Loading...
2003 04 24 WS MinutesMINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN April 24, 2003 The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in work session on April 24, 2003, at 4:45 p.m. in the Hullum Conference Room of Baytown City Hall, 2401 Market Street, Baytown, Texas, with the following in attendance: Coleman Godwin Council Member Calvin Mundinger Council Member Don Murray Council Member Mercedes Renteria III Council Member Scott Sheley Council Member Pete C. Alfaro Mayor Gary M. Jackson City Manager Ignacio Ramirez, Sr. City Attorney Gary W. Smith City Clerk The meeting was opened with a quorum present after which the following business was conducted: Discuss non - emergency ambulance transportation. Mike Lester, Director of Health and Emergency Medical Services, related that during the strategic review of the department's operations various options have been considered and discussed with the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Committee. Based on the Committee's recommendation, the concept of non - emergency ambulance transportation by the City is being presented to the Council. Jack Pitcock, EMS Coordinator, provided the history of emergency medical service within the City. In 1986 a private company was contracted to provide the service. The company abandoned the contract at midnight and Baytown established the current system. The City provides emergency response only. In 1987, 1,864 calls were made with two ambulances with an average response time of 6.2 minutes. In 2002, over 6,400 calls were made with two ambulances and a supervisor's ambulance with an average response time of 5.7 minutes. EMS accounts for $1,300,000 in the General Fund, of which $700,000 is recovered through the collection of service charges. Emergency service is the segment of the business with the highest liability and lowest financial return. It does not cover the cost of providing the service or allow for system overload or disasters. Ignacio Ramirez, Sr., City Attorney, stated that the City has insurance coverage for the risk liability. Mr. Pitcock explained that the national collection average for emergency service is 36% while the City has collected at 50 %. A non - emergency transport service is a lower liability risk with more stable patients whose trips can be scheduled. The national recovery rate for non - emergency transports is 85 %. The establishment of a City non - emergency transport service will provide N Page 2 of 4 Minutes of the Work Session — April 24, 2003 additional resources to the community. The EMS Advisory Committee supports the addition of this service for the standardization of care, the provision of additional resources and additional revenues. A survey indicated that the City could provide 400 non - emergency transports per month. Medicare pays for ambulance transportation from a regulated schedule at 80% of the cost. Most insurance companies follow the same schedule. Based on the survey and schedule, the potential revenue is $907,630 per year. The expenses are estimated to be as follows: Personnel $587,920 Operations 57,787 Total $645,707 Capital 208,500 First year cost $754,207 The net revenue for the first year is projected to be $53,423 and $261,923 in the second year. Other cities' operation of non - emergency transports was reviewed. If the proposal is adopted, the operational impact on the General Fund by the Emergency Medical Services could decline from $600,000 per year to $350,000 per year. The vehicles would be different from the vehicles currently used, but the personnel would have the same qualifications and the equipment would be the same. Mike Lester responded to questions from the Council and related that the three transport ambulances would be used to supplement the emergency service, but the emergency ambulances would not be used for transport service. Gary Jackson, City Manager, noted that the entire service could be contracted out, but the general experience is large increases in rates or subsidies. It seems reasonable to take advantage of the more revenue beneficial part of the business. Council Member Murray asked whether the private sector was satisfying the demand, if the additional ambulances will benefit the emergency service, and if there is a benchmark for ambulance response time. Mr. Pitcock stated that the goal for advanced life support is arriving at 90% of the calls within 9 minutes. In response to a question from Council Member Sheley, Mr. Pitcock informed the Council that computers are used to measure call volume and assist the department in placing ambulances in the area that require the greater response. The fleet can be moved as the conditions change. Mr. Lester noted that the transport service would not be twenty -four hours per day. Council Member Anderson arrived at 5:26 p.m. Council Member Sheley asked for information on housing costs for the crews and equipment and for the impact on private businesses. The meeting then recessed to move to the Council Chamber. Page 3 of 4 Minutes of the Work Session — April 24, 2003 The meeting reconvened in the Council Chamber. Discuss the Ad Hoc Industrial District Agreement (IDA) Committee's proposed Industrial District Agreement policy and form of agreement and proposed goals and timeline for new policy and agreements. Gary Jackson, City Manager, recognized Council Member Mundinger for his work as Chair of the Ad Hoc Industrial District Agreement and Mr. Lanham for his service on the Committee. Mr. Jackson reminded the Council that the projections that have been made are based on certain circumstances and assumptions. The circumstances may change and the assumptions may not be exact, therefore the projections can change. There may be increases or decreases in values under the current agreements. The current agreements expire up until 2008. Mr. Jackson reviewed the projections and provided handouts of the projections. The efforts of the Committee concerned developing an agreement that was suitable to meet the Committee's goals for existing industries. New industries must be considered. Mr. Jackson detailed four scenarios. The first scenario is a new industry building in the City. No IDA would apply, the improvements would be taxed at 100% of valuation, after a tax abatement period, if the industry qualified. The second scenario involved new development by an existing industry with an IDA. The value of the new improvements would not be added to the base value during the term of the existing IDA. The third scenario involved the sale of raw land by an existing industry with an IDA to an industry without an IDA. Under the current proposal, the City would get the value of the raw land for the term of the agreement. The fourth scenario involved an industry without an IDA developing a tract not covered by an IDA. Under the current proposal, the City would receive the value of the raw land for seven years, if the industry signed an IDA. Staff proposes that the policy and standard form of agreement apply only to existing industries with an IDA. The changes are reflected in redlined policy and standard form of agreement copies at Council's places. The proposed Resolutions are modified to incorporate the changes. The policy is also changed to indicate that industry should pay its fair share of revenue, not taxes. Council Member Anderson asked for comments from other Council Members that had talked to representatives of industries. Council Member Murray responded and related that he had been contacted and had views expressed that the proposal was too onerous for industry and that the proposal was too friendly to industry. Industry opposed the lack of "grand fathering" the current phase -in exemptions. Citizens opposed the proposed 50% rate level. Council Member Mundinger explained that the exclusions expired at the end of the current contract. Mr. Ramirez stated that the current contract expressly provided that the exclusions would not continue beyond the current contract. Council Member Mundinger continued that the goal was to treat all industries fairly and equally. With the expiration of the exclusions, it was fair to keep the rate at 50% and it was fair to all industries to keep the rate the same. Mayor Alfaro noted that the proposed agreement will not include new development value in the base value. Council Member Murray continued that concern was expressed over fixing the base value to a particular year, that the State Implementation Plan Page 4 of 4 Minutes of the Work Session — April 24, 2003 00� impacts and valuations would not be considered thereby making values too high and harming industry, and concern that industry was not paying its fair share. Council Member Anderson stated that industry should not carry the brunt of the imbalance in the budget. Council Member Murray continued that concern was expressed that the Committee had not fully responded to request for wording changes and that a slower increase in the percentage was requested. Council Member Mundinger stated that it was important to clarify the City's right to participate in regulatory hearings and proceedings. There is no authority for the City to act as a regulatory agency for environmental purposes. Many meetings were held and communication was provided to industry. Discuss appointments. Council Member Sheley stated that he would nominate members of the Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Adjourn. There being no further business, Council Member Renteria moved adjournment. Council Member Murray seconded the motion. The vote follows: Aye: Council Members Anderson, Godwin, Murray, Mundinger, Renteria and Sheley Mayor Alfaro Nay: None. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 6:29 p.m. G W. Smith City Clerk