaries of the Fire Department; One that could be applied on an equitable basis to communi- ties that have widely varying fire protection needs; One that would use as its primary factor the probable and possible demands upon the manpower and equipment of Fort Worth citizens; and One that assesses cost based upon Fort Worth citizens' annual investment in fire protection. In developing a formula, the staff met with veteran fire protec- tion personnel in the department , analyzed all available statisti- cal data, and reviewed criteria used by other cities. The following formula was developed by the Fire Department to estab- lish a fee based upon the cost of fire protection in the central city and the extent to which that protection is committed to an additional area. This system looks at six areas of fire protection that can be divided into property classes and non-property classes. (1) Class I Properties. These include small homes, small offices, small shops, and other properties that have only a very minimal potential to escalate beyond the ability of the first alarm assignment . ( If this were the only potential, it could be met with about 20 percent of the department ' s assets. ) (2 ) Class II Properties . These include large homes, small businesses, light industrial area, small public assemblies, and other properties that have the poten- tial for escalation to a higher alarm level. (At this level, the department would need about another 25 percent of its assets . ) ( 3 ) Class III Properties . These include industrial areas, ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7169-p.2 DoE To the Mayor and Members of the City Council February 3, 1987 Subject: PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICE TO WESTWORTH VILLAGE AND WESTOVER HILLS hazardous materials, hazardous operations, high-rise buildings, large public assemblies, institutional properties where life hazard is above average and other properties where the potential to escalate to a maximum response is high. (At this level, about another 40 percent of the department ' s assets would be needed. ) In rating the properties into Class I , II, and III, consideration is given to construction of floors, walls , and roofs; spacing; avenues of potential fire spread; and fuel and power sources. (4 ) Transportation routes are considered as another cate- gory since railroads, highways, major traffic routes and proximity to airport runways can all offer special problems in fire protection. (About 5 percent of the department ' s assets are involved with this prob- lem. ) In examining transportation exposure, consideration is given to the type and volume of traffic that flows through the area and likely caraos. ( 5 ) Open land--both developed and undeveloped--is included as a factor since fires in this kind of area require special types of equipment and, at times, large num- bers of manpower. In evaluating this category, consid- eration is given to area, accessibility, and ground cover. ( The department allocates about 5 percent of its assets to this need. ) ( 6 ) other factors that impact fire protection include water supply, fire and building codes and their en- forcement, sprinklers, standpipes, and smoke and heat detectors. (The department allocates 5% of its resources where these items are indicated, but not used. ) Since there is always the possibility of "special factors" which could impact fire protection, the formula has allowed for them to be included as well. This system could be used by most veteran fire officers who are thoroughly familiar with the central city and have a well-rounded knowledge of fire protection. All rating is done based on the rela- tionship of that factor to the "norm" in the central city. A rating ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No 7169 -p.3 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council�QEFebruary 3, 1987 xR Subject: PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICE TO WESTWORTH VILLAGE 08 7 1 AND WESTOVER HILLS of 1 means that that factor is approximately the same as is common to like factors in the City of Fort Worth. A greater hazard would receive a 1.6, for example, while a lesser hazard might receive a . 7. Once the rating in each category was established, it was multiplied by the percentage of assets committed to each area rated. The rati- ng/allocation factors for transportation, open land, and protective system/fire code were then added to the total for the three classes. If that total is 1, then the per capita cost of fire protection would be the same as in the central city; if greater than one, . the cost will be greater, if less than one, the cost will be less than in the central city. Outlined below are the Fire Department ' s rating and calculations for Westover Hills and for that portion of Westworth Village for which fire protection was requested as it relates to the City of Fort Worth. Westover Hills is a community that has 249 structures, mostly very large homes; minimal amount of open land; and only one major thoroughfare , and no railroads . (About 10% of the property falls into Class 1 ; 90% into Class II; and 0% into Class III. ) The overall rating is provided in Attachment I . The estimated cost for providing service to this jurisdiction is $88,625. ( See Attachment 2 . ) Westworth Village includes a large number of houses which is base housing for Carswell Air Base and is thus covered by the Carswell Fire Department . That portion that Fort Worth would protect has 596 homes, one country club, one school, four churches , one grocery store/service station, 54 acres of open land, Highway 183 passing through it , and a railroad spur. (About 98% of the property falls into Class 1; 2% into Class II and none into Class III. ) The overall rating is provided in Attachment I. The esti- mated cost of providing fire protection is $40, 664. ( See Attachment 3. ) The Fire Department ' s formula was reviewed by David M. Griffith and Associates to determine whether all pertinent factors had been con- sidered. Their response is included as Attachment 5. The Management Services Office has also made a calculation of the cost based on assessing these communities an equivalent amount paid by Fort Worth taxpayers for fire protection. The equivalent rating system calculations are provided in Attachment 4 . Based on this [ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7169 -n. -4 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council '' 3, 1987 ;sjof soar DoE ?_x 1(0,C, PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICE TO WESTWORTH VILLAGE , 1 1% 1073 AND WESTOVER HILLS formula, Westover Hills would pay $106, 872 and Westworth Village would pay $51, 713. Fire -Department staff and the Management Services Director will dis- cuss both rating systems in detail at the City Council work session on February 3 , 1987 . If additional information is desired, it will be provided upon re- quest. Douglas Harman City Manager DH:abt -4- ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS ATTACHMENT HAZARD/POTENTIAL RATING SYSTEM Page 1 WESTOVER WESTWORTH HILLS VILLAGE CLASS I: Small Hcrres, Offices, Shops (Potential for escalation to greater than a one-alarm assignment is minimal. ) (a) Shingle Roofs .5 .1 (b) Masonry-Frame .5 1.2 (c) Spacing .5 .7 (d) Avenue of Spread 1.0 .6 (e) Fuel and Power 1.0 1.0 RATING .7 .72 CLASS II: Large Hcmes, Small Businesses, Light Industrial Area, Institutional, Small Public Assemblies (Potential for escalation to greater alarm is present. ) (a) Shingle Roofs .1 (b) Construction 1.0 1.0 (c) Spacing .5 .5 (d) Avenues of Spread 1.0 .5 (e) Fuel and Power 1.0 1.0 RATING .875 .44 CLASS III- Industrial Area, Hazardous Materials, Hazardous Operations, High-Rise Build- ings, Large Public Assenblies, Insti- tutional) (Life hazard is above average. ) (a) Hazardous Material Operations (b) High Rise (c) Life Hazard --- (d) Special Problezws, --- --- RATING ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 WESTOVER WESTWORTH HILLS VILLAGE TRANSPORTATION: (a) Railroads --- .4 (b) Major Roads .4 1.0 (c) Highways --- .8 (d) Airports --- 1.0 RATING .4 .800 OPEN/UNDEVELOPED LAND: (a) Area .2 .5 (b) Accessibility 1.4 .8 (c) Ground Cover 1.0 1.0 (d) Park .6 --- (e) Undeveloped/Unkept 1.0 1.0 RATING .8 .825 FIRE PICGWTION SYSTEMS: (Where needed) (a) Sprinklers/Standpipes; 1 (b) Smoke/Heat Detectors 1 (c) Full Protective System 1 --- (d) Water Supply 1 3.0 (e) Code 1 1.0 (f) Enforcement 1 2.0 RATING 1 2.0 SPECIAL FACTORS: (Things that would be out of line with Fort Worth Fire Department procedures or experience) (a) Protection System Malfunctions 1 RATING 1 ATTACHMENT 2 WESTOVER HILLS NO. OF HAZ. % IN ASSETS POTEN. CLASS CLASS I .20 x .7 x .10 = .014 CLASS II .45 x .875 x .90 - .354 CLASS III .85 x --- x --- TRANSPORTATION .05 x .4 .02 OPEN LAND .05 x .8 .04 SYS./CODE .05 x 1. .05 SPECIAL FACTORS 1. x 1. 1.-- TOTAL HAZARD/POTEN'T'IAL PERCENTAGE FACTOR = 1.478 X Fort Worth, Per Citizen Cost - $83.63 X Numt)er of Citizens Covered 717 TOTAL FEE PER YEAR $88.625 ATTACHMENT 3 WESTWORTH VILLAGE NO. OF HAZ. $ IN ASSETS POTEN. CLASS CLASS I .20 x .72 x .98 = .14112 CLASS II .45 x .44 x .02 = .00396 CLASS III .85 x -- x . -- _ --- TRANSPORTATION .05 x .800 .040 OPEN LAND .05 x .825 .04125 SYS.JCODE .05 x 2.0 .100 TOTAL HAZARD/POTEN'T'IAL PERCENTAGE FACTOR .32633 x Fort Worth, Per Citizen Cost = $83.63 x Nunber of Citizens Covered = 1,490 TOTAL FEE PER YEAR $40,664 ATTACHMENT 4 EQUIVALENT RATING SYSTEM During the Pre-Council meeting on January 7 , 1987, it was suggested by the City Council that one method of assessing the communities of Westover Hills and Westworth Village for fire protection would be to relate the assessment to an equivalent amount paid by Fort Worth taxpayers for fire protection. The following calculations were made using that approach: I. City of Fort Worth A. City of Fort Worth's operating revenues (General Fund rev- enue minus amount from debt service levy) for 1986-87 total $165, 338, 254 . B. City of Fort Worth Fire Department Budget is $31,450,012 . C. Approximately 19% of City of Fort Worth property tax goes for fire protection, or about $19.8 million. D. The amount spent on fire protection equals approximately 13.5 on the tax rate of 73.9 or about 18% of that rate. II. City of Westover Hills A. Westover Hills has a tax base of $174 , 628, 065 and a tax rate of 34� . B. Eighteen percent of that rate would be 6. 12(, . C. Six cents x $174 , 628, 065 = $106, 872. Under this approach, $106, 872 would be the amount due the City of Fort Worth from Westover Hills for fire protection. III. City of Westworth Village A. Westworth Village does not use the advalorem property tax; however, its assessed valuation is $38, 305, 657. B. Substituting the City of Fort Worth' s tax rate for fire protection, 13.5� ; the following computation can be made: 13 .54', x $38, 305, 657 = $51,713 Using this approach, $51, 713 would be the amount due the City of Fort Worth from Westworth Village for fire protec- tion if we were covering the entire city. s ATTACHMENT 5 DAVID M. GRIFFITH AND ASSOCIATES, LTD. am Professional Services to the Public Sector 1301 S. BOWEN ROAQ SUITE 335 CIARUNGTON, TEXAS 760131(817) 850-2277 January 2, 1987 Mr. Bob Terrell Assistant City Manager City of Fort Worth 1000 Throckmorton Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Dear Mr. Terrell: Per your request, I met with Mr. Alton Bostick on December 12, 1986, to discuss the methodology he had used to develop a formula for estimating the cost of fire protection by the Fort Worth Fire Department to other communities. I believe the formula is very well thought out and will provide the City with a consistent, equitable, and dependable method of charging other communities for fire protection. Alton and I reviewed the variables he has developed for evaluating a community's fire risk. I was very impressed with the effort Alton had spent in developing these variables and their worth. This is the most detailed evaluating system I have seen for evaluating fire risk. My concern is the level of expertise that will be required to consistently evaluate all communities. Although that expertise is available now, will it be in the future? Communities should be reevaluated on a regular basis. * I also reviewed the costs that he planned to include. I recommended that he obtain the amount of indirect costs allocated to the department in order to develop the full cost. All other costs appeared to be included. A concern I have is that the City of Fort Worth is assuming additional legal risks which can not be accurately calculated. one way of reducing these risks could be to require contracted communities to adopt the same fire code and ordinance as the City of Fort Worth. I hope this information is of assistance to you. If you have any questions or I may be of any further assistance, please give me a call. Very Truly Yours, (Joel Nolan Senior Associate JNsckw cc: Mr. Alton Bostick * Indirect costs have been added into the formula being recommended to the City Council. AB