pages: CityCouncil/2010-09-21.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-09-21 | 8 | Services] states that the City has failed to provide 911 response time information; requested an explanation of protocol for submitting information; stated the City provided information up to a certain point and then stopped. Mr. Briscoe responded Monday's meeting would be a better time to go into detail of what is required; stated currently, the only outstanding data is the second quarter response times, which was due August 1st; enforcement action is difficult without a Contract. Councilmember Tam inquired whether the City would be fined $50.00 per day for every missed deadline if there were a Contract. Mr. Briscoe responded that he believes so; stated the City enjoys one of the fastest response times in the County; the City's Fire Department has the potential to be one of the best EMS service providers in the County; the County does not have access to enforcement, oversight, or management measurement mechanisms. Councilmember Matarrese stated having the City be the best EMS service provider in the County is not a potential, but a reality. Councilmember Gilmore stated the [Alameda County Health Care Services] letter notes that the Fire Department would be required to share an appropriate number of ambulance calls with other ambulance companies that wish to provide services in Alameda if the County removes Alameda's EOA destination; recently, the County contracted with Paramedics Plus for Countywide responses; inquired whether "other ambulance companies" would mean other ambulances that service the area. Mr. Briscoe responded the Interim City Manager is in receipt of communication from Paramedics Plus and American Medical Response; stated both ambulance companies have stated that cheaper and better service cannot be provided [in comparison to the City's Fire Department]. Councilmember Matarrese stated requiring the Fire Department to share an appropriate number of ambulance calls seems counter productive if the Fire Department can provide better and cheaper service than a private contractor; direction should be given to preserve the service level. Following Mr. Weaver's comments, Councilmember Gilmore directed that the item come back as an action item at the first Council meeting in October so Council can make a decision; stated that her preference is to preserve service; she would like to know how the $6.6 million [annual cost for providing the ALS program] is calculated; that she recalls the cost being $4.2 million in past discussions; inquired where the extra $2.4 million comes from; stated collection rates were discussed approximately one year ago; inquired what are the ambulance service collection rates; Council has not been satisfied with collections rates and has directed staff to find another collection entity to get a higher [collection] percentage; that she recalls the collection rate was under 50%; the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 September 21, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-09-21.pdf |