Agenda packet — Costa Mesa City Council, November 15, 2022 (part 2 of 8)

350
File #: 22-926 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
technical ability than the standard HVAC systems. The packaged chiller systems in both facilities also require a higher level of expertise and technical ability that Siemens provides.

The City’s adopted Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Operating Budget includes funds to provide HVAC mechanical system repairs and maintenance services for City Hall and the Police Department facility.

ANALYSIS:

The Public Works Department/Maintenance Services Division sent Siemens Industry, Inc., a Request for Proposal (RFP) for HVAC Mechanical Repair and Maintenance Services for City Hall and the Police Department facility, based on Sourcewell Contracts #070121-SIE pricing (Attachment 2). The Sourcewell-based pricing is provided in the below table.

Billing Frequency Period Range Period Sell Price
Annually 11/15/2022 to 6/30/2023 Year 1 of 4 $154,472.71 Annually 7/01/2023 to 6/30/2024 Year 2 of 4 $224,734.43 Annually 7/01/2024 to 6/30/2025 Year 3 of 4 $249,167.58** Annually 7/01/2025 to 6/30/2026 Year 4 of 4 $248,228.67 TOTAL $876,603.39
**Please note: Year 3 of 4 includes ‘Eddy Current Testing’ for chillers.

This proposed MSA will provide much needed repair services to the City Hall building in addition to routine maintenance. The controls and equipment at City Hall are very dated and require continuous maintenance and repairs. The proposed scope of work under this MSA provides for servicing repairs, both parts and labor, to the City’s HVAC equipment system.

Siemens is offering the pricing through its Sourcewell contract, which meets all requirements set forth in the City of Costa Mesa’sPurchasing Policy and all requirements set forth by the State of California in regards to regional cooperative purchasing agreements. Sourcewell established an approved vendor list following a nationwide competitive bid process. This assures that the City receives the lowest available pricing and meets the competitive bid process requirements. The City has utilized cooperative agreements successfully in the past.

Public Works/Maintenance Services and Purchasing Department’srecommendation is to award a Maintenance Service Agreement (MSA) to Siemens Industry, Inc. for HVAC System Repairs & Maintenance Services for City Hall and the Police Department facility (Attachment 1).

ALTERNATIVES:

1. The Council could not approve the contract and direct staff to release a RFP. However, staff does not expect reduced prices as a result of releasing a RFP.

2. The Council could direct staff to evaluate the cost effectiveness of managing this work with in-

Page 2 of 3 ends

351
File #: 22-926 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
house staff. However, this is not recommended as the nature of work is beyond staff capabilities.

FISCAL REVIEW:

Funding for the purchase of the requested HVAC Mechanical Repair and Maintenance Services agreement is included in the adopted FY 2022-23 Public Works Department budget. Funding for future fiscal years will be included as part of the respective year budget.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’soffice has reviewed this agenda report, has prepared the Maintenance Services Agreement (Attachment 1) and approves them both as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:
· Maintain and Enhance the City’s Infrastructure, Facilities, Equipment, and Technology CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Approve the proposed Maintenance Services Agreement (MSA), Attachment 1, with Siemens Industry, Inc., for an initial term of eight months, effective November 15, 2022 - June 30, 2023, in the amount of $154,472.71 for the eight month term to provide HVAC maintenance and repair services for the City Hall and the Police Department facility based on pricing from Sourcewell Contract #070121-SIE.

2. Approve the MSA terms for up to three additional one year terms, with annual compensation amount for year one, $224,734.43, year two, $249,167.58 and third year (through June 2926), $248,228.67.

3. Approve a 10% contingency annually for additional repairs and other unforeseen costs.

4. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute the agreement and to extend the agreement each year with an effective term of July 1st through June 30th, for up to a maximum of three (3) additional one-year terms.

Page 3 of 3 ends

352
1 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

CITY OF COSTA MESA

MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH
SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC.

T
HIS MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this 15th day of November, 2022 (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a municipal corporation (“City”), and SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC. , a Delaware corporation authorized to do business in California (“Contractor”).

W
I T N E S S E T H :

A. C
ity proposes to utilize the services of Contractor as an independent contractor to pr
ovide maintenance of City property, as more fully described herein; and B. C
ontractor represents that it has the experience and expertise to properly perform such services and holds all necessary licenses to practice and perform the services; and C. C
ity and Contractor desire to contract for the services and desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the performance of such services; and D.

No official or employee of City has a financial interest, within the provisions of Sections 1090-1092 of the California Government Code, in the subject matter of this Agreement.

N
OW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. 0. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR

1. 1. Scope of Services. Contractor shall provide the services described in Contractor’s Proposal (the “Proposal”) attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein (the “Services”).

1. 2. Prevailing Wage Requirements.
(a) Prevailing Wage Laws. Contractor is aware of the requirements of Chapter 1 (beginning at Section 1720 et seq.) of Part 7 of Division 2 of the California Labor Code, as well as Title 8, Section 16000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations (“Prevailing Wage Laws”), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on “public works” and “maintenance” projects. This project is a “maintenance” project and requires compliance with the Prevailing Wage Laws. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.
(b) Payment of Prevailing Wages. Contractor shall pay the prevailing wag e rates for all work performed under this Agreement. When any craft or classification is omitted from the general prevailing wage determinations, ATTACHMENT 1
353
2 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

Contractor shall pay the wage rate of the craft or classification most closely related to the omitted classification. A copy of the general prevailing wage rate determination is on fi le in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. Contractor shall post a copy of such wage rates at all times at the project site(s).

(c) Legal Working Day. In accordance with the provisions of Labor Code Section 1810 et seq., eight (8) hours is the legal working day. Contractor and any subcontractor(s) of Contractor shall comply with the provisions of the Labor Code regarding eight (8)-hour work day and 40-hour work week requirements, and overtime, Saturday, Sunday, and holiday work. Work performed by Contractor’s or any subcontractor’s employees in excess of eight (8) hours per day, and 40 hours during any one week, must include compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day, or 40 hours during any one week, at not less than one and one-half times the basic rate of pay. Contractor shall forfeit as a penalty to City Twenty -Five Dollars ($25.00), or any greater penalty set forth in the Labor Code, for each worker employed in the execution of the work by Contractor or by any subcontractor(s) of Contractor, for each calendar day during which such worker is required or permitted to the work more than eight (8) hours in one calendar day or more than 40 hours in any one calendar week in violation of the Labor Code.

(d) Apprentices. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Labor Code Section 1777.5 concerning the employment of apprentices on public works projects. Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring compliance by its subcontractors with Labor Code Section 1777.5.

(e) Payroll Records. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1776, Contractor and any subcontractor(s) shall keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by Contractor or any subcontractor in connection with this Agreement. Each payroll record shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under penalty of perjury, stating both of the following: (1) The information contained in the payroll record is true and correct; and (2) The employer has complied with the requi rements of Sections 1771, 1881, and 1815 of the Labor Code for any work performed by his or her employees on this project. The payroll records shall be certified and shall be available for inspection at all reasonable hours in accordance with the requirements of Labor Code Section 1776.

(f) Registration with DIR. Contractor and any subcontractor(s) of Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Labor Code Section 1771 and Labor Code Section 1725.5 requiring registration with the DIR.

1.3. Performance to Satisfaction of City . Contractor agrees to perform all the work to the complete satisfaction of City. Evaluations of the wor k will be done by City ’s Maintenance Services Manager or his or her designee. If the quality of work is not satisfactory, City in its 354
3 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21
discretion has the right to:
(a) M
eet with Contractor to review the quality of the work and resolve the matters of concern;
(b)
Require Contractor to repeat the work at no additional fee until it is satisfactory; and/or
(c) Ter
minate the Agreement as hereinafter set forth.

1.4. Compliance with Applicable Law . Contractor warrants that it shall perform the services required by this Agreement in compliance with all applicable federal and s tate employment laws, including, but not limited to, those laws related to minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers ’ compensation insurance and s afety in employment; and all other applicable federal, state and local laws and ordinances applicable to the services required under this Agreement . Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys ’ fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Contractor’s performance under this Agreement.

1.5. Non -Discrimination. In performing this Agreement, Contractor shall not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religious creed, c olor, national origin, ancestry, phy sical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expres sion, age, sexual orientation, or military or veteran status, ex cept as permitted pursuant to section 12940 of the Government Code.

1.6. Non -Exclusive Agreement . Contractor acknowledges that City may enter into agreements with other contractors for services similar to the Services in this Agreement or may have its own employees perform services s imilar to those Serv ices contemplated by this Agreement.

1.7. Delegation and Assignment . Contractor may not delegate or assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, to any person or entity without the prior written cons ent of City.

Contractor may engage a subcontractor(s) as permitted by law and may employ other personnel to perform services contemplated by this Agreement at Contractor’s sole cost and expense.

2.0. COMPENSATION AND BILLING

2.1. Compensation. Contractor shall be paid in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit A, not to exceed the yearly compensation as described therein. Contractor’s total compensation shall not exceed Eight Hundred and Seventy-Si x Thousand Six Hundred and Three Dollars and Thirty-Nine Cents ($876,603.39).

2.2 Contingency . Upon the determination of the City, Contractor may be paid for additional unfores een repairs and costs ass ociated with this Agreement in an amount not to exceed 10% of the annual cost as set forth in Exhibit A. 355
4 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

2.3. Additional Services. Contractor shall not receive compensation for any s ervices provided outside the Scope of Services set forth in this Agreement without amending this Agreement as provided herein. It is specifically understood that oral requests and/or approvals of such additional services or additional compensation shall be barred and are unenforceable.

2.4. Method of Billing. Contractor may submit invoices to the City for approval on a progress basis, but no more often than two times a month. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Contractor’s services which have been completed to City’s sole satisfaction. City shall pay Contractor’s invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice. Each invoice shall describe in detail, the Services performed , the date of performance, and the associated time for completion.

2.5. Records and Audits. Records of Contractor’s S ervices shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City for inspection and/or audit at mutual ly convenient times throughout the term of this Agreement through three (3) years after its termination.

3.0. TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1. Commencement and Completion of Work . The S ervices shall be performed in strict compliance with Exhibit A . Failure to commence work in a timely manner and/or diligently pursue work to completion may be grounds for termination of this Agreement.

3.2. Excusable Delays. Neither party shall be responsible for delays or lack of performance resulting from acts beyond the reasonable control of the party or parties. Such acts shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God, fire, strikes, material shortages, compliance with laws or regulations, riots, acts of war, or any other conditions beyond the reasonable control of a party.

4.0. TERM AND TERMINATION

4.1. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue for a period of three (3) years and eight (8 ) months , ending on June 30, 2026, unless previously terminated as provided herein or as otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties.

4.2. Notice of Termination. City reserves and has the right and privilege of canceling, suspending or abandoning the execution of all or any part of the work contemplated by this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time, by providing written notice to Contractor . The termination of this Agreement shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the notice of termination.

In the event of such termination, Contractor shall immediately stop rendering services under this Agreement unless directed otherwise by the City.

4.3. Compensation. In the event of termination, City shall pay Contractor for reasonable costs incurred and Services satisfactorily performed up to and including the date of City’s written notice of termination. Compensation for work in progress shall be prorated based on the percentage of work completed as of the effective date of termination in accordance with the fees set forth herein.

5.0. INSURANCE

356
5 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

5.1. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance . Contractor shall obtain, maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated “A,” Class X, or better in the most recent Best ’s Key Insurance Rating Guide, and approved by City:

(a) Commercial general liability, including premises -operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

(b) Business automobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non- owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

Contractor agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers’ compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers ’ compensation insurance policy against the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by Contractor for the City and to require each of its subcontrac tors, if any, to do likewise under their workers’ compensation insurance policies.

5.2. Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:

(a) Additional insureds: “The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Con tractor p ursuant to its contract with City; products and completed operations of Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by Contractor; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by Contractor.”

(b) Notice: “Said policy shall not terminate, be suspended, or voided, nor shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage or limits reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to City.”

(c) Other insurance: “ Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of Costa Mesa shall be excess and not contributing with the ins urance provided by this policy.”

(d) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers.
357
6 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

(e) Contractor’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability.

5.3. Deductible or Self Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self-insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self-insured retention shall be approved in advance by City. No policy of insurance issued as to which the City is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention.

5.4. Certificates of Insurance. Contractor shall provide to City certificates of insurance showing the insurance coverages and required endorsements described above, in a form and content approved by City, prior to performing any services under this Agreement.

5.5. Non-limiting. The insurance provisions contained in this Agreement shall not be construed as limiting in any way, the indemnification provisions contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Contractor may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property.

6.0. GENERAL PROVISIONS

6.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to any matter referenced herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This Agreement may be modified only in writing, and signed by the parties in interest at the time of such modification. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any inconsistent provision in any other contract document appurtenant hereto, including exhibits to this Agreement.

6.2. Representatives. The C ity Manager or his or her designee shall be the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of the City, called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.

Contractor shall designate a representative for purposes of this Agreement who shall be authorized to issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of Contractor called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.

6.3. Project Managers. City shall designate a Project Manager to work directly with Contractor in the performance of this Agreement.

Contractor shall designate a Project Manager who shall represent it and be its agent in all consultations with City during the term of this Agreement. Contractor or its Project Manager shall attend and assist in all coordination meetings called by City.

6.4. Notices. Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this Agreement or the work hereunder may be provided by personal delivery, facsimile or mail and shall be addressed as set forth below. Such communication shall be deemed served or delivered: a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery; b) at 358
7 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

the time of transmission if such communication is sent by facsimile; and c) 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such communication is sent through regular United States mail.

IF TO CONTRACTOR: IF TO CITY:

Siemens Industry, Inc
6141 Katella Avenue
Cypress, CA 90630
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Tel: (657) 413-8648 Tel: (714) 754-5289
Attn: Doug Ray Attn: Daniel Jojola

Courtesy copy to:

City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Attn: Finance Dept. | Purchasing

6.5. Drug-free Workplace Policy . Contractor shall provide a drug -free workplace by complying with all provisions set forth in City ’s Council Policy 100-5, attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference. Contractor’s failure to conform to the requirements set forth in Council Policy 100- 5 shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City.

6.6. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event that litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the prevailing party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof.

6.7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the parties hereto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Orange County, California.

6.8. Assignment. Contractor shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or encumber all or any part of Contractor ’s interest in this Agreement without City ’s prior written consent. Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for termination of this Agreement.

Regardless of City’s consent, no subletting or assignment shall release Contractor of Contractor’s obligation to perform all other obligations to be performed by Contractor hereunder for the term of this Agreement.

6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, hold free and harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, at Contractor’s sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees arising out of the performance of the Contractor, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, of the 359
8 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the Contractor , its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the Contractor, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim, action, complaint or suit asserts liability against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the Contractor , its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the Contractor, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors are specifically named or otherwise asserted to be liable.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Contractor shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the City for claims, actions, complaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions contained either in the City ’s specifications or Contractor ’s Proposal, which shall be of no force and effect.

6.10. Independent Contractor . Contractor is and shall be acting at all times as an independent contractor and not as an employee of City. Contractor shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent.

Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor’s employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. Contractor shall secure, at its sole expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of Income Tax, Social Security, State Disability Insurance Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and other payroll deductions for Contractor and its officers, agents, and employees, and all business licenses, if any are required, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. Contractor shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Contractor further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Contractor to comply with the applicable worker’s compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Contractor under this Agreement any amount due to City from Contractor as a resul t of Contractor’s failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this paragraph.

6.11. PERS Eligibility Indemnification. In the event that Contractor or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Contractor providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City, Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Contractor or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.

Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Contractor and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
360
9 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

6.12. Cooperation. In the event any claim or action is brought against Cit y relating to Contractor’s performance or services rendered under this Agreement, Contractor shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require.

6.13. Conflict of Interest . Contractor and its officers, employees, associates and subcontractors, if any, will comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Contractor’s services under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the Political Reform Act (Government Code Sections 81000, et seq.) and Government Code Section 1090.

During the term of this Agreement, Contractor and its officers, employees, associates and subcontractors shall not, without the prior written approval of the City Representative, perform work for another person or entity for whom Contractor is not currently performing work that would require Contractor or one of its officers, employees, associates or subcontractors to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute.

6.14. Prohibited Employment. Contractor will not employ any regular employee of City while this Agreement is in effect.

6.15. Order of Precedence. In the event of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibits, the terms set forth in this Agreement shall prevail . If, and to the extent this Agreement incorporates by reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any conflict among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced.

6.16. Costs. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein.

6.17. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns.

6.18. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights . This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of City and Contractor and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement.

6.19. Headings. H eadings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

6.20. Construction. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement and have had an adequate opportunity to review each and every provision of the Agreement and submit the same to counsel or other consultants for review and comment. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

6.21. Amendments . Only a writing executed by the parties hereto or their respective 361
10 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

successors and assigns may amend this Agreement.

6.22. Waiver. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver.

6.23. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any part y, is materially impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations.

6.24. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement.

6.25. Corporate Authority . The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.

[Signature page follows.]

362
11 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written.

CONTRACTOR

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Signature

__________________________________
[Name and Title]

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Signature

__________________________________
[Name and Title]

CITY OF COSTA MESA

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Lori Ann Farrell Harrison
City Manager

ATTEST:

__________________________________
Brenda Green
City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Kimberly Hall Barlow
City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Ruth Wang
Risk Management

363
12 Siemens Industry, Inc.

Form Rev. 11-18-21

APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Daniel Jojola
Project Manager

DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Raja Sethuraman
Public Works Director

APPROVED AS TO PURCHASING:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Carol Molina
Finance Director

364

PROPOSAL
HVAC and Automation Maintenance Service Agreement for:

Costa Mesa City Hall and Police Department Headquarters

PREPARED BY
Siemens Industry, Inc. utilizing Sourcewell Contract #070121-SIE

PREPARED FOR
City of Costa Mesa, Sourcewell Member #2173

DELIVERED ON
October 21, 2022

THE PRICES STATED HEREIN ARE BASED ON THE TERMS OF ONLY THE SOURCEWELL CONTRACT AND ATTACHED

SIEMENS STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF FERDERAL TERMS REQUIRED WHEN FEDERAL FUNDING IS USED. BY PARTICIPATING IN THE SOURCEWELL PROGRAM, PARTICIPATING ENTITIES HAVE AGREED TO USE THE SOURCEWELL CONTRACT AND ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

ATTACHMENT 2
365
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 Proposal Information ............................................................................................. 1 Contact Information .............................................................................................. 3 CUSTOMER OVERVIEW.................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ............................................................................................... 4 Siemens Capabilities & Customer Commitment ...................................................... 5 SERVICE SOLUTION......................................................................................................... 6 Building Services – Automation.............................................................................. 6 Emergency Response Times ................................................................................... 8 Building Services – Mechanical .............................................................................. 9 Equipment Inventory ........................................................................................... 13 Mechanical Exclusions and Clarifications .............................................................. 23 SERVICE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................. 24 Connectivity and Communications ....................................................................... 24 Service Agreement Contract Characteristics.......................................................... 25 Service Details ..................................................................................................... 26 Maintained Equipment Table ............................................................................... 27 Service Team ....................................................................................................... 46 TERMS AND CONDITIONS ............................................................................................. 47 Terms and Conditions .......................................................................................... 47 Agreement Terms for Investments ....................................................................... 48 SIGNATURE PAGE ......................................................................................................... 49 Signature Page .................................................................................................... 49 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 50 Appendix A: Siemens Service Portfolio ................................................................. 50

Page 2 of 50 ends

366
Proposal #: 7148358
Date: October 21, 2022
Contact Information
Sales Executive: Doug Ray
Branch Address: 6141 Katella Ave.

Cypress, California 90630
Telephone: 657-238-6317
Email Address: [email protected]
Customer Contact: Daniel Jojala
Customer: City of Costa Mesa
Address: 77 Fair Dr.

Costa Mesa CA 92626-6520
Services shall be provided at: 1. City Hall: 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626

2. Police Department: 99 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Page 3 of 50 ends

367
Executive Summary
Customer Needs
The Services proposed in this agreement are specifically designed for City of Costa Mesa, and the services provided herein will help you in achieving your facility goals.

Our Services
Siemens will provide the following services.

Service Description

1. Building Services - Mechanical
• Annual Inspection
• Operational Inspection
• Condenser Tube Cleaning
• Vibration Analysis
• Air Filter Service
• Belt Service
• Coil Cleaning - Condenser
• Cooling Tower Cleaning
• Combustion Analysis
• Customer Directed Support

2. Building Services - Automation Control
• Network Maintenance
• Control Loop Tuning
• Preventative Maintenance
• Software Maintenance
• Customer Directed Support

Page 4 of 50 ends

368
Siemens Capabilities & Customer Commitment
Siemens Industry, Inc. is a leading single-source provider of cost-effective facility performance solutions for the comfort, life safety, security, energy efficiency and operation of some of the most technically advanced buildings in the world. For more than 150 years, Siemens has built a culture of long-term commitment to customers through innovation and technology. Siemens is a financially strong global organization with a Branch network that delivers personalized service and support to customers in multiple industries and locations.

References are available upon request.

Page 5 of 50 ends

369
Building Services – Automation
Services that deliver the outcomes you want to achieve
Services delivered by Siemens have been developed to help you achieve the outcomes you expect.

Network Health
Optimize the health of the network infrastructure by analyzing network traffic and resolving performance issues.

Network Maintenance
Network Maintenance: Using a combination of proprietary diagnostic technologies, digital meters, and network analysis software, Siemens will analyze, optimize and report on the performance of the customer's systems networks a specified number of times per year. Proper network performance helps to ensure the proper speed of communication and accuracy of control, alarming, and reporting across the facility. Using network diagnostic tools, our proactive evaluation of the data network includes an analysis of bandwidth, disturbances, network traffic, communication over the network, and overall operation. The number of networks to be analyzed and the frequency of the service are documented in the List of Maintained Equipment.

Control Loop Tuning
Control loops drift out of calibration with changes in mechanical efficiency, building use, and climatic conditions. Through this service Siemens will ensure control loops for devices such as valves, dampers, actuators, etc., experience minimized overshooting and oscillatory behavior. The control loops to be included as part of this service are itemized in the List of Maintained Equipment in this service agreement.

Preventive Maintenance – Automation
We will provide preventive maintenance in accordance with a program of routines as determined by our experience, equipment application and location. The list of field panels and/or devices included under this service are identified in the List of Maintained Equipment in this service agreement.

Automation controls can drift out of calibration with changes in HVAC component performance characteristics, building use, and climatic conditions. This service will extend equipment life, reduce energy consumption, and reduce the risk of costly and disruptive breakdowns.

Software Maintenance
Using appropriate tools from Siemens' suite of diagnostic tools, we periodically perform system diagnostics and then take corrective actions to ensure that the Building Automation System is performing at peak efficiency or to customer requirements. We make sure that software changes are clear and consistent, address any failed points, points in alarm, points in operator priority and take corrective action. We identify and correct software corruption and inconsistencies; eliminate duplicate points, redundant loops and causes of unnecessary traffic; and address unresolved points and alarm reporting problems. This will ensure that the system operates quickly, accurately and efficiently as originally designed and installed or as determined by current standards or requirements.

Page 6 of 50 ends

370
Customer Directed Support - 20 hours annually, not to exceed 5 hours per quarter.

Page 7 of 50 ends

371
Emergency Response Times
Emergency Online/Phone Response
Premium
Monday through Sunday, 24 Hours per Day System and software troubleshooting and diagnostics will be provided remotely to enable faster response to emergency service requests and to reduce the costs and disruptions of downtime. Siemens will respond within 2 hours, Monday through Sunday, 24 hours per day, including Holidays, upon receiving notification of an emergency, as determined by your staff and Siemens.

Where applicable, Siemens will furnish and install the necessary online service technology to enable us to remotely access into your system, through a communications protocol (internet connection or dedicated telephone line) that will be provided by the facility. Where remote access is not available to the system, Siemens will provide phone support to your staff to assist in their onsite troubleshooting and diagnosis. If remote diagnostics determine a site visit is required to resolve the problem, a technician can be dispatched.

Depending on your contract coverage, the on-site dispatch will be covered or will be a billable service call.

Emergency On-site Response
Premium
Monday through Sunday, 24 hours a day, Emergency Onsite Response will be provided to reduce the costs and disruptions of downtime when an unexpected problem does occur. Siemens will provide this service between scheduled service calls and respond onsite at your facility within 4 hours for emergency conditions, as determined by your staff and Siemens, Monday through Sunday, 24 hours per day, including Holidays, upon receiving notification of an emergency. Non-emergency conditions, as determined by your staff and Siemens, may be incorporated into the next scheduled service call.

Page 8 of 50 ends

372
Building Services – Mechanical
Services that deliver the outcomes you want to achieve.

Services delivered by Siemens have been developed to help you achieve the outcomes you expect.

Air Filter Service
Through this service Siemens will maintain indoor air quality by changing filters and minimizing dust and particles from collecting in the ductwork. This service also helps ensure proper flow through cooling and heating coils thus helping to prevent restrictions in airflow and provide better heat transfer, leading to better system performance and energy efficiency. The air handling equipment in which this air filter service is included is identified in the Mechanical Equipment List. Any filters that require replacement on a frequency other than the scheduled operational or annual service visits will be specifically identified immediately following this paragraph. In the event the air filter service or cleaning requires different frequencies than indicated (due to experience or changes in operating conditions), recommendations will be made for your approval to adjust the frequencies and any associated price.

Annual Inspection
Siemens will perform scheduled annual preventive maintenance in accordance with a program of standard routines as determined by our experience, equipment application, and equipment operating hours that are recommended by each equipment manufacturer and location. This service is designed to optimize the reliability and efficiency of the equipment, and provide you with possible indications of excessive wear and damage to your systems before a catastrophic failure occurs. Depending on our findings we will also provide recommendations for additional service(s) that will help to better enhance equipment performance and / or report any other deficiencies that are not corrected within the scope of this agreement. The equipment included under this service is itemized in the Mechanical Equipment List in this service agreement.

Belt Service
Siemens will provide necessary labor and material to change the belt(s) on the listed equipment. The belts will be changed during annual or seasonal inspections once per year Coil Cleaning - Condenser (Refrigeration)
Through this service Siemens will improve airflow across condenser coils and improve heat transfer. This service will help to extend the life of the compressors and improve efficiency. Coil cleaning consists of cleaning the outside surface of the condensing unit coils to remove any airborne particles, or dirt buildup by using a brush, high pressure air, chemical with low pressure wash or chemical with high pressure wash at our discretion based on the condition of the outside environment and coil accessibility. The equipment included under this service is itemized in the Mechanical Equipment List in this service agreement. Any Coils that require cleaning on a frequency other than the scheduled operational or annual service visits will be specifically identified immediately following this paragraph.

Page 9 of 50 ends

373
Condenser Tube Cleaning
Siemens will provide necessary labor and material to remove the condenser head and manually clean the condenser tubes with the appropriate cleaning equipment and replace the condenser head when cleaning is completed. This is done to maximize heat transfer which should result in efficiently operating equipment.

The condenser tubes will be cleaned during normal hours at a time that is mutually agreeable between your staff and Siemens. Acid washing to remove excessive scale build up due to poor water treatment is not included with this service.

Cooling Tower Cleaning
Siemens will drain, clean and remove normal debris from the cooling tower basins and distribution pans. This provides for even water flow and reduces the likelihood that debris will enter the condenser water system that could block chiller condenser tubes and restrict condenser flow, thus helping to prevent nuisance chiller shutdowns and poor system energy efficiency. The cooling towers included under this service are itemized in the Mechanical Equipment List in this service agreement.

Operating Inspection
Through this service Siemens will help to ensure mechanical equipment continues to operate efficiently, safely and with minimal operating disruptions during the operating season. We will provide routine operating inspection(s) to check system performance in accordance with a program of standard routines as determined by our experience, the equipment manufacturer's published recommendations, equipment application, and location. This service will focus on equipment operation, fluid levels, operating and safety controls, and safe equipment operation. The equipment included under this service is itemized in the Mechanical Equipment List in this service agreement.

Combustion Analysis
Siemens will utilize electronic flue gas analysis to perform combustion analysis, whereby we adjust the burner controls and linkages as required for efficiency and pollution control. If existing equipment cannot meet current pollution requirements, we will make recommendations for system improvements. The boilers included under this service are itemized in the Mechanical Equipment List in this service agreement.

Eddy Current Testing (To be done in Period 3, 2025)
Eddy Current Testing helps to ensure heat exchanger tubes are within manufacturer's specifications and tubes are free of defects, thus helping to prevent costly waterside failures. After completion of each test, Siemens shall interpret the results and provide you with a written report including recommendations for corrective action(s). The following systems are covered in the Agreement for chillers itemized in the Mechanical Equipment List:
• Chiller Condenser tubes (once every 3 years)

Page 10 of 50 ends

374
Many motor and driven component failures are directly related to mechanical failure. Vibration analysis can help you uncover mechanical issues well in advance of a failure and before motors are permanently damaged. As mechanical components begin to wear improperly, equipment begins to vibrate. By analyzing the signature of this vibration, the severity of the issues can be determined as well as the likely cause of the problem. The system combines a powerful diagnostic engine with a straightforward data collection process to analyze and report on specific machine faults and their severity. It provides quantifiable proof of equipment condition that drives budget and investment decisions to repair or replace machinery.

The early detection of mechanical issues can help increase uptime and reduce the overall cost of repairs by identifying issues before they cause major damage. When an issue is identified, plans can be implemented to repair and minimize business interruptions.

Services Performed on:
• Pumps
• Air Handler Motors

Page 11 of 50 ends

Vibration Analysis
375
Severity Scale
The Scale is an indication of the severity for any particular fault machine condition.

Follow these recommended actions for each severity level to avoid failure. In general, the scale may be interpreted as:
• Slight
No repair action is recommended. Monitor the machine and retest after regular machine planned maintenance to verify maintenance was performed correctly. • Moderate
(Months, even up to a year) – Repair action may be needed in the future. A machine failure is possible, so plan accordingly. Increase the frequency of vibration testing on this equipment and review spare parts availability.
• Serious
(Weeks) – Repair action may be needed before the next planned downtime. There may be other physical evidence of the fault in terms of noise or higher bearing temperatures. Retest the machine within a short period to confirm finds. Limit the run time of the machine, if possible, and determine a fault progression trend to prevent additional component failure.

Note:

Time to failure will vary depending on the equipment type, age, machine load, environmental conditions, and other variables.
• Extreme
(Days) – Consider shutting down the equipment and tacking repair action now to avoid catastrophic failure. There is likely other physical evidence of the fault in terms of noise, higher bearing temperatures or visible movement. Retest the machine within a short period to confirm finds.

Page 12 of 50 ends

Customer Directed Support - 80 hours annually, not to exceed 20 hours per quarter.

With Customer Directed Support, Siemens will provide a trained and experienced specialist or technician who will work under your direction. The intent of this service is to offer you labor assistance in completing a special project, or to meet a facility objective. Specific job responsibilities, goals, work hours and other associated deliverables of this service are listed in the Appendix section of this service agreement. 376
Equipment Inventory
CDS
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
#
Serial
#
Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
(M) Customer Directed
Support 1 4 4 NA Yes No
Chiller Plant
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer
Size
(Tons/
HP)
Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Chiller 1 - Trane 1 4 4 No TRANE 60 CGWC60 L88L04974 Yes No Chiller 2 - Trane 1 4 4 No TRANE 60 CGWC60 L88L04975 Yes No Chiller 3 - Trane 1 4 4 No TRANE 60 CGWC60 L88L04976 Yes No Chiller 4 - Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 25 30HWB025-C-610EC 1402Q01381 Yes No Chiller 5 - Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 25 30HWB025-C-610EC 1402Q01380 Yes No CH Pump 1- PACO 1 4 4 No PACO 7.5 11-20953-133201 Yes No CH Pump 2- PACO 1 4 4 No PACO 7.5 Concealed Yes No
CH Pump 3- PACO 1 4 4 No PACO 7.5 Concealed Yes No
CH Pump 4- PACO 1 4 4 No PACO 7.5 Concealed Yes No
CH Pump 5 - Kirst
Pump 1 4 4 No KIRST PUMP 5 5BFK1 Yes No
CW Pump 1- PACO 1 4 4 No PACO 7.5 Concealed Yes No

Page 13 of 50 ends

- Customer Direct Service - 100 total hours. Not to exceed 20 hours per quarter for mechanical, 5 hours per quarter for automation.

Costa Mesa City Hall

ALL ALL
377
CW Pump 2- PACO 1 4 4 No PACO 7.5 Concealed Yes No
CW Pump 3- PACO 1 4 4 No PACO 7.5 Concealed Yes No
CW Pump 4 - Frederic 1 4 4 No 5 Yes No
CW Pump 5 -
Weinman 1 4 4 No WEINMAN 5 167669 Yes No
Air Tube - Lamson -
Incl Basement 2 2 4 No LAMSON 1 12-SG-75 670357 Yes No
Air Compressor -
Quincy 1 2 4 No QUINCY 1 BMQTS5QCBDT UTY951156 Yes No
Air Dryer - Hankinson 1 2 4 No HANKINSON 1 HPR5-10-115 H510A1150510202 Yes No RTU 1 - Carrier 1 1 4 No CARRIER 5 50HJQ006---511-- 2202G49246 Yes No RTU 2 - Carrier 1 1 4 No CARRIER 4 50HS-042---501--- 1094G02634 Yes No Clean Strainer
(Annual)
5 1 4 No No No
FCUs
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Fan Coil 1 - Magic
Aire 1 4 4 No MAGIC AIRE 90000 90-BHW-6-A W991222866 Yes No Fan Coil 2 - Magic
Aire 1 4 4 No MAGIC AIRE 90000 90-BHW-6-A W991222867 Yes No Fan Coil 3 - Magic
Aire 1 4 4 No MAGIC AIRE 48000 48-BHW-6-A W000126023 Yes No Fan Coil 4 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 72000 CHN-6.52 28A66F-183 Yes No

Page 14 of 50 ends

378
Fan Coil 5 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 72000 CHN-6.52 28A66F-180 Yes No Fan Coil 6 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 24000 CHN-2.05 28A66F-169 Yes No Fan Coil 7 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 24000 CHN-2.05 28A66F-173 Yes No Fan Coil 8 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 48000 CHN-4.62 28A66F-185 Yes No Fan Coil 9 - First
Co. 1 4 4 No FIRST CO. 60000 60CHW4-C J03 part#
88060--4QS Yes No
Fan Coil 10 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 72000 CHN-6.52 28A66F-176 Yes No Fan Coil 11 - Magic
Aire 1 4 4 No MAGIC AIRE 240000 180/
240-BMW-6-A W040292250 Yes No
Fan Coil 12 - Magic
Aire 1 4 4 No MAGIC AIRE 240000 180/
240-BMW-6-A W031287599 Yes No
Fan Coil 13 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 96000 CHV-13.50 64A66G86 Yes No Fan Coil 14 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 96000 CHV-13.50 64A66G91 Yes No Fan Coil 15 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 96000 CHV-13.50 64A66G-85 Yes No Fan Coil 16 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 96000 CHV-13.50 64A66G-83 Yes No Fan Coil 17 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 96000 CHV-13.50 64A66G87 Yes No Fan Coil 18 -
Worthington 1 4 4 No WORTHINGTON 96000 CHV-13.50 64A66G-84 Yes No

Page 15 of 50 ends

379
Fan Coil 19 -
UNKNOWN 1 4 4 No 12000 Yes No
RTUs
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
RTU 1 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 5 50HJQ006---511-- 2202G49246 Yes No RTU 2 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 4 50HS-042---501--- 1094G02634 Yes No Split Systems
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP) Model # Serial
#
Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Split System 1 -
Mitsubishi 1 4 4 No MITSUBISHI 3.5 PUZ-
A42NKA7 Yes No
Split System 2 -
Mitsubishi 1 4 4 No MITSUBISHI 3.5 PUZ-
A42NKA7 Yes No
Split System 3 -
Mitsubishi 1 4 4 No MITSUBISHI 3.5 PUZ-
A42NKA7 Yes No
Exhaust Fan
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Exhaust Fan
RR 1 4 4 No UNKNOWN 1 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Yes No

Page 16 of 50 ends

380
Cooling Tower
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Cooling Tower -
BAC 1 4 4 Yes BAC 145 VTO-145-M U188617501-01-01 Yes No Strip Heaters
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
#
Serial
#
Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Strip Heaters 1st Floor - 2kw
to 15kw 23 1 4 No 34122 Yes No
Strip Heaters 2nd Floor - 2kw
to 7kw 20 1 4 No 17060 Yes No
Strip Heaters 3rd Floor - 2kw
to 6kw 19 1 4 No 13469 Yes No
Strip Heaters 4th Floor - 2kw
to 6kw 17 1 4 No 13469 Yes No
Strip Heaters 5th Floor - 2kw
to 5kw 20 1 4 No 11943 Yes No
Labor by month (For time adjustment purposes only)
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
#
Serial
#
Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
User Defined Eqpt.

Independent 1 12 4 No
Yes No

Page 17 of 50 ends

381
Chillers
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
# Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Chiller 1 -Trane 1 4 4 No TRANE 80 CGWC80 L87K04982 Yes No Chiller 2 -Trane 1 4 4 No TRANE 80 CGWC80 L87K04983 Yes No Clean Strainer
(Annual) 2 1 4 No No No
Pumps
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
CHW 1 - B&G 1 4 4 No BELL & GOSSETT 5 UNKNOWN C052920-01 K70 Yes No
CHW 2 - B&G 1 4 4 No BELL & GOSSETT 5 UNKNOWN C052920-02 K70 Yes No
CW 1 - B&G 1 4 4 No BELL & GOSSETT 5 UNKNOWN CO052921-01 K70 Yes No
CW 2 - B&G 1 4 4 No BELL & GOSSETT 5 UNKNOWN C05292T-02 K70 Yes No
Split Systems
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size
(Tons/HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service

Page 18 of 50 ends

Costa Mesa Police Headquarters
382
Split System 1 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 5 38HDR060 /
CK3B060 4306X92236 Yes No
Split System 2 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 5 38HDR060 /
CK3B060 4206X92222 Yes No
Split System 3 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 1.5 38HDR018 /
FK4C018 Yes No
Split System 4 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 1.5 38QRF018 /
40QAE018 Yes No
Split System 5 -
Mitsubishi 1 4 4 No MITSUBISHI 1.5 PUY-A30NHA / PLA-
A30AA Yes No
FCUs
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size
(Tons/HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Fan Coil 1 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 12000 CPE-80-H 07-263906-01 Yes No Fan Coil 2 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 12000 CPE-80 Yes No
Fan Coil 3 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 30000 CPE-150 07-263906-03 Yes No Fan Coil 4 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 12000 CPE-80 07-263906-04 Yes No Fan Coil 5 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 30000 CPE-150 Yes No Fan Coil 6 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 36000 CPE-200 07-263906-06 Yes No Fan Coil 7 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 36000 CPE-200 07-263906-07 Yes No

Page 19 of 50 ends

383
Fan Coil 8 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 No THERMAL CORP 36000 CPE-100 07-263906-08 Yes No Fan Coil 9 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 18000 FX4CNF018 1407A70104 Yes No Fan Coil 10 -
Carrier 1 4 4 No CARRIER 18000 42DAA16LRDY6YYYY 195011-10-1 Yes No Fan Coil 11 -
McQuay 1 4 4 No MCQUAY 60000 CAH006FDAC FBOU000500002 Yes No Fan Coil 12 -
McLean 1 4 4 No MCLEAN 60000 NCRMAC8000 10051590-49 Yes No Fans
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
# Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Exhaust Fan 1 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 2 135 CPS Yes No
Exhaust Fan 2 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 2 135
ACRUB Yes No
Exhaust Fan 3 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 3 150 CPS 138S988039-01/
0002101 Yes No
Exhaust Fan 4 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 7.5 245 CPS 138S988039-01/
0003501 Yes No
Exhaust Fan 5 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 5 210
SQNB Yes No
Exhaust Fan 6 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 5 GC-220 Yes No
Exhaust Fan 7 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 1 100 CPS 138S948902-00/
0000701 Yes No

Page 20 of 50 ends

384
Exhaust Fan 8 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 1 100 CPS 138S938097-00/
0002101 Yes No
Exhaust Fan 9 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 3 150
ACRUB
138S936258-01/
0012404 Yes No
Exhaust Fan 10 -
UNKNOWN 1 4 4 No UNKNOWN 5 Yes No
Supply Fan 1 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 5 180
KSP-B
138S988039-00/
0000701 Yes No
Supply Fan 2 - Loren
Cook 1 4 4 No LOREN COOK 3 150 ASP 138S988039-00/
0001801 Yes No
Gun Range Exhaust -
Dayton 1 4 4 No DAYTON 5 1M8F2 15104289 Yes No
AHUs
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP) Model # Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Air Handler 1 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 Yes THERMAL CORP 50 RTA-701-H 09-263906-09 Yes No Air Handler 2 -
Thermal Corp 1 4 4 Yes THERMAL CORP 50 RTA-241-HS 09-263906-10 Yes No Boilers
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
# Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Boiler 1 -
Raypak 1 4 4 No RAYPAK INC. 60 302-902 704264547 Yes No

Page 21 of 50 ends

385
Boiler 1 -
Raypak 1 4 4 No RAYPAK INC. 60 302-902 704264548 Yes No HWPs
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
#
Serial
#
Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Hot Water Pump 1 - Bell &
Gossett 1 4 4 No BELL & GOSSETT 5 1BF046
E70 Yes No
Hot Water Pump 2 - Bell &
Gossett 1 4 4 No BELL & GOSSETT 5 1BF046
E70 Yes No
Cooling Tower
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
# Serial # Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
Cooling Tower -
BAC 1 4 4 Yes 160 FXT-160/
X U15634601-01 Yes No
Labor by month (For time adjustment purposes only)
Description Qty # of
Visits
# of
Years
VFD
Incl. Manufacturer Size (Tons/
HP)
Model
#
Serial
#
Preventive
Maintenance
R&R
Service
User Defined Eqpt.

Independent 1 12 4 No No No

Page 22 of 50 ends

Mechanical Exclusions and Clarifications
Unless expressly stated otherwise, Services do not include and Siemens is not responsible for: (a) re- installation or relocation of Equipment; (b) painting or refinishing of Equipment or surrounding surfaces; (c) parts, accessories, attachments or other devices added to Equipment but not furnished by Siemens; (d) failure to continually provide suitable operating environment including, but not limited to, adequate space, ventilation, electrical power and protection from the elements; (e) the removal or re-installation of replacement valves, dampers, water flow and tamper switches, airflow stations, venting or draining systems, and any other permanently mounted integral pipe or air duct component; (f) installation / removal, and / or rental fees for any temporary HVAC equipment if necessary; (g) Cranes, hoisting or rigging that may be required; (h) Leaks at gaskets O-rings or seals; or (i) latent defects in the Equipment that cannot be discovered through the standard provision of the Services. Siemens is not responsible for services performed on any Equipment other than by Siemens or its agents.

Siemens will not be responsible for the maintenance, repair or replacement of, or Services necessitated by reason of: (a) non-maintainable, non-replaceable or obsolete parts of the Equipment, including but not limited to ductwork, shell and tubes, heat exchangers, coils, unit cabinets, casings, refractory material, electrical wiring, water and pneumatic piping, structural supports, cooling tower fill, slats and basins, etc. unless otherwise expressly stated elsewhere in this Proposal; or (b) negligence, abuse, misuse, improper or inadequate repairs or modifications by others, improper operation, lack of operator maintenance or skill, failure to comply with manufacturer's operating and environmental requirements.

Siemens is not responsible for repairs, replacements, or services to Equipment due to corrosion, erosion, improper or inadequate water treatment by others, electrolytic or chemical action, or reasons beyond its reasonable control.

Siemens is not responsible for water treatment related damages to the condenser, evaporator, hot water, or steam systems.

Siemens is not responsible for service calls due to power outages.

Siemens is not responsible for repair labor/materials/parts for ice machines, refrigerators, freezers, kitchen specialty equipment, boilers, laundry equipment, replacement refrigerant, replacement glycol, or replacement control valves unless included elsewhere. On occasion a flush and refill of the Water-Glycol mixtures may be required. Flush and refill is not included in the standard service offering.

Siemens is not responsible for helium replacement in chiller systems that service Medical Imaging Systems.

Siemens is not responsible for repair labor/materials/parts for covered equipment that has experienced electrical damage due to power surges, single phasing, and related electrical issues.

Page 23 of 50 ends

387
Connectivity and Communications
Siemens Service Portal
The Service Portal complements the personalized services you will receive from your local Siemens office by providing greater visibility into equipment and services delivered by Siemens. This web-based portal allows you the ability to submit service requests, confirm and modify schedules, track repairs, manage agreements, generate reports, and access critical information; then share it across your entire enterprise quickly and efficiently. The Service Portal is a user-friendly way to increase your productivity and the value of your service program.

Data security as a basic requirement
We value confidentiality and long-term partnerships. That is why we give the security of your data the highest priority. Before we implement an enhanced service package with remote support, we conduct an in- depth analysis of the situation, taking into account national and international regulations, technical infrastructures and industry specifics. Our service employees carefully evaluate your needs on an individual basis with a view toward information security.

Page 24 of 50 ends

388
Service Agreement Contract Characteristics
Description MECHANICAL AUTOMATION
Hours of Coverage 24 x 7 24 x 7
Response Times (Phone/Online) 2 Hours 2 Hours
Response Times (Onsite/Emergency) 4 Hours 4 Hours
Remote Services No Yes
Third Party Systems No No
Monitoring No No

Page 25 of 50 ends

389
Service Details
Automation
Service Description Qty Frequency Year
Customer Directed Support 1 4 1,2,3,4
Apogee System 1 2 1,2,3,4
Apogee P2 1 1 1,2,3,4
Insight Workstation 1 1 1,2,3,4
Control Loop Tuning 1 1 1,2,3,4
User Defined Equipment Independent Service 1 12 1,2,3,4

Page 26 of 50 ends

390
Maintained Equipment Table
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Chiller 1 - Trane
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Condenser Tube Cleaning (water) 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Eddy Current Analysis 1 1 3 Onsite N/A
Chiller 2 - Trane
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Condenser Tube Cleaning (water) 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Eddy Current Analysis 1 1 3 Onsite N/A
Chiller 3 - Trane
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Condenser Tube Cleaning (water) 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Eddy Current Analysis 1 1 3 Onsite N/A
Chiller 4 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Condenser Tube Cleaning (water) 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 27 of 50 ends

391
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Eddy Current Analysis 1 1 3 Onsite N/A
Chiller 5 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Condenser Tube Cleaning (water) 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Eddy Current Analysis 1 1 3 Onsite N/A
CH Pump 1- PACO
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CH Pump 2- PACO
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CH Pump 3- PACO
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CH Pump 4- PACO
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 28 of 50 ends

392
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CH Pump 5 - Kirst Pump
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CW Pump 1- PACO
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CW Pump 2- PACO
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CW Pump 3- PACO
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CW Pump 4 - Frederic
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 29 of 50 ends

393
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CW Pump 5 - Weinman
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Tube - Lamson - Incl Basement
Annual Inspection 2 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 2 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Compressor - Quincy
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Dryer - Hankinson
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
RTU 1 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 30 of 50 ends

394
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Belt Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Coil Cleaning - Condenser (Refrig) 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A RTU 2 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Belt Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Coil Cleaning - Condenser (Refrig) 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A Fan Coil 1 - Magic Aire
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 2 - Magic Aire
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 3 - Magic Aire
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 31 of 50 ends

395
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 4 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 5 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 6 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 7 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 8 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 32 of 50 ends

396
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 9 - First Co.

Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 10 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 11 - Magic Aire
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 12 - Magic Aire
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 13 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 33 of 50 ends

397
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 14 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 15 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 16 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 17 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 18 - Worthington
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 34 of 50 ends

398
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 19 - UNKNOWN
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 1 - Mitsubishi
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 2 - Mitsubishi
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 3 - Mitsubishi
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan RR
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 35 of 50 ends

399
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Cooling Tower - BAC
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Cooling Tower Cleaning 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Belt Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Cooling Tower Cleaning 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Belt Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Strip Heaters 1st Floor - 2kw to 15kw
Annual Inspection 23 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Strip Heaters 2nd Floor - 2kw to 7kw
Annual Inspection 20 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Strip Heaters 3rd Floor - 2kw to 6kw
Annual Inspection 19 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Strip Heaters 4th Floor - 2kw to 6kw
Annual Inspection 17 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Strip Heaters 5th Floor - 2kw to 5kw
Annual Inspection 20 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Chiller 1 -Trane

Page 36 of 50 ends

400
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Condenser Tube Cleaning (water) 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Eddy Current Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Chiller 2 -Trane
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Condenser Tube Cleaning (water) 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Eddy Current Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CHW 1 - B&G
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CHW 2 - B&G
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CW 1 - B&G
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 37 of 50 ends

401
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
CW 2 - B&G
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 1 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 2 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 3 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 4 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 38 of 50 ends

402
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Split System 5 - Mitsubishi
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 1 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 2 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 3 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 4 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 39 of 50 ends

403
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 5 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 6 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 7 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 8 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 9 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 40 of 50 ends

404
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 10 - Carrier
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 11 - McQuay
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Fan Coil 12 - McLean
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 1 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 2 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 3 - Loren Cook

Page 41 of 50 ends

405
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 4 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 5 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 6 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 7 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 8 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Exhaust Fan 9 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 42 of 50 ends

406
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Exhaust Fan 10 - UNKNOWN
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Supply Fan 1 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Supply Fan 2 - Loren Cook
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Gun Range Exhaust - Dayton
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Handler 1 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Belt Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Air Handler 2 - Thermal Corp
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 43 of 50 ends

407
Mechanical
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
Air Filter Service 1 4 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Belt Service 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Boiler 1 - Raypak
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Combustion Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Combustion Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Hot Water Pump 1 - Bell & Gossett
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Hot Water Pump 2 - Bell & Gossett
Annual Inspection 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Operational Inspection 1 3 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
Vibration Analysis 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 44 of 50 ends

408
Automation
Equipment Service Description Qty Frequency Year Service Location
Repair
Coverage
City Hall Panels on P2 BLN
Apogee System 2 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
PHQ Legacy Panels on P2 BLN
Apogee System 3 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A
PHQ Panel on P2 BLN
Apogee System 1 1 1,2,3,4 Onsite N/A

Page 45 of 50 ends

409
Doug Ray manages the overall strategic service
plan based upon your current and future service
requirements.

Client Services Manager is responsible for
ensuring that our contractual obligations are
delivered, your expectations are being met and
you are satisfied with the delivery of our services.

Primary Service Specialist is responsible for
performing the ongoing service of your system.

Secondary Service Specialist who will be
familiarized with your building systems to provide
in-depth backup coverage.

Remote Services Specialist is responsible for the
execution of remote services including proactive
planned tasks, in-depth fault analysis and
identification of corrective actions.

Service Operations Manager is responsible for
managing the delivery of your entire support
program and service requirements.

Service Coordinator is responsible for
scheduling your planned maintenance visits, and
handling your emergency situations by taking the
appropriate action.

Service Administrator is responsible for all
service invoicing including both service
agreement and service projects.

Service Team
An important benefit of your Service Agreement derives from having the trained building service personnel of Siemens Industry, Inc. familiar with your building systems. Our implementation team of local experts provides thorough, reliable service and scheduling for the support of your system.

Added to the team is a team of building experts at our Digital Service Center. The benefits you receive are less disruption to your employees at the site, less intrusive on the system at peak hours, fewer emissions for trucks rolled, and real time analytics with digital workspace hours.

The following list outlines the service team that will be assigned to the service agreement for your facility Your Assigned Team of Service Professionals will include:

Page 46 of 50 ends

410
Terms and Conditions
Terms and Conditions (Click to download)
Terms & Conditions
(www.siemens.com/standard-terms-service)
Price Escalation. If, during the term of this Contract, the price of various materials or labor or logistics are increased as reflected by CRU, CMAI, COMEX market indexes or IHS Markit, then Siemens may increase the applicable yearly Investment or apply a surcharge accordingly.

As a result of the global Covid-19 Virus outbreak, temporary delays in delivery, labor or services from Siemens and its sub-suppliers or subcontractors may occur. Among other factors, Siemens' delivery is subject to the correct and punctual supply from sub-suppliers or subcontractors, and Siemens reserves the right to make partial deliveries or modify its labor or services. While Siemens shall make every commercially reasonable effort to meet the delivery or service or completion date mentioned above, such date is subject to change.

Attachment A
Riders (Click on rider below to download)
SI Online Backup and Data Protection
(www.siemens.com/rider-data-backup)

Page 47 of 50 ends

411
Agreement Terms for Investments
Services shall be provided at:

Period Period Range Billing Frequency Annual Price
1** Nov 15, 2022 - June 30, 2023 Annually $154,472.71*
2 July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2024 Annually $224,734.43*
3*** July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2025 Annually $249,167.58* 4 July 1, 2025 - June 30, 2026 Annually $248,228.67*
Multi-Period Investment Total $876,603.39

Page 48 of 50 ends

1. Costa Mesa City Hall: 77 Fair Dr., Costa Mesa, CA 92626

2. Costa Mesa Police Department Headquarters: 99 Fair Dr., Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Siemens Industry, Inc. shall provide the services as identified in this Proposal and pursuant to the associated terms and conditions contained within.

This proposal is presented utilizing Sourcewell Contract #070121-SIE to Sourcewell Member #2173, City of Costa Mesa.

Duration (Initial Term and Renewal): This Agreement shall remain in effect for an Initial Term of 4 Periods beginning 2022-11-15. After the expiration of the Initial Term, this Agreement shall automatically renew for successive one year periods. The Investments for each year after the Initial Term of the Agreement and each year of each renewal of this Agreement shall be determined as the immediate prior year's Investment plus an escalator of 5.5% or as allowed per this proposal. In addition, each renewal term pricing shall be adjusted for any additions or deletions to services selected for the renewal term.

Initial Term Investments:
*Amount Due In Advance Based On Billing Frequency
Applicable sales taxes, if included in the investment amount, are estimated only and will be calculated based on local requirements at the time of invoicing. The pricing quoted in this Proposal are firm for 30 days. ** Please Note: Per customer request, Period 1 has a shortened term period of 8 months. ***Please Note: Period 3 has Eddy Current Testing for Chillers. 412
Signature Page
The Buyer acknowledges that when accepted by the Buyer as proposed Siemens Industry, Inc., this Proposal and the Standard Terms and Conditions of Sale for Services, (together with any other documents incorporated into the forgoing) shall constitute the entire agreement of the parties with respect to its subject matter.

BY EXECUTION HEREOF, THE SIGNER CERTIFIES THAT (S)HE HAS READ ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND DOCUMENTS, THAT SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC. OR ITS REPRESENTATIVES HAVE MADE NO AGREEMENTS OR REPRESENTATIONS EXCEPT AS SET FORTH THEREIN, AND THAT (S)HE IS DULY AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE THE SIGNATURE PAGE ON BEHALF OF THE BUYER.

Initial Term Investments
Period Period Range Billing Frequency Annual Price
1 Nov 15, 2022 - June 30, 2023 Annually $154,472.71*
2 July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2024 Annually $224,734.43*
3 July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2025 Annually $249,167.58*
4 July 1, 2025 - June 30, 2026 Annually $248,228.67*
Proposed by: Accepted by:

Siemens Industry, Inc.
______________________________________
Company

CITY OF COSTA MESA
_____________________________________
Company
Doug Ray
______________________________________
Name
_____________________________________
Name (Printed)
7213754
______________________________________
Proposal #
_____________________________________
Signature
$876,603.39
______________________________________
Proposal Amount
_____________________________________
Title
October 21, 2022
______________________________________
Date
_____________________________________
Date
_____________________________________
Purchase Order # ⬜ PO for billing only ⬜ PO not required

Page 49 of 50 ends

This proposal is presented utilizing Sourcewell Contract #070121-SIE to Sourcewell Member #2173, City of Costa Mesa.
413
Appendix A: Siemens Service Portfolio

Page 50 of 50 ends

414
City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 22-917 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
TITLE:

SUB-RECIPIENT AGREEMENT FOR THE 2021 URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANT DEPARTMENT: POLICE DEPARTMENT AND FIRE AND RESCUE

DEPARTMENT
PRESENTED BY: BRENDA EMRICK, ACTING EMERGENCY SERVICES

MANAGER
CONTACT INFORMATION: BRENDA EMRICK, ACTING EMERGENCY SERVICES MANAGER, (714) 327-7406
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute the Sub- Recipient Agreement (Attachment 1) with the City of Santa Ana for the FY 2021 Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program.

BACKGROUND:

In 2005, the cities of Anaheim and Santa Ana were selected as administrators of the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) Grant for the Anaheim/Santa Ana Urban Area jurisdiction. Each year, Anaheim and Santa Ana trade off being the lead agency responsible for the program cycle. Santa Ana, through the Santa Ana Police Department, is the lead agency for the FY 2021 UASI Grant. The City of Costa Mesa is within the Anaheim/Santa Ana Urban Area jurisdiction. As part of this Urban Area, the City of Costa Mesa is eligible to receive equipment or services purchased with grant funds or to receive reimbursement for purchases of authorized equipment, services, joint training exercises, and expenses related to overtime for training evolutions, upon prior written approval from Santa Ana.

The UASI Grant is a reimbursement grant, meaning cities must expend their own funds for eligible expenditures, and then apply for reimbursement of these expenditures. In an effort to ensure each city does not expend funds for equipment, services, or training costs that are not allowable under the UASI Grant, each city is required to obtain prior written approval from the Emergency Management Bureau of the Santa Ana Police Department for expenditures it plans to submit for reimbursement.

Historically, the City received UASI grants to fund equipment purchases and training costs associated with the instruction and delivery of approved UASI courses. For FY 2019, the City did not receive a UASI allocation. However, Santa Ana recommended that the City enter into the Sub-Recipient Agreement with Santa Ana so that the City would be eligible to receive reimbursement in the event the City incurs eligible expenses during the grant period.

Page 1 of 2 ends

415
File #: 22-917 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
ANALYSIS:

The City did not receive a FY 2019 UASI grant. However, pursuant to Santa Ana’srecommendation, staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into the Sub-Recipient Agreement, so the City can be eligible to receive reimbursement in the event the City incurs eligible expenses during the grant period.

If the City Council authorizes the City Manager to enter into the Sub-Recipient Agreement, Police Department Training Bureau staff, with assistance from the Finance Department, will continue to track City expenditures associated within the grant parameters. If approved, the Police Department would process reimbursement requests with UASI grant staff on behalf of the City.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council could reject City participation in the UASI Grant Program. This approach would cause those expenses to be paid from the City’s budget with no potential for reimbursement from the UASI Grant funds.

FISCAL REVIEW:

No fiscal impact.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’sOffice has reviewed this report and the agreement between the City of Santa Ana and the City of Costa Mesa and has approved them as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goals:
· Strengthen the Public’s Safety and Improve the Quality of Life · Advance Environmental Sustainability and Climate Resiliency CONCLUSION:

Page 2 of 2 ends

416
Attachment 1
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 22-932 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
TITLE:

COSTA MESA FIRE & RESCUE STRATEGIC PLAN 2022-2027
DEPARTMENT: COSTA MESA FIRE & RESCUE
PRESENTED BY: DANIEL A. STEFANO, FIRE CHIEF
CONTACT INFORMATION: DANIEL A. STEFANO, FIRE CHIEF, (714) 754-5106 RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue Strategic Plan 2022 - 2027.

BACKGROUND:

The 2015-2020 Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue (CMFR) Strategic Plan was developed through a comprehensive collaborative process and has served as a valued road map for the department.

Over the past five years, the department has made considerable progress and accomplished many of the goals and objectives included in the Strategic Plan including, but not limited to: opening a new fire station; acquiring new and standardized apparatus and equipment; increasing efficiencies through an enhanced deployment model and ambulance transportation program; establishing new cost recovery programs; increasing leadership, professional development, technical and formal education training opportunities within the department; increasing health, safety & wellness programs; establishing City Council approved key lead and support positions for Training & Safety, Emergency Medical Services and Community Risk Reduction; increasing technology capabilities; and firmly re-establishing CMFR as a recognized destination department.

All of the successful outcomes achieved through the road map of the 2015-2020 strategic plan were a direct result of the support the Department has received from the City Council, City Manager, City Leadership Team, and the Costa Mesa Community. With the successful completion of the goals and objectives of the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan CMFR began preparing for the next five-year Strategic Plan while navigating the challenges of the pandemic. CMFR contracted with the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE), a not-for-profit 501(c) (3) corporation, whose role is to help high-performing fire departments and emergency services professionals in their efforts to continuously improve. CPSE was brought in to help facilitate the development of the department’s path into the future via a “Community-Driven Strategic Plan”.

Page 1 of 3 ends

461
File #: 22-932 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
ANALYSIS:

CMFR participated in a number of preparatory meetings and trainings over a four-day period, which included a community-based strategic planning workshop with external stakeholders, and a meeting with internal stakeholders. The Strategic Planning team worked on developing future strategic goals and objectives for the Department that were based on the feedback received from the community, internal stakeholders, and also in alignment with the City Council’sand City’sown Strategic Goals and Objectives.

To continue achieving the mission of Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue, specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time bound goals and objectives were established for 2022-2027. The established goals and objectives will enhance strengths, address identified weaknesses, provide a clear direction, and address the community’sconcerns. The established goals and objectives will direct the organization to its desired future while reducing the obstacles and distractions along the way. Leadership- established workgroups will meet and manage progress toward accomplishing these goals and objectives and adjust timelines as needs and the environment change. Regular reports of progress and changes will be shared with CMFR’s leadership and the City Manager, while also being incorporated into the department’s annual report.

GOAL #1: Upgrade our technological infrastructure by investing in equipment, systems, and personnel to enhance and sustain high service levels and positively impact our community.

GOAL #2: Evaluate, develop, and execute comprehensive administrative and operational staffing levels that enhance and advance our ability to meet and exceed community expectations, governance, and department objectives.

GOAL #3: Upgrade our infrastructure by investing in our facilities, equipment, and systems to enhance and sustain a high level of service and positively impact our community.

GOAL #4: Collectively and continuously assess, develop, execute, and monitor a comprehensive training plan that strengthens, enhances, and advances the organization’s operational, administrative, and professional goals.

GOAL #5: Enhance internal and external communication to provide clarity and alignment with those we serve and serve with.

GOAL #6: Prepare for, pursue, achieve, and maintain international accreditation to better serve our community and embrace excellence.

The CMFR strategic planning team participated in breakout groups for each of the six goals. Each group developed key objectives to implement during the next six-month period and beyond. A detailed work plan was prepared with specific deliverables for each Goal including specific timeframes that will be updated and monitored on a monthly, quarterly and annual basis, throughout the duration of the strategic plan, and adjust as needed.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council can provide alternate direction regarding the department’s Strategic Plan.

Page 2 of 3 ends

462
File #: 22-932 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
FISCAL REVIEW:

Many of the stated priorities and action steps can be funded within the current (FY 2022-23) budget.

Other actions will be included in the proposed budget for FY 2023-2024 as needed, either in whole, or as part of a multi-year funding plan.

The Fire Chief will be working closely with the City Manager and the Finance Director on all related funding needs for inclusion in future proposed budgets as needed.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney reviewed and approved this report as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:
· Strengthen the Public’s Safety and Improve the Quality of Life CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue Strategic Plan 2022 -2027.

Page 3 of 3 ends

463
ATTACHMENT 1
464

This page was intentionally left blank.
465

J o h n S t e p h e n s , M a y o r
A n d r e a M a r r , M a y o r P r o T e m
M a n u e l C h a v e z , C o u n c i l M e m b e r
L o r e n G a m e r o s , C o u n c i l M e m b e r
J e f f H a r l a n , C o u n c i l M e m b e r
D o n H a r p e r , C o u n c i l M e m b e r
A r l i s R e y n o l d s , Co u n c i l M e m b e r

466

City Manager ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... Lori Ann Farrell Harrison City Attorney (Contract) ................................ ................................ ............................ Kimberly Hall Barlow Economic Development Services Director ................................ ................................ ............... Jennifer Le Finance Director ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. Carol Molina Information Technology Director ................................ ................................ ................................ .. Steve Ely Parks and Community Services Director ................................ ................................ .............. Jason Minter Public Services Director ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... Raja Sethuraman Police Chief ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... Ron Lawrence Fire Chief ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ Dan Stefano 467

Message from the Fire Chief
Just over five years ago, our collective team worked together to develop our Costa Mesa Fire & R escue (CMFR) Strategic Plan 2015-2020. The original document was the result of a comprehensive collaboration within our organization, intended to establish a clear roadmap and to help define and guide our Mission, Vision, and Values for the future.

With any successful plan, it is extremely important to develop the plan through engaged and thoughtful collaboration, implement the plan, and then regularly review and assess our progress to ensure we remain on track, adapting and making necessary adjustments along the way. Our team has made extraordinary progress and collectively accomplished so much over the past five years. These accomplishments have been achieved around the foundation and focus of four primary areas. These areas include:

1. Our People (Wellness, Training, Professional Development & Succession Planning);

2. Our Infrastructure (Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment);

3. Our Service (Appropriate Staffing, Deployment, and Quality Service to the Community); and

4. Our Technology and Innovation (Enhanced GIS Resource & Response Mapping, CAD RMS Upgrades, Technology Advances, Firefighter Safety, and Innovation).

There is no question that we have observed outstanding results and outcomes as the result of our extensive preparations, comprehensive planning, steadfast hard work, and exhaustive execution. These successful outcomes have also been a direct result of the valued, strong support from our City Council, City Manager, City Leadership Team, and the Costa Mesa Community!
With the success of our previous Strategic Plan, we have recently finalized our next CMFR Strategic Plan, 2022-2027. This is a community -based strategic plan developed in alignment with our City Council’s Strategic Goals and Objectives. This updated Strategic Plan will build on the outstanding progress made to date and will serve as an essential road map as we embark on thoughtfully carrying out our next chapters, continuing to elevate the department’s progress and strong upward trajectory.

We will continue to actively pursue and achieve our goals and objectives, as we work on our gaps and areas of improvement, utilizing the 2022-2027 Strategic Plan to help define, refine, and provide a clear direction for o ur organization. We will remain committed to mov ing forward to serve the best interests of the community and each other to the absolute best of our abilities.

This Strategic Plan 2022 -2027 is the result of strong partnerships within our organization and wi th our internal and external stakeholders. This community-driven process was a true team effort, and the valued input provided helped to create an outstanding final product, now memorialized in writing.

This would not have been possible without the participation and efforts of everyone involved engaging and participating at all levels, so thank you!
In closing, I want to thank our City Council, City Manager Lori Ann Farrell Harrison, our City Leadership and City Team, our Costa Mesa Fire Family, our incredible Costa Mesa community, and all our partners for the strong support we continue to receive. It is our greatest honor and privilege to serve Costa Mesa with Respect, Integrity, and Compassion - 24/7/365 – and our future is truly brighter than it has ever been!

Daniel A. Stefano, Fire Chief
City of Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue
468

Introduction
Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue (CMFR) provides an all-hazards approach in the protection of the lives and property of the residents, businesses, and visitors of Costa Mesa, California . CMFR is consistently working to achieve and/or maintain the highest level of professionalism and efficiency on behalf of those it serves, and thus, contracted with the Center for Public Safety Excellence ® (CPSE) to facilitate a method to document the department’s path into the future via a “Community-Driven Strategic Plan.” The following strategic plan was written with a basis in the Commission on Fire Accreditation International’s® (CFAI) fire and emergency service accreditation model and is intended to guide the organization within established parameters set forth by the authority having jurisdiction.

The CPSE utilized the community -driven strategic planning process to go beyond just developing a document. It challenged the de partment’s members to critically examine paradigms, values, philosophies, beliefs, and desires and challenged individuals to work in the best interest of the “team.” It further provided the department with an opportunity to participate in the development o f the organization’s long-term direction and focus. Members of the organization’s community and agency stakeholders’ groups demonstrated commitment to this important project and remain committed to the document’s completion and plan execution.

469

COSTA MESA FIRE & RESCUE | STRATEGIC PLAN
Table of Contents

Organizational Background......................................................................................................................................... 1 Organizational Structure .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Community-Driven Strategic Planning ................................................................................................................... 3 Process and Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. 3 Community Group Findings ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Community Priorities ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Agency Stakeholder Group Findings ....................................................................................................................... 5 Mission ................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Values .................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Vision ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Programs and Services .................................................................................................................................................. 8 SWOT Analysis.................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Critical Issues and Service Gaps ................................................................................................................................. 9 Strategic Initiatives ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................................................... 10 Vision ................................................................................................................................................................................. 24 Performance Measurement ....................................................................................................................................... 24 The Success of the Strategic Plan ........................................................................................................................... 25 Glossary of Terms, Acronyms, and Initialisms .................................................................................................... 26 Appendix 1 – Community Input .............................................................................................................................. 28 Should Change ........................................................................................................................................................ 28 Should Not Change................................................................................................................................................ 28 Community Expectations ..................................................................................................................................... 28 Areas of Community Concern ............................................................................................................................ 30 Positive Community Feedback ........................................................................................................................... 32 Other Thoughts and Comments ....................................................................................................................... 33 Appendix 2 - SWOT ...................................................................................................................................................... 35 Strengths .................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Weaknesses ............................................................................................................................................................... 36 Opportunities ........................................................................................................................................................... 37 Threats ........................................................................................................................................................................ 38 Appendix 3 - Critical and Service Gap Issues Identified by Agency Stakeholders ............................... 39 Appendix 4 - City Council Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................... 41

470

Page 1 ends

Organizational Background
Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue was first
organized in 1925 as a volunteer
department in response to several
disastrous fires in the local community.

Over the years, the organization evolved
from its original all-volunteer form to the
present all -hazards resp onse team
approaching its 100th anniversary.

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue, boasting an ISO
rating of 2, serves an approximate
population of 113,000 residents. In
addition, the local area has thousands of
visitors and many others who are
employed within the community. Growth
and increase in population have and will provide for specific risks for which Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue considers, prepares, and deploys its resources and personnel.

Today, CMFR reflects on its history and remains committed to providing all -hazards emergency services and education to its community with courage, leadership, and duty. Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue continues to honor its community by providing quality services through its proactive fo cus on risks and deployment from six stations located strategically throughout the 16 square miles of coverage area. Staffed to support the community, CMFR embraces its future vision and excellence in service delivery.

471

Page 2 ends

Organizational Structure

472

Page 3 ends

Community-Driven Strategic Planning
For many successful organizations, the community’s voice drives their operations and charts the course for their future. A community-driven emergency service organization seeks to gather and utilize the needs and expectations of its community in the development and/or improvement of the services provided. A community-driven strategic planning process was used to develop this strategic plan to ensure that the community remains a focus of an organization’s direction.

A str ategic plan is a living management tool that provides short -term direction, builds a shared vision, documents goals and objectives, and optimizes the use of resources. Effective strategic planning benefits from a consistent and cohesively structured proces s employed across all levels of the organization.

Planning is a continuous process with no clear beginning and no defined end. While plans can be developed regularly, it is the process of planning that is important, not the publication of the plan itself. Most importantly, strategic planning can be an opportunity to unify the management, employees, and stakeholders through a shared understanding of where the organization is going, how everyone involved can work toward that common purpose, and how progression and success will be measured.

Community Stakeholders Work Session
The Community–Driven Strategic Planning Process Outline

1. Define the programs provided to the community.

2. Establish the community’s service program priorities and expectations of the organization.

3. Identify any concerns the community may have about the organization and aspects of the organization that the community views positively.

4. Revisit the mission statement, giving careful attention to the current services and programs and those which logically can be provided in the future.

5. Revisit the values of the organization’s membership.

6. Identify the internal strengths and weaknesses of the organization.

7. Identify areas of opportunity or potential threats to the organization.

8. Identify the organization’s critical issues and service gaps.

9. Determine strategic initiatives for organizational improvement.

10. Establish a realistic goal and objectives for each initiative.

11. Identify implementation tasks for the accomplishment of each objective.

12. Determine the vision of the future.

13. Develop organizational and community commitment to accomplishing the plan.

Process and Acknowledgements
The Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) acknowledges and thanks the community and agency stakeholders for their p articipation and input in this community -driven strategic planning process. The 473

Page 4 ends

CPSE also recognizes Fire Chie f Dan Stefano and the team of professionals that participated for their leadership and commitment to this process.

Development of this strategic plan took place in April 2022, beginning with meetings hosted by a representative from the CPSE for members of the community (as named in the following table). The department identified community stakeholders to ensure broad representation. The community stakeholders were comprised of some who reside or work within Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue’s coverage area and some who were recipients of CMFR’s service(s).

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue Community Stakeholders
Tom Arnold Mike Decker David Geck Diane Pritchett
Daniel Baume Maurice DePasquale Jon Hampe Michele Richards Robert Braithwaite Kent Ferrin Ron Lawrence Michael Steinke Curtis Cienfuegos Jennifer Friend Wendy Leece Geoff West Mary Coppilin Christian Garcia Mike Paz Jonathan Wilby
Reina Cuthill

Community Stakeholders Work Session

474

Page 5 ends

Community Group Findings
A key element of Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue’s organizational philosophy is having a high level of commitment to the community and recognizing the importance of community satisfaction. Thus, the department invited community representatives to provide feedback on the services provided by the department. Respondents were asked to provide a prioritized perspective of the programs and services provided by the department.

Additionally, input was gathered during the meeting that revolved around community expectations and concerns (prioritized) and positive and other comments about the organization. Specific findings of the community stakeholders are provided in the appendix of this document. The agency stakeholders utilized the full feedback from the community stakeholders
in understanding the current challenges
encountered within the organization. Additionally,
the community stakeholders’ feedback provided a
process to ensure alignment with the work
completed on the organizational mission, values,
vision, and goals for improvement.

Community Priorities
To best dedicate time, energy, and resources to services most desired by its community, Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue needs to understand what the customers consider to be their priorities. With that, the community stakeholders were asked to prioritize the programs offered by the department through a process of direct comparison. The results were as follows:

Programs Ranking Score
Emergency Medical Services/Rescue 1 167
Fire Suppression 2 134
Technical Rescue 3 121
Emergency Management 4 96
Community Risk Reduction 5 73
Wildland Fire Services and State-wide Mutual
Aid 6 72
Hazardous Materials Mitigation 6 72
Fire Investigation 8 65
Community Emergency Response Teams and
Volunteer Programs 9 55
Public Fire and Life Safety Education 10 45
See Appendix 1 for a complete list of the community findings, including expectations, areas of concern, positive feedback, and other thoughts and comments.

Agency Stakeholder Group Findings
The agency stakeholder work sessions were conducted over three days. These sessions served to discuss Community Stakeholders Work Session
475

Page 6 ends

the organization’s approach to community-driven strategic planning, focusing on the department’s mission, values, core programs, and support services. Additionally, focus was given to the organization’s perceived strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. The work sessions involved participation by a stakeholder group that represented a broad cross-section of the department, as named and pictured below.

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue Agency Stakeholders
Steve Airey Justin Horner Fred McDowell Daniel Stefano
Cinnamon Basco Nikki Johnson Jon Neal Kristin Stevens
Morgan Cain William Kershaw Josh Ortega Chuck Torres
Steve Cathey Paul Kim Jason Pyle Maurilo Torres
Cristopher Coates Mark Martinez Lora Ross Taylor Voss
Aaron Davis

Agency Stakeholders

476

Page 7 ends

Mission
The mission provides an internal aspect of the existence of an organization and, to a degree, an empowering consideration for all department members. The purpose of the mission is to answer the questions:
 Who are we?
 Why do we exist?
 What do we do?
 Why do we do it?
 For whom?
A workgroup met to revisit the existing mission and, after ensuring it answered the questions, the following mission statement was created, discussed, and accepted by the entire group:

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue is an all-hazard team dedicated to serving and protecting our community through professionalism, leadership, and excellence.

Values
Values embraced by all members of an organization are extremely important, as they recognize the features that make up the personality and culture of the organization. A workgroup met to revisit the existing values and proposed a revision that was discussed, enhanced further, and agreed upon by the entire group:

Respect
Integrity
Compassion

Agency Stakeholders Work Session
477

Page 8 ends

Vision
Vision statements can inspire and motivate the organization around con cepts or ideas that establish benchmarks, provide line of sight, direction, and where the organization wants to be over time. The purpose of setting a vison is to institute something on the horizon that is out of the agency’s comfort zone, challenging it to stretch thinking beyond daily functions while being somewhat attainable. It should clearly indicate the direction in which the agency should move, allowing stakeholders to invest in the future with an understanding of purpose. The workgroup of members reviewed and considered the established vision during deliberations that produced the strategic initiatives in this plan Costa Mesa Fire and Rescue is committed to exceeding the expectations of those we serve by being a leader in Fire Protection, Rescue, Emergency Services, and Community Risk Reduction.

The mission, values, and vision are the foundation of this organization. Thus, every effort will be made to keep these current and meaningful so that the y guide the individuals who make up Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue to accomplish the goals, objectives, and day-to-day tasks.

Programs and Services
To ensure a deeper focus exists in determining issues and gaps within an organization, there must be a delineation between core program s and supporting services. Core p rograms are those core deliverables provided by the department. Supporting services are all of the internal and external programs and services that help CMFR deliver its core programs.

The importance of understanding the difference is that issues and gaps may exist in core programs or supporting services, and the department’s strategic approach may bring forth different considerations for improvement. Additionally, supporting services may be internal or external to the organization and requires an understanding of how the difference impacts their location within the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats if identified. Finally, it is important that the agency stakeholders understand that many local, state, and national services support the delivery of identified core programs.

Through a facilitated brainstorming session, the agency stakeholders agreed upon the core programs provided to the community and many of the supporting services that support the programs. This session provided the sought understanding of the differences and the important key elements of the delineation.

478

Page 9 ends

SWOT Analysis
An organization candidly identifies its positive and negative attributes through a SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threat s). The SWOT analysis also provides an opportunity for an organization to evaluate its operating environment for areas i t can capitalize on and those that pose a danger. Agency stakeholders recorded CMFR’s strengths and weaknesses and the possible opportun ities and potential threats. Information gathered through this analysis guides the agency’s more significant issues and gaps . The information gleaned will assist the agency in finding its broader critical issues and service gaps.

Appendix 2 consists of the SWOT data and analysis collected by the agency stakeholders.

Critical Issues and Service Gaps
Following the identification and review of the department’s SWOT, two separate groups of agency stakeholders met to identify themes as primary critical issues and service gaps ( found in Appendix 3). The critical issues and service gaps identified by the stakeholders provide further guidance toward identifying strategic initiatives, which ultimately lend direction for the development of goals, objectives, critical tasks, and timelines.

Strategic Initiatives
Based upon all previously captured information and the determination of critical issues and service gaps, the following strategic initiatives were identified as the foundation for developing goals and objectives.

Technology Staffing Infrastructure
Training Communication Accreditation

Agency Stakeholders Work Session
479

Page 10 ends

Goals and Objectives
To continuously achieve the mission of Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue, realistic goals and objectives with timelines for completion must be established. These will enhance strengths, address identified weaknesses, provide a clear direction, and address the co mmunity’s concerns . These should become a focus of the department’s efforts, as they will direct the organization to its desired future while reducing the obstacles and distractions along the way. Leadership -established w orkgroups should meet and manage progress toward accomplishing these goals and objectives and a djust timelines as needs and the environment change. Regular reports of progress and changes should be shared with CMFR’s leadership.

Goal 1
Upgrade our technological infrastructure by investing in our equipment, systems, and personnel to enhance and sustain high service levels and positively impact our community.

Objective 1A Identify and analyze current levels of funding, resources, and workload indicators related to our technological infrastructure.

Timeframe 6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Fire and city budget analysis of current budget allocation related to technical infrastructure.
 Identify individuals responsible for each budget area.  Identify current technology, applications, and capabilities.  Determine what technology can be enhanced, better utilized, replaced, or added.  Analyze all current workload indicators.
 Create and disseminate a report of findings.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 1B Create a needs analysis to prioritize the appropriate funding, resources, and workload requirements.

Timeframe 6-9 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Evaluate and review the current conditions in collaboration with IT specialists and individuals responsible for specific technology elements.  Identify technical infrastructure origination dates, anticipated life span, and the required ongoing support.
 Incorporate qualitative and quantitative assessments.  Conduct a cost analysis of identified technology needs.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

480

Page 11 ends

Objective 1C Establish and implement action plans for specific outlined areas of priorities from the needs analysis.

Timeframe 9-12 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Allocate and identify roles and responsibilities for collaboration on the plan development.  Update the cost analysis based on assigned responsibilities and the action plan.  Secure necessary funding and approval for the plan. Establish timelines and benchmarks for construction, purchasing, and acquisition.
 Monitor the progress through the construction periods.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 1D Establish a system to identify, validate, track, and measure progress and impact on the community.

Timeframe 12 months-ongoing Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Establish metrics and assess capability for the collection of data.  Collect data relative to the effectiveness of the plan upon implementation.  Evaluate the collected data to determine the effectiveness and progress relative to established metrics.
 Analyze the collected data to determine needs, updates, or adjustments.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

481

Page 12 ends

Goal 2
Evaluate, develop, and execute comprehensive administrative and operational staffing levels that enhance and advance our ability to meet and exceed community expectations, governance, and department objectives.

Objective 2A Evaluate current staffing level efficiencies and effectiveness related to community expectations, governance, and department objectives.

Timeframe 6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Seek volunteers for assignment to the identified action items detailed below.  Analyze best practices from comparable agencies associated with staffing levels and areas of responsibility.
 Obtain a list of CMFR’s current job descriptions and current areas of responsibility.  Create a survey to identify, at minimum, task processing, commitment times, roles/responsibilities, and critical versus non-critical tasks.  Conduct analysis and create a report of findings and recommendations on the conclusion.  Create a report of findings on the conducted analysis.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 2B Perform a needs assessment to determine adequate staffing to meet and exceed community expectations, governance, and department objectives.

Timeframe 6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Seek volunteers for assignment to the identified action items detailed below.  Analyze current workload and Areas of Responsibility (AOR).  Create a list of tasks that are must-do versus nice to do.  Create a staffing priority list, including options, and review annually.  Conduct analysis and create a report of findings and recommendations on the conclusion.  Create a report of findings on the conducted analysis.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

482

Page 13 ends

Objective 2C Develop methods to enhance professional development programs for all staffing levels.

Timeframe 3 months Assigned to:

Critical
Tasks
 Seek volunteers for assignment to the identified action items detailed below.  Create a list of subject matter experts (SME) in program delivery areas to create methods of professional development.
 Identify available classes and/or training opportunities for each position.  Use current department processes to disseminate the identified opportunities.  Ensure and encourage members to seek tuition reimbursement per a memorandum of understanding.
 Conduct analysis and create a report of findings and recommendations on the conclusion.  On an annual basis, make needed adjustments to the program based on the results of the analysis.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 2D Procure funding sources for additional staffing as identified.

Timeframe 12 months-ongoing Assigned to:

Critical
Tasks
 Seek volunteers for assignment to the identified action items detailed below.  Determine financial requirements for any identified additional staffing needs.  Determine the return on investment (ROI) of any additional staff ing needs.  Seek alternative funding opportunities for any full-time equivalents or parts thereof.  Allocate funds based on a prioritization of those staffing needs.  Conduct analysis and create a report of findings and recommendations on the conclusion.  On an annual basis, make needed adjustments to the program based on the results of the analysis.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 2E
Create an evaluation process to develop performance measures that enhance and advance our ability to meet and exceed community expectations, governance, and department objectives.

Timeframe 3-6 months Assigned to:

Critical
Tasks
 Develop focus groups to create metrics to evaluate the efficiencies and e ffectiveness of current and desired staffing levels and AORs.
 Evaluate current RMS to ensure that the metrics are being captured appropriately.  Determine areas that require more focus is needed based on stakeholder feedback.  Conduct analysis and create a report of findings and recommendations on the conclusion.  On an annual basis, make needed adjustments to the program based on the results of the analysis.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Goal 3
Upgrade our infrastructure by investing in our facilities, equipment, and systems to enhance and sustain a high level of service and positively impact our community.
483

Page 14 ends

Objective 3A Identify and analyze current levels of funding, resources, and workload indicators related to our equipment, facilities, and systems.

Timeframe 6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Perform a departmental budget analysis of current equipment, facilities, and systems budget allocations.
 Identify appropriate individuals responsible for each budget area.  Inventory all current equipment, facilities, and systems.  Create and disseminate a report of findings.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 3B Create a needs analysis to prioritize the appropriate funding, resources, and workload requirements.

Timeframe 6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Evaluate and review current conditions in collaboration with the individuals responsible for equipment, facilities, and systems.
 Determine the following for all equipment, facilities, and systems:
 Year built and year delivered
 General condition of each item
 Prioritize need for replacement or upgrade
 Cost analysis and projected workload requirements
 Incorporate a qualitative/quantitative assessment with the subjective/objective data.  Establish the prioritized needs and respective timelines.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

484

Page 15 ends

Objective 3C Establish and implement action plans for specific outlined areas of priority from the needs analysis.

Timeframe 12 months-ongoing Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Allocate and identify roles and responsibilities to collaborate to create a plan of action.  Conduct a cost analysis of the developed program.
 Secure any needed funding.
 Establish timelines and benchmarks for construction, purchasing, and acquisition.  Monitor, track, and report on progress through completion.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 3D Establish a system to identify, validate, track, and measure service level progress and community impact.

Timeframe 12 months-ongoing Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Collect data relative to our benchmarks.
 Collect historical perspectives for a timeline of equipment, facilities, and systems.  Collect baseline data on community impact and effectiveness.  Collect current and ongoing data for community impact and effectiveness.  Establish mechanisms for inclusive community feedback.  Annually collect and analyze data and make changes as needed.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

485

Page 16 ends

Goal 4
Collectively and continuously assess, develop, execute, and monitor a comprehensive training plan that strengthens, enhances, and advances the organization’s operational, administrative, and personal goals.

Objective 4A Evaluate the current status of our existing training programs to determine the plan’s current status.

Timeframe 12 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Seek volunteers for assignment to the identified action items.  Establish a list of all current training programs.
 Build performance measures for current curriculums and programs.  Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of current curriculums and programs.  Publish and disseminate the results of the evaluation.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 4B Identify gaps or deficiencies in training programs and procedures in operations, administration, and CRR to improve the training plan.

Timeframe 12 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Seek volunteers for assignment to the identified action items.  Using the established list, identify current gaps or areas of concern in programs relative to industry best practices.
 Through analysis, prioritize gaps that have the highest importance to the organization.  Conduct cost analysis on the prioritized program results and any associated needed props and facilities.
 Publish and disseminate results.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 4C Implement a plan to strengthen career development for all positions to strengthen skill sets.

Timeframe 3-6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Seek volunteers for assignment to the identified action items listed below.  Seek SMEs to address the list of priorities.
 Have SMEs develop curriculum and determine needed props.  Submit training plans to the training officer for addition to the training calendar.  Deliver new training curriculum, collect feedback from personnel and make adjustments as needed.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

486

Page 17 ends

Objective 4D Identify ways to incorporate training with county-wide agencies to strengthen operational consistencies.

Timeframe 3-6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Determine current training and its effectiveness with county partners for all involved organizations.
 Establish a list of desired training with county partners in a collaborative effort.  Survey neighboring agencies for the desire to engage in multi-agency training.  Create a list of topics each neighboring agency wants to engag e in training.  Participate in a collaborative effort to build a curriculum.  Establish a training calendar coordinated with neighboring agencies.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 4E Identify leadership development opportunities to improve the skill sets of organizational leaders.

Timeframe 9 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Create a survey for department personnel to identify the current status of leadership  Create priorities for training based on survey responses.  Develop routine leadership curriculums based on priorities.  Implement the established curriculum.
 Re-survey group to measure improvement after implementation of the curriculum.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 4F Develop methods to improve the accountability of supervisors to ensure congruency with the department’s mission and values.

Timeframe 6-9 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Survey personnel to identify the level of accountability of supervisors.  Create a list of strengths and weaknesses in accountability  Create a working group to identify strengths, issues, and challenges.  Develop best practices for accountability
 Train leadership on best practices through focused training and education  Resurvey group to measure the effectiveness of methods.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

487

Page 18 ends

Objective 4G Procure funding sources for training programs, SMEs, and training facilities to meet the plan’s financial requirements.

Timeframe 12 months-ongoing Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Assign personnel to source funding options.
 Determine financial requirements needed to operate desired training programs, props, and facilities.
 Seek opportunities and methods for funding specified training programs, props , and facilities.
 Allocate funds based on the prioritized list of training projects/programs.  Make adjustments to the program based on the allocation of funds.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 4H
Create an evaluation process to develop performance measures that strengthen, advance, and enhance the organization’s operational, administrative, and personal goals.

Timeframe 3 months-ongoing Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Develop focus groups to create metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of training in desired areas of improvement.
 Identify industry and agency-specific standards for each desired program area.  Evaluate current RMS to ensure that the metrics are being captured appropriately.  Assess whether we have met our goals for the previous training period.  Determine areas that require more focus is needed based on the analysis.  Review annually and make needed adjustments to the program based on the results of the analysis.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

488

Page 19 ends

Goal 5 Enhance internal and external communication to provide clarity and alignment with those we serve and serve with.

Objective 5A
Identify and evaluate current and potential communications delivery systems for disseminating information relating to organizational activities and events for public interest.

Timeframe 2-3 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Establish program lead/s for the analysis.
 Identify and list current platforms and applications used in communication .  Identify the audience/end-user of the identified applications and platforms.  Identify the team and areas of responsibility that manage the systems.  Identify alternate platforms that may be appropriate for the department’s use.  Define current content information disseminated and conduct an evaluation,  Utilize the collected community feedback to determine the importance and demand for information.
 Conduct a cost analysis of the identified programs and applications.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 5B Evaluate existing SOPs and operation/organization manuals for applicability and legality.

Timeframe 9-12 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Establish a review committee/ team and point of contact to conduct evaluation.  Explore third-party platform systems contracts (e.g., Lexipol).  Evaluate current and future SOPs for relevance and compliance.  Research and identify third-party records management system options (RMS).  Evaluate it for applicability and select platforms to interface with our syst em needs.  Compile and build a report performance.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

489

Page 20 ends

Objective 5C Identify and train personnel on the systems used to organize all vital operational information to organizational personnel.

Timeframe 9-12 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Identify and develop SMEs for new systems use and application.  Develop a training curriculum based on SME input.
 Publish a training manual for initial training.
 Establish a train-the-trainer group.
 Implement a training program and evaluate the effectiveness of the delivery.  Adjust the training program based on analysis.
 Based on the effectiveness and training adjustments, build a future end-user guide.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 5D Implement the system to organize and make easily accessible all vital operational information to the organization and support personnel.

Timeframe 2-3 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Establish a rollout timetable.
 Identify SMEs to ensure efficient rollout.
 Identify and allocate potential rollout expenses.
 Coordinate with IT point of contact to mitigate any crossover issues.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 5E Continually obtain feedback to evaluate the clarity and alignment of information and the relevance of the systems used.

Timeframe 2-3 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Create a feedback method to gather information from the end user.  Analyze the collected information to determine if clarity and alignment of information are achieved.
 Make necessary adjustments to the systems in use and determine any additional needs required.
 Establish the frequency for continuous evaluation of the systems, their use , and relevance to department systems.
 Evaluate end-user response for potential program enhancements.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

490

Page 21 ends

Goal 6 Prepare for, pursue, achieve, and maintain international accreditation to better serve our community and embrace excellence.

Objective 6A Form team or committee structures with management components as needed to pursue and maintain accreditation.

Timeframe 30 days Assigned to:

Critical
Tasks
 Identify the team or committee for the various components of the accreditation process.  Create management oversight positions to lead the teams or committees and overall process.
 Establish team or committee member criteria.
 Determine the composition of the teams or committees.  Solicit participation to meet the composition of the teams or committees.  Develop and complete the workgroup selection process.  Provide the needed educational components available through the CFAI.  Guide the team or committee in constructing a work plan to manage the accreditation process.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 6B Develop a community-driven strategic plan.

Timeframe 3 months and ongoing Assigned to:

Critical
Tasks
 Hold an external stakeholder meeting where community members provide feedback on program priorities, service expectations, concerns, and strengths perceived about the agency.
 Provide agency stakeholder work sessions to evaluate/update the mission, vision, and values; determine internal strengths and weaknesses, external opportunities, and threats.  Identify critical issues, service gaps, and specific strategic initiatives.  Develop goals, objectives, critical tasks, and appropriate timelines, including measurability levels, to achieve improvement over five years.
 Create a department or agency vision statement from the developed strategic plan.  Publish and distribute the formal strategic plan to stakeholders, including the authority having jurisdiction as determined by the organization.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 6C Implement the community-driven strategic plan.

Timeframe 3 months, ongoing Assigned to:

Critical
Tasks
 Create a strategic planning subcommittee to carry out the strategic plan.  Determine a work plan to accomplish each goal and implement the plan.  Continuously evaluate and revise the objectives and tasking as the plan is implemented.  Report annual plan progress to community and agency stakeholders.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

491

Page 22 ends

Objective 6D Conduct a comprehensive community hazards and risk assessment and document findings to develop a standards of cover.

Timeframe 6 – 9 months Assigned
to:

Critical
Tasks
 Gather and consider geophysical characteristics data of the jurisdictional responsibilities.  Gather and evaluate population, population demographics, area economics, and socioeconomic data of the jurisdiction.
 Gather and consider physical asset development, service, and transportation infrastructure types in the jurisdiction.
 Describe the department’s programs, services, core deliverables, human and physical resources to establish baseline information.
 Determine an appropriate methodology for dividing the area of responsibility into geographical planning zones.
 Build a methodology that identifies, assesses, classifies, and categorizes risk in the jurisdiction’s response areas.
 Document the information collected and the results of the applied methodologies in the risk assessment process.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 6E
Develop standards of cover based on community hazards and risk assessment results and combine results to complete the community risk and standards of cover study document.

Timeframe 3 - 6 months Assigned to:

Critical Tasks
 Evaluate historical jurisdictional emergency response performance and coverage for baseline data.
 Establish benchmark and baseline emergency response service level and performance objectives.
 Develop methodologies and policies for qualifying and validating data sets.  Conduct a gap analysis of performance across classes and categories of risk in each of the established planning zones to illuminate opportunities for improvement.  Build a compliance methodology for monitoring, evaluating, and rep orting delivery performance.
 Utilize the overall system performance data to create short- and long-term plans for maintaining and improving the system’s response capabilities.  Combine and publish the community risk assessment/standards of cover study information, performance data, established objectives, and gap analysis results and  Maintain and annually update the community risk assessment /standards of cover document.
 Present the CRA/SOC study results as updated annually to the authority having jurisdicti on to provide transparency, build consensus, and align expectations.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

492

Page 23 ends

Objective 6F Achieve agency accreditation by the CFAI.

Timeframe 4 months Assigned
to:

Critical Tasks
 Apply for “Candidate Agency” status with the CFAI.
 Prepare for the CFAI peer assessment team visit.
 Upload strategic plan, community risk assessment/standards of cover, and self- assessment documentation for review and comment by the CFAI peer assessment team.  Host the CFAI peer assessment team site visit for accreditation review.  Receive the CFAI peer assessment team recommendation to CFAI for Accredited status.  Review the peer assessment team’s recommendations to determine applicability to agency processes or systems to determine the scope of the annual compliance report process.  Receive vote during the CFAI hearings in favor of accredited status.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

Objective 6G Maintain accreditation with the CFAI.

Timeframe Ongoing Assigned
to:

Critical Tasks
 Continue collecting and evaluating all relevant data for continuous improvement opportunities.
 Submit initial required annual compliance reports.
 Participate in as many offerings from CPSE as possible for continued education.  Participate in the accreditation process by providing “peer assessors” for external department review and identification of possible best practices.  Participate in the annual CPSE Excellence Conference for continued education and networking with other accreditation teams and accredited agencies.  Submit annual compliance reports as required by CFAI policies.  Establish succession development of the internal accreditation team in preparation for the next accreditation cycle.

Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:

Personnel Costs:

Consumable Costs:

Contract Services Costs:

493

Page 24 ends

Vision
On the final day of the process, the CPSE presented a strategic plan vision of where the organization will be in the future if the strategic plan is accomplished.

This is not to override the department’s global vision but rather to confirm the futurity of the work that the agency stakeholders designed . This vision is intended as a target of excellence to s trive toward and provides a basis for its goals and objectives.

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue’s 2027 vision is to be an internationally accredited agency that strives for continuous improvement with its all-hazard approach to delivering excellence. As a forwa rd-thinking organization, we will employ and operate modern technology with a fiscally viable approach to the deployment and sustainability of resources. In addition, we will strengthen our relationships with the community, our service partners, and the member stakeholders we serve through comprehensive communication practices.

In recognition of our greatest resource and human investment, we will make every effort to develop, support, mentor, and prepare our members to be the best they can be. Our concept is to achieve this through the use of appropriate staffing models and contemporary professional development. We envision a future agency that recruits, welcomes, and retains new, inventive members with expertise and demonstrative principles of respect and integrity.

We will be an initiative-focused agency that builds a collaborative leadership environment through individual professionalism and organizational accountability to deliver our mission, live our values, and make this vision a reality.

Performance Measurement
To assess and ensure that an organization is delivering on the promises made in its strategic plan, leaders must determine performance measures for which they are fully accountable. As output measurement can be challenging, the organization must focus on assessing progress toward achieving data-driven improved output. Organizations must further be prepared to revisit and revise their goals, objectives, and performance measures to keep up with accomplishments and environmental changes. “Vision is knowing
who you are, where
you’re going, and
what will guide your
journey.”
Ken Blanchard
494

Page 25 ends

To e stablish that the department’s s trategic plan is
achieving results, performance measurement data will be implemented and integrated as part of the plan. An
integrated process, known as “Managing for Results,” will be utilized, which is based upon:
 The identification of strategic goals and objectives;  The determination of resources necessary to
achieve them;
 The analy sis and evaluation of performance data;
and
 The use of that data to drive continuous
improvement in the organization.

A “family of measures” typically utilized to indicate and measure performance includes:
 Inputs - Value of resource used to produce an output.  Outputs – Quantifiable data-driven units produced which are activity-oriented and measurable.  Efficiency - Inputs used per output (or outputs per input).  Service Quality - The degree to which customers are satisfied with a program or how accurately or timely service is provided.
 Outcome - Qualitative consequences associated with a program/service , i.e., the ultimate benefit to the customer. Focused on the “why” of providing a service.

The Success of the Strategic Plan
The department has approached its desire to develop and implement a strategic plan by asking for and receiving input from the community and organization members during the devel opment stage of the planning process. To assist in developing this plan, the department used professional guidance to conduct a community-driven strategic planning process. The success of this strategic plan will not depend upon the implementation of the g oals and related objectives but on support received from the authority having jurisdiction, the members of the organization, and the community at large.

Provided the community -driven strategic planning process is kept dynamic and supported by effective leadership and active participation, it will be a considerable opportunity to unify agency and community stakeholders. This can be accomplished through a jointly developed understanding of organizational direction, focusing on all vested parties working to a chieve the mission, goals, and vision. Further consideration must be made on how the organization will measure and be accountable for its progress and successes.

 If you don’t measure the results of your plan,
you can’t tell success from failure.
 If you can’t see success, you can’t reward it.
 If you can’t reward success, you’re probably
rewarding failure.
 If you can’t see success, you can’t learn from
it.
 If you can’t recognize failure, you can’t
correct it.
 If you can demonstrate results, you can win
public support.

Reinventing Government
David Osborn and Ted Gaebler
495

Page 26 ends

Glossary of Terms, Acronyms, and Initialisms
Accreditation A process by which an associati on or agency evaluates and recognizes a program of study or an institution as meeting certain predetermined standards or qualifications. It applies only to institutions or agencies and their programs of study or their services.

Accreditation ensures a basic level of quality in the services received from an agency.

CAD Computer-Aided Dispatch
CERT Citizens Emergency Response Team
CFAI Commission on Fire Accreditation International
COOP Continuity of Operations Plan
CPSE Center for Public Safety Excellence
CRR Community Risk Reduction
Customer(s) The person or group who establishes the requirement of a process and receives or uses the outputs of that process; or the person or entity directly served by the department or agency.

Efficiency A performance indication where inputs are measured per unit of output (or vice versa).

EMS Emergency Medical Services
Environment Circumstances and conditions that interact with and affect an organization. These can include economic, political, cultural, and physical conditio ns inside or outside the organization’s boundaries.

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GIS Global Information System
Input A performance indication where the value of resources is used to produce an output.

ISO Insurance Services Office
IT Information Technology
MCT Mobile Computer Terminal
Mission An enduring statement of purpose; the organization ’s reason for existence. Describes what the organization does, for whom it does it, and how.

NMUSD Newport Mesa Unified School District
OCFEC Orange County Fair and Events Center
Outcome A performance indication where qualitative consequences are associated with a program/service, i.e., the ultimate benefit to the customer.

Output A performance indication where a quality or number of units produced is identified.

PSAP Public Safety Access Point
RMS Record Management System
SME Subject Matter Expert
496

Page 27 ends

SOG Standard Operating Guideline
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
Stakeholder Any person, group, or organization that can place a claim on, or influence the organization’s resources or outputs, is affected by those outputs or has an interest in or expectation of the organization.

Strategic Goal A broad target that defines how the agency will carry out its mission over a specific period. An aim . The final res ult of an action. Something to accomplish in assisting the agency in moving forward.

Strategic Objective A specific, measurable accomplishment required to realize the successful completion of a strategic goal.

Strategic Plan A long -range planning documen t that defines the agency’s mission and broadly identifies how it will be accomplished and that provides the framework for more detailed annual and operational plans.

Strategic Planning The continuous and systematic process whereby guiding members of an organization make decisions about its future, develop procedures and operations to achieve that future, and determine how success is measured.

Strategy A description of how a strategic objective will be achieved. A possibility. A plan or methodology for achieving a goal.

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
USAR Urban Search and Rescue
Vision An idealized view of a desirable and potentially achievable future state - where or what an organization would like to be in the future.

497

Page 28 ends

Appendix 1 – Community Input
Understanding the community’s perspective allows the department to change or bolster processes and strategies to fulfill community needs. The following includes feedback from participating community stakeholders, collected and processed by CPSE on behalf of Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue.

Should Change
Respondents were asked to provide one thing the department should change. The data were processed thematically and listed with the number of responses matched the theme, as represented by the number in the parentheses. The following are the responses related to what the department should change:

1. Accessibility and communication of fire department resources available to the community.

Outreach and contact with neighbors adjacent to stations. Great er community-building presence.

More involvement with educators at schools. (5)

2. Increase staffing. Staffing levels. Staffing levels for community outreach. (3)

3. Advanced disaster planning. (1)

4. Publish and discuss key performance indicators. (1)

5. Number of bilingual staff. (1)

6. Social media presence. (1)
Should Not Change
Respondents were asked to provide one thing the department should not change. The data were processed thematically and listed with the number of responses matched the theme, as represented by the number in the parentheses. The following are the responses related to what the department should change:

1. Showing up at community events. Being responsive to our community needs. Your community presence and accessibility. Accessibility of staff to community. Available to contact. (5)

2. Leadership style. Top management. Leadership. (3)

3. Visual appearance of trucks and stations. (1)

4. Management of department and personnel. (1)

5. Their culture. (1)

6. Responsiveness in real time. (1)

7. Decrease in stations. (1)

8. Sending out both trucks and ambulances to the scene of accidents. (1)

9. Customer service. (1)

10. Training. (1)

11. Community-driven performance improvement. (1)
Community Expectations
Understanding what the community expects of its fire service organization is critically important to developing a long-range perspective. With this knowledge, internal emphasis may need to be changed or bolstered to fulfill the community’s needs.
498

Page 29 ends

Respondents were asked to list, in priority order, up to five subjects relative to their expectations for Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue . Responses were then analyzed for themes and weighted. The weighting of the prioritized responses was as follows: if it was the respondent’s first entry, it received five weighted points.

Weighting gradually decreased so that if it was the respondent’s fifth entry, it received one weighted point.

The weighted themes were then sorted from the highest cumulative weight to the lowest cumulative weight and listed below. The numbers in the parentheses are the cumulati ve weighted value that correlated with the theme identified. While the themes are listed in prioritized, weighted order, all responses were important in the planning process. The following are the expectation responses of the community stakeholders (in priority order):

1. To be there when the emergency occurs. High-quality and timely response. Absolutely lowest response time in each Costa Mesa neighborhood. Service quickly, I want a quick response. Response times.

Available and timely response when called. Quick and effective response. (32)

2. Community interaction / presence. To evaluate current community engagement after Covid and reengage with the community in things like CERT. Know the community and encourage others to follow by example. Commitment to the community. Community training and communication. Be active in the community, at local events, and provide education at community events. Family-friendly attitude when in uniform to the community. (19)

3. Emergency response. Save life and property. Quality of service. Emergency prevention and mitigation.

To be responsive to emergency needs. (17)

4. Maintain a well-trained and highly capable fire and rescue staff. That they have the training, tools, and equipment necessary to provide excellent service. To maintain a highly trained and professional staff.

Provide best-in-class training for the firefighters and paramedics. Firefighter expertise. (11)

5. Life safety inspections. Fire prevention - both in open areas and in homes and businesses. Fire prevention and mitigation resources. Continually improve fire prevention efforts. (6)

6. Ensure CMFR has the most up -to-date tools and technology available. Fire/medical assistance will be performed with excellence using the highest quality/advanced equipment and technology. (4)

7. Be healthy and ready to do what is needed to save lives. Personnel to be healthy. (3)

8. Medical response. (3)

9. Access/partnership with staff to work through school safety issues or concerns. (2)

10. Costa Mesa Fire Rescue recruits and retains the top of the class. (2)

11. Stay out of politics (city council member campaigning). (2)

12. Support of the city decision-makers to ensure proper resources are provided. Fire rescue will have the resources immediately available to respond to all emergencies. (2)

13. Fire response. (2)

14. Caring, understanding, and being empathetic during emergency situations. (2)

15. Disaster response and leadership implementation of procedures. Disaster planning/response model. (2)

16. Communication. (2)

17. To continue to work collaboratively with other safety organizations. (1)

499

Page 30 ends

Areas of Community Concern
The planning process would be incomplete without an expression from the community stakeholders regarding concerns about the organization. Some areas of concern may be a weakness within the delivery system, while some weaknesses may also be misperceptions based upon a lack of information, understanding, or incorrect information.

Respondents were asked to list, in priority order, up to five concerns they have about or for the department.

Responses were then analyzed for themes and weighted. The weighting of the prioritized concerns was as follows: if it was the respondent’s first entry, it received five weighted points. Weighting gradually decreased so that if it was the respondent’s fifth entry, it received one weighted point. The weighted themes were then sorted from the highest cumulative weight to the lowest cumulative weight and listed below. The numbers in the parentheses are the cumul ative weighted value that correlated with the theme identified.

While the themes are listed in prioritized, weighted order, all responses were important in the planning process. The following are the concerns of the community stakeholders prioritized and w eighted accordingly (verbatim, in priority order):

1. Emergency communications staffing vacancies from burnout. Can you hire what you need or will there be a staffing shortage. My hope is that staffing levels are not reduced as the result of any fiscal issu es.

Staffing to handle the increase in office use residential growth/expansion. (12)

2. Funding. Do you have enough funding for staff and equipment? It does not have the resources necessary to perform all the tasks being asked. Will be able to provide suffici ent dollars so they can meet their mission. Efforts to control costs may not be widely understood. funding is sufficient to modernize and train. (11)

3. Consistency of fire inspections moving forward. Turnaround time for plan check. Need more inspections, on a quarterly basis in the retail corridor. (8)

4. We all know the stations are staffed ; however, there is little to no interaction w ith the adjacent businesses and residents. Fire department holding community -friendly events in neighborhoods to promote fire sa fety. Community -wide initiative such as replacing batteries at every Costa Mesa household, handout fire extinguishers. sufficient time and commitment to build community leadership and relationships. (7)

5. With the growth of the northeast portion of the city, can CMFR handle the response in normal day -to- day operations. Will they be able to stay ahead of safety needs as the city grows? (6)

6. Homeless calls and continued training around mental illness. It is having to use its valuable resources to respond to mental health call/concerns from chronically homeless individuals. (5)

7. That outside forces - politics, legislative measures will hamper their ability to serve. May be vulnerable to political challenges in the future. Internal vision may be constrained by politics or third-party agenda. (5)

8. Disaster planning beyond documentation. Enough equipment and personnel in natural or manmade disasters. (5)

9. Concern for succession planning for key leadership roles. Is there a succession plan in place to fill vacancies in leadership positions as staff retires or moves on? (4)

10. Amount of training to do rescues on trees when people are dying with no way to access the back without a ladder. (3)

11. Response times. (3)
500

Page 31 ends

12. Was someone from NMUSD, Orange County Department of Education, or private school system invited today? (3)

13. Aging or outdated technology and or equipment. (3)

14. Do they respond to calls the same in Mesa Verde and the westside? (3)

15. Firefighters knowing community resources when responding to an emergency of individual families at risk. (3)

16. Not clear if objectives are being met. (3)

17. Equipment to climb trees in case of any emergencies. (2)

18. Health/wellness/staffing of your personnel. (2)

19. Employee morale. (2)

20. Are there enough bilingual employees to interact with our large Hispanic population? (2)

21. Understanding of existing location/ building infrastructure. (2)

22. Instructors to teach them about the failure and risk (trees). (1)

23. Other city entities not doing their job , and that results in CMFR having to step into areas they should not. (1)

24. Are there other ways to involve youth in understanding fire safety without having them be members of the explorers? (1)

501

Page 32 ends

Positive Community Feedback
The CPSE promotes the belief that the community’s view on the organization’s strengths must be established for a strategic plan to be valid. Needless efforts are often put forth in over-developing areas that are already successful. However, proper utilization and promotion of the strengths may often help the organization overcome or offset some identifie d weaknesses. The following are the identified strengths recognized by the community stakeholders (verbatim, in no particular order):
 Great looking fire trucks and fire stations are very beneficial to the community.  Strong leadership and cooperation with similar departments.  Establish community presence at city events.
 Staff engagement and access while working through issues and concerns.  Emergency response-arriving quickly and professionalism of the staff.  Improved quality of fire inspections being done.
 Very involved.
 On-time and ready for what’s up.
 Trained for all emergencies, except trees.
 They do well with training and succession planning within the ranks and file firefighters.  Our CMFR are personal, friendly, and professional.
 Dan Stefano is an amazing leader; humble, engaging, and politically savvy.  Positive and welcoming attitude by Chief Stefano, humble, access able, and professional.  Professional attitude and service by CMFR, even during difficult times.  They do love their job of saving lives.
 Staff and employees – firefighters are kind and willing to help.  The response time at night has been swift.
 The department is trying to do more community outreach.  Station crews are always great to work with.
 The fire marshal’s office is always responsive.
 Great community partner.
 Rapid response time.
 Positive community role modeling through opportunities for greater community building.  Excellent community service attitudes with all department individuals that I have encountered.  Extremely well-led.
 Excellent community presence.
 Very responsive, not only to emergencies but to requests in general.  Thank you for including us in this process.
 OCFEC is proud to be a neighbor and partner.
 When you engage with CMFD personnel they are professional and present a unifie d front -everyone smiles!
502

Page 33 ends

 The chief/management play a very visible and active role in the community.  The mutual aid system works well when other departments are needed to assist.  Outstanding leadership at all levels.
 Excellent community outreach and a positive reputation.  Highly skilled and well-trained staff.
 Excellent and caring personnel.
 Overall passion for providing good service.
 Having worked at Orange County fairgrounds for the past 18 years, the communication and partnership has been great.
 Response time.
 Leadership.
 Past emergency/non-emergency response was fast and effective.  Personnel interactions were professional.
 Fire marshal and CERT resource assistance was/is extremely valuable.  Outstanding leadership.
 Excellent communication with the community, great outreach.  Proud of their image among peer groups.
 They stop and say hi to kids and hand out stickers.
 Always friendly interaction with staff.
 Positive social media presence.
 Great team! Fire specialist team is top-notch and very assessable to answer questions and meet on-site.  The fire department personnel are very helpful, professional, and friendly.  If the staff does not have the answer, they look for it in the fire code books and are seasoned to view the situation in spirit of the code.
 Well regarded and respected by many in the business community.  Community involvement on all levels.
 Thorough building and business inspections.
 Resiliency of the team during the last 2+ years.
 Willingness by the leadership and department to be transparent and search for a higher vision, purpose, and level of performance.
 Apparent healthy relationship between the elected, the city manager, and the fire chief. Very important to have genuine alignment and commitment.

Other Thoughts and Comments
The community was asked to share any other comments they had about the department or its services. The following written comments were received (verbatim, in no particular order):
 Two gardeners on my street passed away from climbing trees around electrical conductors. We need to educate our community and firefighters of all risks.
503

Page 34 ends

 They are effective at resourcing , engaging, and mobilizing the community for emergency response contingencies (CERT).
 My friend Debbie Magnussen started Project Cuddle here in Costa Mesa - she wants every fire and police station to have a safe surrender sign for women in crisis.  Love the flags on the trucks.
 I would love to see more community events where families are able to interact, buy shirts/hats.  CMFR is doing a great job and I am thrilled they are undertaking this process.  Community training and other interaction.
 I could not be prouder of our CMFR department-they are professionals and leaders in their profession.  I am proud to be a Costa Mesa resident and protected by these men and women.  Thank you for all you do and taking the time to go through this community input process.  It would be helpful to know when fire is dispatched to an emergency on Vanguard University campus when the call/emergency was not generated by Vanguard.
 It is my perception that the City of Costa Mesa is in good hands with the CMFR organization.  Share my community fire hazards that are preventable.

504

Page 35 ends

Appendix 2 - SWOT
Strengths
It is important for any organization to identify its strengths to ensure that it can provide the services requested by the community and that strengths are consistent with the issues facing the organization.

Often, identifying organizational strengths leads to the channeling of efforts toward primary community needs that match those strengths. Program s that do not match organizational strengths or the organization’s primary function, should be seriously reviewed to evaluate the rate of return on staff time and allocated funds.

Through a consensus process, the agency stakeholders identified the department’s strengths as follows:

Department’s recognition processes; social media,
employee of the month, and awards
Commitment to service through the
empowerment to do good deeds
Awareness and priority of our succession planning that
builds redundancy in the agency
Individual commitment, involvement, and
volunteerism of our members
Positive stakeholder relationships, both internally and externally
Equipment is well maintained, with new
equipment on order
Probationary firefighter training, mentoring, and
academy Communication
Operational adaptability in our deployment model Professionalism The welcomed outcome data from our EMS training Regional and state involvement Teamwork exampled by peer-to-peer communication People (our fire family) Existence and application of a department-specific
COOP Professional development (i.e., education)

505

Page 36 ends

Weaknesses
For any organization to either begin or continue to move progressively forward, it must be able to identify its strengths and those areas where it functions poorly or not at all. These areas of needed enhancements are not the same as threats to be identified later in this document but rather those day -to-day issues and concerns that may slow or inhibit progress. The following items were identified by the agency stakeholders as weaknesses:

Lack of a comprehensive, user-friendly, easily
accessible administrative procedure manual
Lack of procedure to update site maps and printed
map books
Lack of performance measures / CQI Lack of arson investigation capabilities Applications and programs used for data
collection and reporting are owned and managed
by external agencies limiting agency control of
data
The reliance on functions managed by volunteers,
such as EMS supplies, and tools, may impact their
passion for participation
Program area(s) workload balance between shift
stations and crews
Confusion between the application of
management vs. leadership
SOP manual out of date Lack of multi-company drills
Lack of appropriate compensation for additional
workload from program area assignments
Lack of training with our neighboring agencies
and Costa Mesa Police Department
Lack of hazmat specialist Lack of empowerment in decision making Lack of administrative staff (executive, EMS,
training)
Budgetary mechanism to identify money in and
out
Lack of an IT strategic plan on the fire side USAR equipment and training Communications – email vs. policy/procedure
objectives being worked on by multiple people
and don’t know it
Lack of comprehensive formal mentorship and
professional development training for all
positions in the organization
Insufficient staffing to provide needed reliable
administration support
The need for appropriate mission-critical support
vehicles
Lack of formal and documented career path involvement process for members of the organization

506

Page 37 ends

Opportunities
The opportunities for an organization depend on identifying strengths and weaknesses and how they can be enhanced. The focus of opportunities is not solely on existing service but on ex panding and developing new possibilities inside and beyond the traditional service area. The agency stakeholders identified the following potential opportunities:

Evaluation and expansion of the current
regional ambulance operator program
PSAP position growth to improve communications,
911 call-taking, and dispatch processes
Determining IT / GIS software processes or
systems to update mapping
Enhancing current/future external stakeholder
relationships
Increase opportunities for fire
department/state incident management teams
Enhance the relationship between OCEHD and the
department in the management of the hazmat
program
Need for improved city fleet management SOP Need for additional emergency vehicle technician Increase funding to assist in meeting agency-
appropriate standards
Current COVID/COOP level prevents us from
engaging the public (schools, open houses)
Enhance grant opportunities Increase in participation in outside state fire committees
Determine opportunities for external funding
sources other than grants
Identify external training opportunities (other fire
departments, FEMA, state, etc.)
Staffing to allow dual company fire stations
that increases presence in the community
(money)
Increase funding to provide for more subject matter
expert use in agency development

507

Page 38 ends

Threats
By recognizing possible threats, an organization can reduce the potential for loss. Fundamental to the success of any strategic plan is the understanding that threats are not entirely and/or directly controlled by the organization. Some of the current and potential threats identified by the agency stakeholders were as follows:

Changes in the economic variables of inflation,
interest rates, property values, sale tax revenue,
etc.

The policies and agendas produced through
political activities
Supply chain IT limitations
Domestic and international terrorist acts Commercial/industrial demographics/evolution Natural and manufactured disasters Social influences/movements/generational ideology
The impact of unfunded state mandates on the
organization
Shrinking candidate pool due to multiple agencies
hiring and a decrease in qualified candidates
Ambulance patient offload time during busy times Increasing call volume Homeless / mental illness /facilities Privatization of fire and/or EMS service delivery Commercial/residential development impact on
call volume
Retention issues causing the loss of employees to
other agencies
Relocation of the workforce to greater distances
and/or out of state
Legislative changes at the local, state, and federal
levels impacting the organization
Pandemics Paramedic school product quality
Population density changes that may drive political and legislative changes that negatively impact the organization

508

Page 39 ends

Appendix 3 - Critical and Service Gap Issues Identified by Agency Stakeholders
The following information is the raw data comprised from the deliberation of the two workgroups. The information in each table is linked to a strategic initiative that the overall group, by consensus, determined was something that the department should pursue for change and continuous improvement.

Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
Technology
Technology
o Lack of funding
o Grossly deficient mapping program
o Outdated RMS program
o Lack of contemporary CAD and MCT
technology
o Lack of department clearance with inter-
departmental functions
o Lack of real-time data/dashboard
o F-drive overhaul
Technology
o RMS
o CAD
o GIS/mapping
o Inspections
o Telestaff
o Payroll
o Communication
o Data collection/control
o Training
o Vector solutions
o Program availability
o Billing
Staffing
Staffing
o Lack of administrative staffing
o Forecasting/proactive approach for
staffing needs
o Arson staffing
o Specialty staffing for committees, special
events, and areas of responsibility
Staffing
o Lack of admin support staff
o Lack of SMRs
o Funding needed
o Qualification/experience
o Recruitment/retention
o Employee development/opportunity
o Overload
Infrastructure
Infrastructure
o Continuing issues with ambulances
o Lack of a real-time asset management
system
o Lack of completion on modernizing the
fire stations
o Lack of modernization of training tower
for EMS and USAR
o Lack of a contemporary information
technology program
o Lack of mission support vehicles
Equipment/facilities
o Funding
o Outdated equipment and facilities
o Lack of supply availability
o Procedural process
o Project bid/management process
o IT.
o Organizational structure/ownership

509

Page 40 ends

Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
Training
Training
o Lack of multi-company drills
o Lack of training with neighbor departments
o Lack of USAR training
o Wide range of topics to cover
o Lack of funding for training
o Identify and develop/strengthen subject
matter experts
o Strengthen career development
o Lack of driver education
o Implementation of new training programs
o Leadership development
o Accountability of chiefs and company
officers
N/A
Communication Organizational Information Management
o Lack of structure
o Lack of succession planning
o Lack of an evaluation process
o Lack of updated manuals/best practices
o Lack of contemporary SOP/SOG library
o Lack of time and funding for the overhaul
o Lack of access to special notices/training
bulletins
Communication
o Email
o Policies
o Objectives
o Social media with the public
o RMS
o Organizational accessibility to
information (F-drive)
o Continuity
The following information is the raw data comprised from the deliberation of the t wo workgroups. The information in each table is not linked directly to a strategic initiative but remains important. The department is best served to understand and embrace this other information as it moves forward for deliberative purposes and consideration of support of the strategic initiatives.

Topic Group 1 Group 2
Leadership
N/A
Leadership
o Roles and responsibilities
o Subject matter experts
o Mentorship
o Decentralized command
o Empowerment
o Relinquishment of control
o Communication
o Ownership/responsibility vs. management
o Facilitation of internal/external relationships

510

Page 41 ends

Appendix 4 - City Council Goals and Objectives
The following information is a reference to the Costa Mesa City Council’s Goals and Objectives.

511

Page 42 ends

512

Page 43 ends

513

Page 44 ends

514

Page 45 ends

515

Page 46 ends

516

Page 47 ends

517

Page 48 ends

518

Page 49 ends

519

Page 50 ends

520

Page 51 ends

521

Page 52 ends

522

Page 53 ends

523
ATTACHMENT 2
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
ATTACHMENT 3
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
TITLE:

APPROVAL OF RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REGARDING ORANGE COUNTY EMS AND THE

FIRE SERVICE
DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER AND COSTA MESA FIRE & RESCUE
PRESENTED BY: CITY MANAGER AND COSTA MESA FIRE & RESCUE CONTACT INFORMATION: DANIEL A. STEFANO, FIRE CHIEF, (714) 754-5106 RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager and Fire Chief to respond to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court concerning the findings and recommendations made by the Orange County Grand Jury Report. 2021-2022.

BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to Article 1, Section 23, of the California Constitution, each county is required to summon and impanel a Civil Grand Jury at least once a year. The purpose of the Civil Grand Jury is to investigate and report on the operations of local government, and to provide their findings and recommendations for improvement where appropriate.

The City of Costa Mesa was included in a response request, along with the majority of cities who provide Fire & Rescue services, including those served by contractual agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). As such, a report was prepared by the Orange County Grand Jury during 2021-2022 regarding Fire-Based Emergency Medical Services and a final report was presented to the City and City Fire Chief. Under California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, a response to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court regarding the Civil Grand Jury’sReport is required.

ANALYSIS:

GRAND JURY FINDING #F1
FINDING: “Despite fire departments throughout Orange County having evolved into emergency medical departments, most have not updated their emergency response protocols accordingly, but have simply absorbed emergency medical responses into their existing fire response models.”
RESPONSE:The City Disagrees Wholly with this Finding.

This finding is inconsistent with the historical facts of the California Fire Service generally and with

Page 1 of 17 ends

646
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
This finding is inconsistent with the historical facts of the California Fire Service generally and with the City of Costa Mesa specifically.

For over half a century, the California Fire Service, including Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue (CMFR), has been the primary provider of prehospital EMS throughout the state, long before the existence of an organized statewide EMS system. Recognizing the obvious value-in terms of both operational and financial efficiency and effectiveness-of already-existing strategically located fire stations and emergency apparatus, staffed by highly trained and experienced firefighters who possess a vast array of rescue skills and capabilities, in 1969 the California Legislature enacted Health & Safety Code §219, which created minimum first aid training standards for all public safety personnel. During that same year, a pilot program was launched by three physicians in Los Angeles County to train 18 Firefighters as “Mobile Intensive Care Paramedics” (MICPs) who would provide Advanced Life Support (ALS) level care to the critically ill and injured in the prehospital setting. The success of this program led to passage of the Wedworth-Townsend Paramedic Act of 1970 for the purpose of expanding paramedic services throughout the state.

The California Fire Service-based model for the delivery of ALS/paramedic-level care was so overwhelmingly successful that the television series “Emergency”(1972-1977) was developed to bring national attention to the importance of prehospital EMS through the characters of Firefighter- Paramedics Johnny Gage and Roy DeSoto (actors Randolph Mantooth and Kevin Tighe). When “Emergency”first aired, there were only about six paramedic systems nationwide. However, the series was tremendously popular, and people all over the United States began to ask their local officials why they did not also have such a system.

In its efforts to better organize and coordinate the newly developing field of prehospital EMS, the California Legislature adopted the Emergency Medical Services System and Prehospital Medical Care Personnel Act of 1980 (“1980 EMS Act”) that established Division 2.5 of the Health & Safety Code (HSC). Due to the fundamental and essential role of the Fire Service in developing the EMS infrastructure over preceding decades-that included an enormous commitment of time, staffing, training, and money from cities and citizen taxpayers-the Legislature wrote California Health & Safety Code §1797.201 to formally recognize and preserve the pre-existing authority of those local cities and fire agencies to continue in the provision, administration, and operational control of all prehospital EMS their jurisdiction, in compliance with, and subject to, state and local medical (i.e., patient care) standards and guidelines.

Section 1797.201 also reflects the Legislature’s acknowledgement that the administrative and operational aspects of an EMS system are best determined at the local level, based on the specific needs and nuances of the community served, ultimately defined by local policy through jurisdictional governance and based on the subject-matter expertise of the public safety representatives (e.g., Fire Chief, EMS Division/Section, etc.) who best understand the particular needs of their community and who are directly accountable to the community served.

With that all said, the distinction between the operational and administrative control of an EMS system and the medical control of an EMS system need to be clearly acknowledged and clarified.

Whereas the various local governments and fire agencies have the sovereign legal authority over the administration and operational control of prehospital EMS within their respective jurisdictions (HSC

Page 2 of 17 ends

647
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
administration and operational control of prehospital EMS within their respective jurisdictions (HSC §1797.201), the Local Emergency Medical Services Agency (LEMSA) maintains absolute legal authority over medical control. “Medical control” is statutorily defined as, and expressly limited to, “themedical management”and the “medical direction”of the EMS system. In other words, decisions and actions that directly impact patient care such as assessment, treatments/interventions, and transport destination decisions (HSC §§ 1797.90, 1797.220, 1798(a), 1798.8). Costa Mesa has not in our history challenged the medical control of our LEMSA. In fact, this acknowledgement and delineation is extremely important, combined with the significant value placed on local governmental agencies and the LEMSA working within a highly collaborative environment for the best interests of EMS system itself and the communities served.

Further, the California Fire Service, which includes Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue (CMFR), has continued to be the primary provider of prehospital EMS throughout the State, with Orange County being one of the best examples of a well-functioning and efficiently structured EMS system. This is primarily because of our long history as a highly unified fire service-based EMS system composed of fire agencies that are capable of providing “All-Hazards”Emergency Services (i.e., Fire, Rescue, Medical, Community Risk Reduction, etc.), including both BLS and ALS/paramedic level prehospital emergency care, in all types of hazardous environments and across all jurisdictional boundaries due to our emphasis on inter-agency coordination and standardization of training and procedures according to local, state, and national guidelines. In fact, inter-agency and cross-jurisdictional coordination and standardization is absolutely critical for operational effectiveness and firefighter safety, but it is also necessary to achieve the goals of optimal quality patient care, as well as equality of patient care, for all county residents and visitors regardless of their location or situation. Moreover, this is predicated on the reciprocity of like resources and services between fire service agencies, without a reduction in type, level, or quality of care. The Orange County Fire Chiefs Association (OCFCA)-which includes CMFR and represents all Orange County Fire Service-ALS-Level provider agencies-remains committed to all of these goals, as well as continuing its tradition of innovation and ongoing improvement in the rapidly changing world of healthcare and medicine, because the people who depend on us deserve nothing less.

In 1975, Costa Mesa initiated a three-platoon schedule for the fire department, resulting in a 56-hour workweek. Later that year, seven firefighters were trained as paramedics and the Mobile Intensive Care (MIC) program was initiated.

The first “Medic”unit was a 1975 Chevy ambulance. Later a Ford ambulance was purchased so that one could be kept in reserve. It is interesting to note that these ambulances were not utilized for patient transport; a private ambulance company was utilized to perform that function. Soon, the single paramedic unit for Costa Mesa’s70,000 people proved to be inadequate. In January of 1983, a second Medic unit, Medic Truck 3 was placed in service at the Park Avenue Fire Station.

Over the subsequent decades and up to the present time, Costa Mesa has made many positive improvements and enhancements in our EMS system and EMS system protocols. For example, in addition to strong BLS EMS education and training efforts, a nurse educator was added to our EMS education cadre. Similarly, we added the positions of both an EMS Manager and an EMS Coordinator due to the ever-expanding prehospital EMS needs of our community as well as evolving

Page 3 of 17 ends

648
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
CQI (Continuous Quality Improvement) requirements, among other areas.

As the number of emergency medical responses increased, it became apparent that more than two paramedic units were necessary to achieve the goals of the MIC program. An aggressive purchasing program saw the replacement of nearly every front line apparatus in 1989-90, and within 5 years, the department had converted all of the five engine companies to Paramedic Engines, each staffed with four personnel and the continued utilization of a private ambulance company from an off-site location to assist with our emergency transportation.

From 2010-2013, during the city’sinitial recovery planning from the Great Recession of 2008-2009, the city and the department continued to analyze different options of deployment and delivery, including the formal evaluation of joining the Orange County Fire Authority. Ultimately, the decision was made to retain our city fire department and explore the most effective and efficient model of emergency service delivery moving forward. In 2013, the department initiated the purchase of six brand new rescue ambulances and began piloting an expanded paramedic program. In 2014, the department initiated its first strategic planning process, which included updating the department’s name from “Fire”Department to “Fire & Rescue” Department to reflect the robust “all-hazard” response approach and focus on continuous improvement and innovative evolution.

In 2018, the City Council approved the Fire Chief and City Manager recommendation to implement a city based ambulance operator emergency transportation program, which brought the emergency ambulance transportation in-house in an innovative public-private partnership model, that Costa Mesa continuously monitors and adapts “real-time”to the changing health and safety needs of the community.

Regarding specific technologies and procedures, prehospital EMS in 2022 is obviously substantially different than the prehospital EMS provided by fire departments 50 years ago when the Mobile Intensive Care Paramedic was first created. Indeed, the assessment and treatment interventions performed by the modern-day Firefighter-Paramedic, along with evidence-based system protocols governing patient triage and hospital destination, have dramatically improved survival and outcome for victims of sudden illness and injury. Moreover, technological advances in the field of medicine traditionally utilized exclusively in the hospital setting are more and more being adapted for use in the prehospital setting by fire department paramedics. The following are just some of the many examples of major improvements in prehospital assessment and treatment that demonstrates Costa Mesa is not only evolving, but always working diligently to be on the forefront of advancement and thoughtful innovation, for the benefit of our residents to prevent and minimize premature death and disability, while maximizing positive neurological outcomes.

A. Electronic Patient Care Reporting (E-PCR)
CMFR transitioned from a paper based patient care record to an electronic patient care record (ePCR) system in 2012, after being brought in as the first Orange County fire service agency to pilot and initiate the ePCR program. This happened in conjunction with the Orange County Emergency Medical Services Agency (OCEMSA) and allowed for significant improvements in the ability to operate a Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) program. In 2016, again in conjunction with the OCEMSA, a transition was made to an upgraded ePCR program that continues to be used and

Page 4 of 17 ends

649
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
OCEMSA, a transition was made to an upgraded ePCR program that continues to be used and refined today. CMFR participates in a multi-agency CQI committee which utilizes the ePCR format and its data to improve emergency medical service delivery.

B. Prehospital 12-Lead Electrocardiogram (EKG) & Cardiac Center Triage Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one cause of death for both men and women in the United States, killing over one million people each year. CVD kills more people than cancer, AIDs, and the other top five causes of death combined. One of the primary mechanisms of death from cardiovascular disease is heart attack, which kills over 450,000 people each year. A heart attack, known more accurately as myocardial infarction, is when a person’s coronary artery suddenly becomes blocked. The heart muscle that was supplied by the blocked artery then begins to die as it is deprived of oxygen rich blood. According to American Heart Association (AHA) Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) guidelines, in order to survive a myocardial infarction “itis imperative that healthcare providers evaluate, triage, and treat patients as quickly as possible,”because “halfof the patients who die of myocardial infarction do so before reaching the hospital” (2005 AHA ECC Guidelines, IV-89). Accordingly, AHA makes the performance of a 12-Lead EKG a Class I recommendation, which means it is deemed essential for survival. The sooner a myocardial infarction is identified by paramedics in the field, the sooner they can initiate the appropriate treatments and notify the nearest Cardiac Center hospital, so that when the patient arrives the coronary artery blockage can be rapidly removed. CMFR was one of the first EMS agencies in Orange County to implement at 12-Lead EKG and Cardiac Triage program and, along with Hoag Hospital (Newport Beach), set national records for the successful treatment of heart attack victims.

C. Public Access Defibrillation Program
Another primary mechanism of death from cardiovascular disease is Sudden Cardiac Arrest, which kills over 250,000 people each year. Unfortunately, the national survival rate for Sudden Cardiac Arrest is only 5%, which means that 95% of all Sudden Cardiac Arrest victims die. However, in places with strong Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) programs, the survival rates are substantially higher (~40-70%). This is because for every minute that goes by without defibrillation, a Sudden Cardiac Arrest victim has a 10% less chance of survival (if CPR is not performed, there is a 20% less chance of survival for each minute). Costa Mesa is one of the handful of cities in the nation that has taken a proactive approach to fighting premature death due to Sudden Cardiac Arrest. Back in the mid-2000s, CMFR implemented a City-wide PAD (Public Access Defibrillation) system making AEDs (Automated External Defibrillators) available in all City facilities accessible by the public. Further, CMFR assisted many public and private organizations, such as Orange Coast College and South Coast Plaza, implement their own PAD programs, thus making our community significantly safer for victims of sudden cardiac arrest. CMFR continues to partner and provide our local businesses, schools and broad range of community stakeholders and members with support, information and training with respect to all emergency and disaster preparedness matters.

D. Transcutaneous Pacing
Some people experience cardiac emergencies where their heart beats too slow due to an electrical problem in the heart’sconduction system. When this happens, the brain and other vital organs are

Page 5 of 17 ends

650
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
problem in the heart’sconduction system. When this happens, the brain and other vital organs are deprived of an adequate supply of oxygen rich blood, which can rapidly lead to cardiac arrest and brain death. An important treatment for these patients is a procedure called Transcutaneous Pacing (TCP), in which adhesive electrode pads are placed on the chest, and an electrical current is generated to override the patient’scardiac conduction system and achieve a heart rate sufficient for the patient’sneeds. Although this procedure has been standard in hospitals for decades, it was not introduced into the prehospital setting until the recent decade. CMFR was one of the first EMS agencies in Orange County to implement Transcutaneous Pacing, which has greatly improved our ability to care for victims of these heart problems.

E. Prehospital Stroke Assessment & Stroke Center Triage Stroke is the third leading cause of death in the United States, and is a leading cause of disability in the United States (there are currently over 6,400,000 stroke survivors in the United States today).

The key to reducing death and disability due to stroke is rapid recognition and rapid triage to a designated Stroke Center hospital. CMFR EMTs and Paramedics were among the first in the County, in conjunction with Hoag Hospital (Newport Beach), to initiate new stroke assessment protocols and triage procedures that continues to afford specialized physicians to remove the blockage in the cerebral blood vessel as soon as possible, thus minimizing the damage to brain tissue due to lack of oxygen, which results in substantially improved quality of life for stroke survivors.

F. Capnography
One of the most important interventions in the treatment of cardiac and respiratory arrest victims is endotracheal intubation, in which a breathing tube is inserted into the patient’strachea. Unfortunately, this procedure involves the potential complications of misplaced and displaced tubes, which may result in the death of the patient and resultant lawsuits. In fact, this is one of the most legally risky procedures performed by paramedics. CMFR paramedics were among the very first in the County to use the technology of Capnography/Capnometry, which allows us to confirm tube placement by measuring the patient’sexpired carbon dioxide levels: If the tube is properly placed in the patient’s trachea, then the cardiac monitor will detect the presence of carbon dioxide, which will be represented by a visible waveform on the monitor screen. The confirmation afforded by the technology of capnography substantially increases intubation success rates while significantly decreasing the liability exposure of the City. CMFR paramedics were also among the first EMS professionals in Orange County to utilize capnography for conscious patients with breathing/respiratory problems to better and more precisely determine their actual pathophysiology and decide on the most appropriate treatment intervention.

G. Intra-Osseous Infusion
All life-threatening emergencies require the administration of medications and/or fluids into the patient’scirculation. This is usually accomplished with an intravenous (“I.V.”)catheter that is inserted through the patient’sskin into a vein. However, sometimes it is not possible to insert an intravenous catheter due to the patient’scondition or size. In the past, if paramedics were unable to insert an intravenous catheter, they would be unable to administer life-saving medications and fluids.

Page 6 of 17 ends

651
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
As of 2010, CMFR became one of the few EMS agencies in Orange County whose paramedics were trained and equipped to insert a catheter directly into a patient’stibia bone in a process called Intra- Osseous (“I.O.”)Infusion, which is often easier to do than intravenous access on critical patients.

Paramedics may then administer medications and fluids directly into the patient’sbone marrow, from where they rapidly flow into the patient’s circulation. Because of the addition of Intra-Osseous Infusion to the paramedic scope of practice, Costa Mesa residents have an exponentially greater chance of receiving life-saving medications and fluids than in the past, when this critical procedure was not allowed in the prehospital setting.

H. Commercially Available Tourniquets
Although the treatment of a life-threatening extremity bleed with a tourniquet is actually a Boy Scout level skill, at the change of the millennium, OCEMS had no protocol dealing specifically with this issue. In fact, it was the CMFR EMS Coordinator who, after meeting with Special Operations personnel with extensive combat experience in the Middle East, added the “Combat Application Tourniquet - CAT”to the CMFR EMS inventory. In the next several years, CMFR was ultimately able to persuade the OCEMS DEAG (Drug & Equipment Advisory Group, which unfortunately no longer exists) to add OCEMS-approved commercially available tourniquets to the official OCEMS mandatory inventory pursuant to OCEMS Policy 325.00 (“ALS Unit Provider Inventory”).

I. Emergency Transport Model
Most recently, over the course of the past several years, Costa Mesa has significantly enhanced our emergency ambulance transport system by adding six rescue ambulances and implementing a city (local government) based ambulance transport program, inclusive of both ALS and BLS configurations that are dynamically deployed in the same manner as all of our emergency response resources. This includes now being housed and staffed throughout our six strategically located city fire and rescue stations for optimum emergency response. Costa Mesa has continued to evolve into the most effective and efficient EMS ambulance transport model, incorporating the best advantages of a public-private partnership model for our community, utilizing a combination of EMT-level Ambulance Operators and our own cross-trained professional Firefighter/Paramedics who are completely and dynamically integrated into the Costa Mesa EMS system. The current deployment and transport model has resulted in increased paramedic availability in their designated areas of primary responsibility throughout the city because of the flexibility our model to adapt to the acuity of medical emergencies and treatment needs, as well as increased fire and rescue resource availability.

Simply put, Costa Mesa’sEmergency Transport Model a shining example of “updating emergency response protocols.”
J. Definition of “Patient”
It is worth noting that it was the CMFR EMS Division and EMS Coordinator back in the early 2000s, who literally wrote the official definition of “patient”for our City EMS protocols (with some help from Anne Stratton, RN), that was ultimately formally adopted by OCEMS and is still used as the official definition in OCEMS protocols for the entire County EMS system.

Page 7 of 17 ends

652
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
There are a wide range of many other examples of CMFR evolving the structure, model, and corresponding protocols of our EMS system according to the changing needs of our city, however the aforementioned items serve to clearly substantiate our conclusion of this finding. Further, while a majority of our emergency responses are EMS-related, many of our EMS responses require additional specialized training and skills for situations such as vehicle heavy rescue that only professionally cross-trained firefighters are qualified to handle. Consequently, every CMFR Firefighter, like all OCFCA Fire/ALS agencies, is cross-trained and certified as an EMT (Emergency Medical Technician), capable of providing BLS (Basic Life Support) emergency medical care. For those patients with more serious problems, the CMFR has 30+ Mobile Intensive Care Paramedics who have received additional training and are licensed to provide ALS (Advanced Life Support) emergency medical care.

One of core elements of CMFR’smission is focused on minimizing death, disability, and injury by optimizing patient outcomes with superior quality medical care by professionally cross-trained firefighters who conduct themselves with Respect, Integrity and Compassion. Because, like all branches of medicine, Prehospital EMS is a science that is constantly changing due to advances in concepts, technologies, and procedures, modern day “all-hazard”fire service agencies, such as CMFR, are also continuously adapting, adjusting, evaluating and improving the services we provide according to those changing standards, which includes the updating of all emergency response and related protocols when and where appropriate.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F3
FINDING: “ALS staffed ambulances or smaller squad vehicles are often the most appropriate response to medical aid calls and do not compromise the quality of medical care.”
RESPONSE:The City Disagrees Wholly with this Finding.

The goal of emergency medical aid (and any emergency) response is to send the appropriate resource(s) as expeditiously and safely as possible to most effectively manage the emergency, incident or situation identified. As such, we disagree wholly with a “one-size-fits-all”approach to define the most appropriate emergency response for a given emergency, incident or situation.

The intent of the Legislature with the creation of the 1980 EMS Act and its clear recognition of the importance of local control was memorialized with all possible clarity §1797.201.

Page 8 of 17 ends

653
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
box”) to effectively manage medical aid calls and other emergencies when properly deployed.

Thus, a “one-size-fits-all” approach is definitively not an appropriate approach, as the goal of emergency medical aid (and any emergency) response is to deploy the appropriate resource (s) as expeditiously and safely as possible to most effectively and efficiently manage the emergency, incident or situation identified and subsequently found.

For example, a medical aid in the respective Fairview Park or Talbert Park areas would not be effective within Costa Mesa (and Orange County) without a combination response of appropriate resources (i.e., four-wheel drive vehicles, fire apparatus with specialized rescue equipment and tools, and ambulance, etc.). Additionally, in Costa Mesa, and in the fire and emergency services in general, we frequently have emergency medical aids that are the secondary result of a primary incident, such as a vehicle or other technical rescue related accident, which requires specialized expertise of our professionally cross-trained and highly skilled “all-hazardresponse”firefighters. This is important to note because the value of professionally cross-trained firefighters have the knowledge, skills and abilities to safely and appropriately manage a high risk emergency scene, (i.e., inclusive of the incident management, safety risk management, technical rescue and the medical aid itself, etc.).

Some of our most labor-intensive calls for service, such as sudden cardiac arrest, are often reported as falls, syncope, or other well intended, but not clearly accurate descriptions of the emergency. Our deployment model allows us to adapt and provide the appropriate level of emergency service truly needed, with the least amount of emergency response delay.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F4
FINDING: “There has been a breakdown of communication and trust between OCEMS and Orange County Fire Chiefs.”
RESPONSE:The City Agrees Wholly with this Finding.

We agree that there has been a breakdown of communication and trust between OCEMS and Orange County Fire Chiefs. Specifically, the breakdown of communication and trust began following the transition of the new OCEMS leadership change in 2019, and to be clear, the breakdown in communication and trust appeared to primarily reside with certain lead managers from OCEMS, not the entire organization.

Prior to that, the OCEMS and the OCFCA had a long established and strong relationship, grounded in mutual respect, trust and collaboration. When EMS matters came up that were disagreed upon and/or needed additional clarification, OCEMSA and OCFCA always worked to find a way to come together and meet to professionally resolve the issue at hand. While each party may have mutually not agreed on a policy, order or decision that was ultimately issued, OCFCA respected the end result, because we were all substantively part of the process.

Page 9 of 17 ends

654
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
From the inception of the Mobile Intensive Care Paramedic (MICP) by Article 3 of the California Wedworth-Townsend Paramedic Act of 1970, Orange County residents have received the highest quality pre-hospital emergency medical care through the fire service-based EMS system, that is widely acknowledged as the most effective and efficient utilization of professionally cross-trained emergency resources. Although the fire service-based EMS model demonstrates a wide array of benefits to Orange County residents, CMFR recognizes that the quality of our EMS system is not effective if it is not a comprehensive team effort that depends on all EMS system members and stakeholders who each contribute in different ways that are equally important to the overall success of the system. Accordingly, CMFR’s guiding principle continues to be good communication and meaningful collaboration with all of our EMS system partners in the spirit of cooperation and mutual respect, never losing sight or focus on our joint and solemn purpose to humbly and compassionately care for the people of Costa Mesa who we serve.

The Costa Mesa Fire Chief served as the President of the Orange County Fire Chiefs Association prior to, during and following the leadership transition of 2019 and it became abundantly clear that the transition of leadership in OCEMS became adversarial and autocratic in nature, lacking collaboration. The rationale that was provided by the new leadership of OCEMS to the Orange County Fire Chiefs was that OCEMS did not have the staff or the time to regularly meet with the OCFCA on these issues, nor did they need to have the approval of the OCFCA for policy changes.

The latter assertion was not one the OCFCA was seeking, the OCFCA was merely seeking collaboration.

Understandably, any leadership transition will have some growing pains, with some grace and space a welcomed component to provide the organization and partnerships time to grow. Unfortunately, in this case, the escalating lack of desire for interpersonal communications, collaboration, and building trust from the new OCEMSA leadership began to get worse instead of improving. One example of this included the OCEMS leadership unilaterally putting out policies and orders without meeting to informally or formally confer with the Orange County Fire Chiefs and/or the OCFCA’sEMS subject matter experts, affording the opportunity to provide thoughtful collaborative input in advance of policies being implemented. Instead of viewing and utilizing the OCFCA and OCFCA’sEMS subject matters experts as valuable resources and professional partners, the new OCEMS leadership team did not fully utilize the OCFCA and the EMS SME’sas valuable resources or subject matter experts thereby inhibiting the development of mutual professional understanding. This exclusionary approach and change in disposition of the OCEMS toward partnering with the OCFCA was not something that was previously observed and/or noted as a point of historical reference. Moreover, it has been broadly communicated that this same approach was indicative of the tone received by other stakeholders, including, but not limited to the Orange County Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs Association as well as the Hospital Administrators, among others. That said, our goal is resolution and one recommendation would be for the OCHCA to reach out to other stakeholders who regularly work with OCEMS (i.e., inclusive a 360-degree evaluation) to determine the breadth and depth of the breakdowns of trust and communication with all partners to help guide a formal memorialized pathway to help rebuild two-way professional collaborations and relationships with OCEMSA and all of their related stakeholders. Despite all of this, the City of Costa Mesa and OCFCA has and will continue to resiliently look for opportunities to build bridges of trust and collaboration where ever

Page 10 of 17 ends

655
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
possible.

As another example, during the fall of 2020, during the initial peak of the COVID Pandemic and during the engagement of active wildland fire seasons, OCEMS leadership attempted to push through an update to the Orange County Ambulance Ordinance without effectively notifying the OCFCA or the 34 cities within the County. Again, this was at the peak of the Pandemic and during historic wildfire seasons that this ordinance change became a sudden urgency for OCEMS to bring forward, with no previous communication. As soon as the OCFCA identified that this was happening, the OCFCA actively advocated to collaboratively work through the issue on behalf of the Orange County Fire Chiefs and the California Fire Chiefs, as well as City Managers.

After continued unsuccessful efforts to resolve this issue directly with OCEMS Leadership, the Orange County Fire Chiefs engaged their respective City Managers and/or legal counsels, among others, including the Orange County CEO, Frank Kim and the OCHCA Director Dr. Clayton Chau.

After key leadership representing all of the referenced groups came together in a number of different meetings with CEO Kim, OCHCA Director Chau, and members of the OCEMS leadership team, it became clear that the Fire Chiefs and the respective cities intent all centered around that of collaboration and resolution, of which was acknowledged by the outcome of the final meeting and the facilitation by CEO Kim. The Orange County Fire Chiefs and the City of Costa Mesa acknowledged and appreciated the collaborative leadership approach demonstrated by CEO Kim and Dr. Chau, as well as the valued engagement of the City Managers and legal counsels. Subsequently, after all of the stakeholders spent some time working together, including the Orange County Fire Chiefs in direct collaboration with OCEMS, a final draft product was created that was tentatively acceptable to all parties involved. This final draft product now remains in the possession of OCEMS for a final group review before being formally being brought to the Orange County Board of Supervisors for formal approval. Interestingly enough, as of the date of this Grand Jury response, November 2022, the Orange County Fire Chiefs have yet to see any final closure to the ambulance ordinance update.

This example is provided to illustrate that the Orange County Fire Chiefs have committed to and will continue to be unwavering in our efforts to build trust, collaboration and partnerships with all stakeholders, including OCEMS.

To that end, and as another example in the spirit of working to rebuild trust and communication, the OCFCA initiated an EMS advisory group established to rebuild that line of communication. The Costa Mesa Fire Chief, on behalf of and under unanimous direction from the Orange County Fire Chiefs, directly reached out to the OCEMS Medical Director with the request and it was ultimately mutually agreed and established.

Lastly, throughout the entirety of the Pandemic, when the OCEMSA and OCHCA were significantly challenged with managing the impacts of COVID and the Pandemic, the Orange County Fire Chiefs and the Orange County Fire Service took the initiative and stepped up to take a lead role in managing a number of areas, including, but not limited to establishing the first vaccination point of dispensing (POD) sites, and thereafter, the super POD vaccination sites, all from the tip of the spear and all while still serving their respective communities throughout the duration of the Pandemic, infused with thoughtful communication, trust, collaboration, compassion and partnership.

Page 11 of 17 ends

656
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
Lastly, here are a few narrative summaries that are of importance to acknowledge and highlight:

A. Medical Control - Whereas the various Fire Service agencies have the sovereign legal authority over the administration and operational control of prehospital EMS within their respective jurisdictions (HSC §1797.201), the LEMSA maintains absolute legal authority over medical control. “Medical control” is statutorily defined as, and expressly limited to, “the medical management” and the “medical direction” of the EMS system, in other words, decisions and actions that directly impact patient care such as assessment, treatments/interventions, and transport destination decisions (HSC §§ 1797.90, 1797.220, 1798(a), 1798.8). NOTE: Costa Mesa and/or CMFR has not ever challenged the Medical Control authority of our LEMSA.

B. EMS Protocols - The main statutory mechanism for a LEMSA to exercise its medical control authority is through written EMS protocols (i.e., polices, procedures, guidelines, standing orders, etc.) that are the basis for all field patient care-related decisions and actions and, therefore, represent the standard of care against which prehospital personnel will be judged in any administrative or civil legal action, and in any disciplinary action initiated by the LEMSA, Base Hospital, or employing agency. Consequently, for EMS protocols to be valid, effective, practical, and equitable, they must:

1. Comply with the letter, intent, and spirit of federal and state law, in addition to accepted medical principles and standards; and

2. Be written with sufficient clarity and in a logical format so that the average prehospital professional can reasonably understand what is expected and how to comply; and

3. Provide the minimal direction necessary to guide/achieve the desired decisions and actions, while affording the maximal reasonable flexibility to account for the volatile and unpredictable nature of the prehospital environment, as well as to avoid unnecessarily exposing the EMT/Paramedic and employing agency to undue or excess legal liability.

C. Fire Service Compliance - The Orange County Fire Service (and the California Fire Service), including CMFR, has a consistent history of respecting the authority of the LEMSA Medical Director and abiding by the medical guidance of the LEMSA and Base Hospital physicians and nurses who represent the Medical Director, including following all LEMSA protocols in good faith to the best of our ability. This is especially true in the Orange County EMS System, where the Fire Service and OCEMSA, in conjunction with the various Base Hospitals, have always worked very closely together with an open and constructive dialogue for the benefit of our patients. We are not aware of any time in the past decades where an Orange County Fire Service agency challenged the actual Medical Control of our LEMSA, though state history is replete with examples of many LEMSAs-and even the state EMS Authority (EMSA) itself-that had to be addressed with legal action.

This legal action was taken due to their attempts to expand the definition of “medical” control with the utilization of illegal “underground regulations” to undermine the authority of local

Page 12 of 17 ends

657
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
jurisdictions and the communities they represent. Specifically, the Sacramento Superior Court entered judgment <https://wlelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Conformed-Judgment.pdf> on behalf of the California Fire Chiefs Association (CalChiefs) and issued a peremptory writ of mandate <https://wlelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Peremptory-Writ-of-Mandate- ISSUED.pdf> against the California Emergency Medical Services Authority (“EMSA”), in California Fire Chiefs Association Inc. v. California Emergency Medical Services Authority, No. 34-2019-80003163. CalChiefs, a professional association for more than 800 fire service agencies across the state, alleged that EMSA, the State of California’s regulatory agency for EMS had been operating in violation of mandatory state law for at least 30 years. CalChiefs’ verified petition for writ of mandate and complaint for declaratory and injunction relief <https://wlelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CalChiefs-Petition-and-Complaint-re- alleged, among other things, that EMSA’s rules implementing two key statutes regarding local governments’ provision and administration of EMS and ambulance services were void “underground regulations” because they had not been lawfully adopted pursuant to California’s Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”). The Hon. Laurie M. Earl, Judge of the Superior Court agreed, declaring that EMSA’s rules were void “underground regulations” and commanding EMSA to cease enforcing its invalid rules until and unless the state agency properly adopts the rules in compliance with the APA. Judge Earl also concluded that CalChiefs should be allowed to petition for an award of its attorneys’ fees for bringing an action to vindicate important public rights (Schouten, 2020).

The good news is that the relationship between the California fire service and the state EMSA has begun the transition to a more collaborative partnership, much credited to both sides working closely together since the arrival and formal appointment of Elizabeth “Liz”Basnett to the position of Acting Director of the state EMSA in November of 2021. Since her arrival, EMSA and the California fire service have been working closely together with all of the statewide EMS stakeholders to rebuild the professional relationships and trust, including the development of an inclusive strategic planning process. It is our hope that this model and approach can be embraced and integrated in the same manner with our OCEMSA.

D. Fire Service Input - It is a true statement that the LEMSA Medical Director has no legal obligation to seek advice or approval from any EMS provider agency when modifying (i.e., creating, revising, deleting) EMS protocols, even though such a change may have a substantial impact on the administrative and operational planning of EMS provider agencies and their cities, including significant financial burdens on the citizen taxpayers who fund those agencies. Nonetheless, due to the many and diverse ramifications of protocol modification, and to ensure that the patient care goals of the Medical Director are accurately conveyed to, and understood by, field personnel, input and feedback from the EMS provider agencies that must comply with the protocols is highly recommended. CMFR is grateful for the fact that the OCEMSA has historically been very collaborative with the fire service and all other EMS system members by not only allowing, but actively seeking meaningful input whenever protocol modification or system improvement decisions were being considered. This commitment to strong teamwork and professional partnership is clearly evidenced by our county EMS history in terms of collaborative and effective protocol modification. From the early 2000s under Dr. Bruce Haynes’OCEMS administration, through Dr. Samuel Stratton’s OCEMS administration, and well before that, Orange County was literally known as one of the most effective and synergistic amongst the many other counties and LEMSAs in California.

Page 13 of 17 ends

658
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
most effective and synergistic amongst the many other counties and LEMSAs in California.

This is because the OCFCA, OCEMSA, and other EMS provider agencies have traditionally worked together in a manner of great cooperation, collaboration, teamwork, support, and in good faith, even when there was disagreement. However, with the exit of the Dr. Stratton administration, this dynamic of strong teamwork and highly productive collaboration changed dramatically for reasons still unknown to us.

E. OCFCA EMS Section - To further ensure that the Orange County Fire Service continues to meet the goals and expectations of the OCEMS Medical Director, as well as to provide the OCEMS Agency practical input to help ensure that those goals and expectations are effectively translated to the field, decades ago OCFCA established a sub-committee called the “EMSSection,”which is composed of all the EMS Coordinators from the various Fire-Rescue 911 ALS Provider agencies, as well as other Fire agency members in EMS-related positions.

EMS Section meetings are routinely attended by Fire agency members, OCEMSA officials, Base Hospital Coordinators, and other EMS system representatives for the purpose of maintaining good communication and strong collaboration in our joint efforts to maintain and improve our high quality of patient care. In the post-Stratton era, amidst the challenges with OCEMSA and the OCFCA, the OCFCA EMS Advisory Group (EMSAG) was created after being initiated by the OCFCA. Although EMSAG and OCEMS has had limited success in its meetings and making progress, it is our desire and hope that EMSAG and OCEMSA continue to foster and build a valuable foundation to work from in the future, per the intent of the group’s formation.

In closing, while we agree with this finding, CMFR and the OCFCA will continue to resiliently look for opportunities to build bridges of trust and collaboration in every way possible including, but not limited to:

1. Re-establishing and re-building the decades-long collaborative relationship between the OCEMSA and the Orange County Fire Service agencies that comprise the County EMS system in furtherance of our joint mission to provide optimal patient care and outcomes for the people who we serve.

2. Facilitate open lines of collaborative communication between OCEMSA and the Orange County Fire Service on all matters that impact the County EMS System.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F5
FINDING: “Over-deployment of firefighters for medical calls contributes to the current climate of forced hiring and firefighter fatigue.”
RESPONSE: The City Disagrees Wholly with this Finding.

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue does not engage in an “over-deployment”of firefighters for medical calls.

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue has a robust and dynamic deployment model that is continually being monitored to make any necessary adjustments. Most importantly, Costa Mesa always places the health and safety of our professional firefighters as a highest priority.

Appropriate staffing is a necessary aspect of every public safety staffing model, in some way, shape

Page 14 of 17 ends

659
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
Appropriate staffing is a necessary aspect of every public safety staffing model, in some way, shape or form. Simply put, we need to have sworn and trained public safety professionals on duty at all times, based on the community needs and risks of each jurisdiction served. Therein, different variables impact the need for forced hiring, including, but not limited to no firefighter voluntarily signed up to work the overtime; rank specific or department-wide staffing gaps; lack of budgeted and approved sworn and trained public safety positions consistent with the needs of the community; local, regional, statewide or national emergencies, or special circumstances. At this time, Costa Mesa does not have any staffing gaps and the city is currently in the midst of evaluating our Standards of Coverage for the City, as well as entering into the final stage of implementing a new five-year strategic plan.

Lastly, firefighter fatigue has been a noted discussion point over the past few years, regionally, statewide and nationwide, primarily due to the extraordinary role that professional firefighters take on every day in answering the call for any and every emergency, from historic wildfires to the COVID Pandemic to the day to day emergencies and operations on all fronts. As an example, from the onset of the COVID Pandemic throughout its peak and wind down phase, professional firefighters, emergency responders and healthcare workers remained on the front lines, start to finish, without pause or hesitation. With that in mind, mental and behavioral health for firefighters, all public safety personnel and healthcare workers needs to remain a highest priority for all levels of government.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F9
FINDING: “OCEMS has the authority and responsibility to inspect all for-profit ambulances operating in Orange County; however, publicly owned ambulances are not automatically subject to OCEMS oversight.”
RESPONSE:The City Agrees Partially with this Finding.

Costa Mesa agrees that “OCEMS has the authority and responsibility to inspect all for-profit ambulances operating in Orange County.” However, the second part of the finding that “…publicly owned ambulances are not automatically subject to OCEMS oversight” would read more appropriately as follows: “…publicly owned ambulances are not automatically subject to OCEMS oversight as it relates to areas exclusive of medical control.” To that end, all other responsibilities, risks and rights are held with and through the City of Costa Mesa, as legally and lawfully memorialized by state, county, and local statute (HSC §1797.201). We agree that OCEMS does not currently inspect publicly owned ambulances.

For further clarification purposes, Costa Mesa agrees that all EMS entities, public and private, including CMFR, are statutorily required to comply with all LEMSA medical control protocols, including, but not limited to the mandatory medical inventory, medications, supplies and equipment of ambulances (i.e., OCEMS Policy 300 - Medical Control; specifically, Policy #325.00 - Advanced Life Support (ALS) Provider Unit Minimum Inventory). However, it is not under the authority and responsibility of the OCEMSA to determine other areas outside of that statutory and regulatory purview, including, but not limited to our emergency response deployment model or determine vehicle related requirements with no defined nexus to medical control (e.g., apparatus/vehicle type,

Page 15 of 17 ends

660
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
apparatus/vehicle permitting, wheel size/brand, fuel used, etc.).

Clayton Chau. As an interesting side note, specific to this finding and given the time and effort the Grand Jury placed on preparing this comprehensive report, it was surprising that there was no inclusion of information or discussion on the significant issues related to OCEMSA’sOrange County Ambulance Ordinance update.

GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION #R1
RECOMMENDATION: “By 2024, all Orange County fire agencies utilize criteria-based dispatch protocols and send a single response to those incidents triaged as non-life-threatening (BLS).”
RESPONSE:The recommendation of utilizing criteria-based dispatch protocols has already been implemented.

Costa Mesa’s dispatch center (CMCC/Costa Mesa Communications Center) is a joint Police/Fire Emergency Communications Center. We have historically mirrored, and continue to use, the King County Washington Criteria Based Dispatch (CBD) Guidelines as adapted by and modified for the Orange County Fire Authority. Thus, Costa Mesa continues to use CBD dispatching, inclusive of determining the most effective, efficient and viable deployment of emergency resources, based on the community risks and needs and all established through local policy (HSC §1797.201) of the City Council, under approved recommendations of the City Manager and Fire Chief. NOTE: Please review the response summaries to F1 & F3 for further detail.

GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION #R4
RECOMMENDATION: “While OCEMS should recognize how certain policy changes may pose operational challenges to emergency responders in the field, fire leadership should recognize and respect the independent oversight authority and expertise of OCEMS.”
RESPONSE:This Recommendation Has Already Been Implemented Costa Mesa Fire Leadership recognizes and respects the expertise and authority of OCEMSA as our standard operating practice, highlighted by the acknowledgement of OCEMSA’s authority as it pertains to medical control. NOTE: Please review the response summaries to F4 & F9 for further detail.

GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION #R5
RECOMMENDATION: “Departments with public owned ambulances should allow OCEMS

Page 16 of 17 ends

661
File #: 22-933 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
RECOMMENDATION: “Departments with public owned ambulances should allow OCEMS to inspect their ambulances for compliance with State EMS guidelines and adopt OCEMS recommendations.”
RESPONSE:This Recommendation Has Never Been Denied.

As previously shared, Costa Mesa remains committed to meet and exceed all State and OCEMS guidelines, policies and statutory requirements related to our public owned ambulances, in alignment with OCEMS authority of medical control and the City’s legal, statutory, and regulatory rights, including, but not limited to the California Health & Safety Code, Section 1797.201 and the City of Costa Mesa’sMunicipal Code. Moreover, this recommendation was addressed through a number of meetings related to resolving the updates to the Orange County Ambulance Ordinance, including a final summary meeting with clear consensus on how we would proceed with a mutual agreement of under of understanding. The final meeting included representatives from the Orange County Fire Chiefs, including the Costa Mesa Fire Chief, representatives from the Orange County City Managers, OCEMSA Leadership, OCHCA Director Dr. Clayton Chau and Orange County CEO Frank Kim.

NOTE: Please review the response summaries to F4 & F9 for further detail.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council has the following options:

1. Approve staff’s recommendation; or

2. Provide alternative direction
FISCAL REVIEW:

There is no financial impact as a result of the Grand Jury Report responses.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved this report as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:
· Strengthen the Public’s Safety and Improve the Quality of Life CONCLUSION:

Page 17 of 17 ends

662
ATTACHMENT 1
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690

CITY OF COSTA MESA
P.O. BOX 1200 / 77 FAIR DRIVE
COSTA MESA, CA 92628-1200
Phone: (714) 754-5106 / TTD: (714) 754-5244 / Fax: (714) 754-4944 www.costamesaca.gov

November 1, 2022

The Honorable Erick L. Larsh
Presiding Judge of the O.C. Superior Court Grand Jury
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, California 92701

RE: CITY OF COSTA MESA RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT
"Where's the Fire? Stop Sending Fire Trucks To Medical Calls"

Honorable Judge Larsh:

The City of Costa Mesa and the Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue Department appreciate the time and effort the Orange County Grand Jury spent on their report titled “Where’s The Fire? Stop Sending Fire Trucks to Medical Calls.” In alignment with the original subpoena request dated March 16, 2022 and subsequent extension to respond that was formally approved on September 14, 2022, allow this document to serve as our formal response on behalf of the City of Costa Mesa and the Costa Mesa Fire Chief.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond and if you should you need any additional information or clarifications, please do not hesitate to contact Fire Chief Dan Stefano at (714) 754 -5106 or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,

___________________________________ ___________________________________ Lori Ann Farrell Harrison Daniel A. Stefano City Manager Fire Chief

Cc: Honorable Mayor & City Council
City Attorney

ATTACHMENT 2
691

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 2

GRAND JURY FINDING #F1

FINDING: “Despite fire departments throughout Orange County having evolved into emergency medical departments, most have not updated their emergency response protocols accordingly, but have simply absorbed emergency medical responses into their existing fire response models.”

RESPONSE: The City Disagrees Wholly with this Finding.

This finding is inconsistent with the historical facts of the C alifornia Fire Service generally and with the City of Costa Mesa specifically.

For over half a century, the California Fire Service , including Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue, has been the primary provider of prehospital EMS throughout the state, long before the existence of an organized statewide EMS system. Recognizing the obvious value—in terms of both operational and financial efficiency and effectiveness— of already -existing strategically locate d fire stations and emergency apparatus, staffed by highly trained and experienced firefighters who possess a vast array of rescue skills and capabilities, in 1969 the California Legislature enacted Health & Safety Code § 219, which created minimum first aid training standards for all public safety personnel. During that same year, a pilot program was launched by three physicians in Los Angeles County to train 18 F irefighters as “Mobile Intensive Care Paramedics” (MICPs) w ho would provide Advanced Life Support (ALS) level care to the critically ill and injured in the prehospital setting. The success of this program led to passage of the Wedworth-Townsend Paramedic Act of 1970 for the purpose of expanding paramedic services throughout the state.

The California Fire Service -based model for the delivery of ALS/paramedic -level care was so overwhelmingly successful that the television series “Emergency” (1972 -1977) was developed to bring national attention to the importance of prehospital EMS through the characters of Firefighter- Paramedics Johnny Gage and Roy DeSoto (actors Randolph Mantooth and Kevin Tighe). When “Emergency” first aired, there were only about six paramedic systems nationwide. However, the series was tremendously popular, and people all over the United States began to ask their local officials why they did not also have such a system.

In its efforts to better organize and coordinate the newly developing field of prehospital EMS, the California Legislature adopted the Emergency Medical Services System and Prehospital Medical Care Personnel Act of 1980 (“1980 EMS Act”) that established Division 2.5 of the Health & Safety Code (HSC). Due to the fundamental and essential role of the Fire Service in developing the EMS infrastructure over preceding decades—that included an enormous commitment of time, staffing, training, and money from cities and citizen taxpayers —the Legislature wrote California Health & Safety Code §1797.201 to formally recognize and preserve the pre-existing authority of those local cities and fire agencies to continue in the provision, administration, and operational control of all prehospital EMS their jurisdiction, in compliance with , and subject to, state and local medical (i.e., patient care) standards and guidelines.

Section 1797.201 also reflects the Legislature’s acknowledgement that the administrative and operational aspects of an EMS system are best deter mined at the local level, based on the specific needs and nuances of the community served, ultimately defined by local policy through jurisdictional governance and based on the subject- matter expertise of the public safety representatives (e.g., Fire Chief , EMS Division/Section, etc. ) who best understand the particular needs of their community and who are directly accountable to the community served.

With that all said, the distinction between the operational and administrative control of an EMS system and the medical control of an EMS system need to be clearly acknowledged an d clarified. W hereas the various local governments and fire agencies have the sovereign legal authority over the administration and operational control of prehospital EMS within their respective jurisdictions (HSC §1797.201) , the Local Emergency Medical Services 692

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 3 Agency (LEMSA) maintains absolute legal authority over medical control. “Medical control” is statutorily defined as, and expressly limited to, “the medical management” and the “medical direction” of the EMS system. In other words, decisions and actions that directly impact patient care such as assessment, treatments/interventions, and transport destination decisions (HSC §§ 1797.90, 1797.220, 1798(a), 1798.8). Costa Mesa has not in our history challenged the m edical control of our LEMSA. I n fact, this acknowledgement and delineation is extremely important, combined with the significant value placed on local governmental agencies and the LEMSA working within a highly collaborative environment for the best interests of EMS system itself and the communities served.

Further, the California Fire Service , which includes Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue (CMFR), has continued to be the primary provider of prehospital EMS throughout the State, with Orange County being one of the best examples of a well- functioning and efficiently structured EMS system. This is primarily because of our lo ng history as a highly unified fire service-based EMS system composed of fire agencies that are capable of providing “All-Hazards” Emergency Services (i.e., Fire, Rescue, M edical, Community Risk Reduction, etc.), including both BLS and ALS/paramedic level prehospital emergency care, in all types of hazardous environments and across all jurisdictional boundaries due to our emphasis on inter -agency coordination and standardization of training and procedures according to local, state, and national guidelines. In fact, inter -agency and cross -jurisdictional coordination and standardization is absolutely critical for operational effectiveness and firefighter safety, but it is also necessary to achieve the goals of optimal quality patient care, as well as equality of patient care, for all county residents and visitors regardless of their location or situation. Moreover, this is predicated on the reciprocity of like resources and services between f ire service agencies, without a reduction in type, level, or quality of care.

The Orange County Fire Chiefs Association (OCFCA)—which includes CMFR and represents all Orange County Fire Service-ALS-Level provider agencies—remains committed to all of these goals, as well as continuing its tradition of innovation and ongoing improvement in the rapidly changing world of healthcare and medicine, because the people who depend on us deserve nothing less.

In 1975, Costa Mesa initiated a three-platoon schedule for the fire department, resulting in a 56-hour workweek.

Later that year, seven firefighters were trained as paramedics and the Mobile Intensive Care (MIC) program was initiated.

The first “Medic” unit was a 1975 Chevy ambulance. Later a Ford ambulance was purchased so that one could be kept in reserve. It i s interesting to note that these ambulances were not u tilized for patient transport; a private ambulance company was utilized to perform that function. Soon, the single parame dic unit for Costa Mesa’s 70,000 people proved to be inadequate. In January of 1983, a second Medic unit, Medic Truck 3 was placed in service at the Park Avenue Fire Station.

As the number of emergency medical responses increase d, it became apparent that more than two paramedic units were necessary to achieve the goals of the MIC program. An aggressive purchasing program saw the replacement of nearly every front line apparatus in 1989 -90, and within 5 years, the department had c onverted all of the five engine companies to Paramedic Engines, each staffe d with four personnel and the continued utilization of a private ambulance company from an off-site location to assist with our emergency transportation.

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 4 paramedic program. In 2014, the department initiated its first strategic planning process, which included updating the department’s name from “Fire” Department to “Fire & Rescue” Department to reflect the robust “all-hazard” response approach and focus on continuous improvement and innovative evolution.

In 2018, the City Council approved the Fire Chief and City Manager recommendation to i mplement a city based ambulance operator emergency transportation program, which brought the emergency ambulance transportation in-house in an innovative public-private partnership model, that Costa Mesa continuously monitors and adapts “real-time” to the changing health and safety needs of the community.

Regarding specific technologies and procedures, prehospital EMS in 2022 is obviously substantially different than the prehospital EMS provided by fire departments 50 years ago when the Mobile Intensive Care Paramedic was first created. Indeed, the assessment and treatment interventions performed by the modern -day Firefighter- Paramedic, along with evidence-based system protocols governing patient triage and hospital destination, have dramatically improved survival and outcome for victims of sudden illness and injury. Moreover, technological advances in the field of medicine traditionally utilized exclusively in the hospital setting are more and more being adapted for use in the prehospital setting by fi re department paramedics. The following are just some of the many examples of major improvements in prehospital assessment and treatment that demonstrates Costa Mesa is not only evolving, but always working diligently to be on the forefront of advancement and thoughtful innovation, for the benefit of our residents to prevent and minimize premature death an d disability, while maximizing positive neurological outcomes.

This happened in conjunction with the Orange County Emergency Medical Services Agency (OCEMSA) and allowed for significant improvements in the ability to operate a Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) program. In 2016, again in conjunction with the OCEMSA, a transition was made to an upgraded ePCR program that continues to be used and refined today. CMFR participates in a multi-agency CQI committee which utilizes the ePCR format and its data to improve emergency medical service delivery.

B. Prehospital 12-Lead Electrocardiogram (EKG) & Cardiac Center Triage

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one cause of death for both men and women in the United States, killing over one million people each year. CVD kills more people than cancer, AIDs, and the other top five causes of death combined. One of the primary mechanisms of death from cardiovascular disease is heart attack, which kills over 450,000 people each year. A heart attack, known more accurately as myocardial infarction, is when a person’s coronary artery suddenly becomes bl ocked. The heart muscle that was supplied by the blocked artery then begins to die as it is deprived of oxygen rich blood. According to American Heart Association (AHA) Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) guidelines, in order to survive a myocardial infarction “it is imperative that healthcare providers evaluate, triage, and treat patients as quickly as possible,” because “half of the patients who die of myocardial infarction do so before reaching the hospital” (2005 AHA ECC Guidelines, IV -89). Accordingly, AHA makes the performance of a 12-Lead EKG a Class I recommendation, which means it is deemed essential for survival. The sooner a myocardial infarction is identified by paramedics in the field, the sooner they can initiate the appropriate treatments and notify the nearest Cardiac Center hospital, so that when the patient arrives the coronary artery blockage can be rapidly removed. CMFR was one of the first EMS agencies in Orange County to implement at 12 -Lead EKG and Cardiac Triage program and, alo ng with Hoag Hospital (Newport Beach), set national records for the successful treatment of heart attack victims.

C. Public Access Defibrillation Program

Another primary mechanism of death from cardiovascular disease is Sudden Cardiac Arrest, which kills over 694

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 5 250,000 people each year. Unfortunately, the national survival rate for Sudden Cardiac Arrest is only 5%, which means that 95% of all Sudden Cardiac Arrest victims die. However, in places with strong Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) pr ograms, the survival rates are substantially higher (~40 -70%). This is because for every minute that goes by without defibrillation, a Sudden Cardiac Arrest victim has a 10% less chance of survival (if CPR is not performed, there is a 20% less chance of survival for each minute). Costa Mesa is one of the handful of cities in the nation that has taken a proactive approach to fighting premature death due to Sudden Cardiac Arrest.

Back in the mid -2000s, CMFR implemented a City -wide PAD (Public Access Defib rillation) system making AEDs (Automated External Defibrillators) available in all City facilities accessible by the public. Further, CMFR assisted many public and private organizations, such as Orange Coast College and South Coast Plaza, implement their own PAD programs, thus making our community significantly safer for victims of sudden cardiac arrest. CMFR continues to partner and provide our local businesses, schools and broad range of community stakeholders and members with support, information and training with respect to all emergency and disaster preparedness matters.

D. Transcutaneous Pacing

Some people experience cardiac emergencies where their heart beats too slow due to an electrical problem in the heart’s conduction system. When this happens, the brain and other vital organs are deprived of an adequate supply of oxygen rich blood, which can rapidly lead to cardiac arrest and brain death. An important treatment for these patients is a procedure called Transcutaneous Pacing (TCP), in which adhesive electrode pads are placed on the chest, and an electrical current is generated to override the patient’s cardiac conduction system and achieve a heart rate sufficient for the patient’s needs. Although this procedure has been standard in hospitals for decades, it was not introduced into the prehospital setting until the recent decade. CMFR was one of the first EMS agencies in Orange County to implement Transcutaneous Pacing, which has greatly improved our ability to care for victims of these heart problems.

E. Prehospital Stroke Assessment & Stroke Center Triage

Stroke is the third leading cause of death in the United States, and is a leading cause of disability in the United States (there are currently over 6,400,000 stroke survivors in the United States today). The key to reducing death and disability due to stroke is rapid recognition and rapid triage to a designated Stroke Center hospital. CMFR EMTs and Paramedics were among the first in the County, in conjunction with Hoag Hospital (Newport Beach), to initiate new stroke assessment protocols and triage procedures that continues to afford specialized physicians to remove the blockage in the cerebral blood vessel as soon as possible, thus minimizing the damage to brain tissue due to lack of oxygen, which results in substantially improved quality of life for stroke survivors.

F. Capnography

One of the most important interventions in the treatment of cardiac and respiratory arrest victims is endotracheal intubation, in which a breathing tube is inserted into the patient’s trachea. Unfortunately, this procedure involves the potential complications of misplaced and displaced tubes, which may result in the death of the patient and resultant lawsuits. In fact, this is one of the most legally risky procedures performed by paramedics. CMFR paramedics were among the very first in the County to use the technology of Capnography/Capnometry, which allows us to confirm tube placement by measuring the patient ’s expired carbon dioxide levels: If the tube is properly placed in the patient’s trachea, then the cardiac monitor will detect the presence of carbon dioxide, which will be represented by a visible waveform on the monitor screen. The confirmation afforde d by the technology of capnography substantially increases intubation success rates while significantly decreasing the liability exposure of the City. CMFR paramedics were also among the first EMS professionals in Orange County to utilize capnography fo r conscious patients with breathing/respiratory problems to better and more precisely determine their actual pathophysiology and decide on the most appropriate treatment intervention.

G. Intra-Osseous Infusion
695

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 6

All life -threatening emergencies require the administration of medications and/or fluids into the patient’s circulation. This is usually accomplished with an intravenous (“I.V.”) catheter that is inserted through the patient’s skin into a vein. However, sometimes it is not possible to insert an intravenous catheter due to the patient’s condition or size. In the past, if paramedics were unable to insert an intravenous catheter, they would be unable to administer life-saving medications and fluids.

As of 2010, CMFR became one of the few EMS agencies in Orange County whose paramedics were trained and equipped to insert a catheter directly into a patient’s tibia bone in a process called Intra-Osseous (“I.O.”) Infusion, which is often easier to do than in travenous access on critical patients. Paramedics may then administer medications and fluids directly into the patient’s bone marrow, from where they rapidly flow into the patient’s circulation. Because of the addition of Intra- Osseous Infusion to the p aramedic scope of practice, Costa Mesa residents have an exponentially greater chance of receiving life -saving medications and fluids than in the past, when this critical procedure was not allowed in the prehospital setting.

H. Commercially Available Tourniquets

Although the treatment of a life -threatening extremity bleed with a tourniquet is actually a Boy Scout level skill, at the change of the millennium, OCEMS had no protocol dealing specifically with this issue. In fact, it was the CMFR EMS Coordinator who, after meeting with Special Operations personnel with extensive combat experience in the Middle East, added the “Combat Application Tourniquet – CAT” to the CMFR EMS inventory. In the next several years, CMFR was ultimately able to persuade the OCEMS DEAG (Drug & Equipment Advisory Group, which unfortunately no longer exists) to add OCEMS-approved commercially available tourniquets to the official OCEMS mandatory inventory pursuant to OCEMS Policy 325.00 (“ALS Unit Provider Inventory”).

I. Emergency Transport Model

Most recently, over the course of the past several years, Costa Mesa has significantly enhanced our emergency ambulance transport system by adding six rescue ambulances and implementing a city (local government) based ambulance transport program, inclusive of both ALS and BLS configurations that are dynamically deployed in the same manner as all of our emergency response resources. This includes now being housed and staffed throughout our six strategically located city fire and rescue stations for optimum emergency response . Costa Mesa has continued to evolve into the most effective and efficient EMS ambulance transport model, incorporating the best advantages of a public-private partnership model for our community , utilizi ng a combination of EMT -level Ambulance Operators and our own cross -trained professional Firefighter/Paramedics who are completely and dynamically integrated into the Costa Mesa EMS system. The current deployment and transport model has resulted in increased paramedic availability in their designated areas of primary responsibility throughout the city because of the flexibility our model to adapt to the acuity of medical emergencies and treatment needs , as well as increased fire and rescue resource availability. Simply put, Costa Mesa’s Emergency Transport Model a shining example of “updating emergency response protocols.”

J. Definition of “Patient”

It is worth noting that it was the CMFR EMS Division and EMS Coordinator back in the early 2000s, who literally wrote the official definition of “patient” for our City EMS protocols (with some help from Anne Stratton, RN), that was ultimately formally adopte d by OCEMS and is still used as the official definition in OCEMS protocols for the entire County EMS system.

There are a wide range of many other examples of CMFR evolving the structure, model, and corresponding protocols of our EMS system accordin g to th e changing needs of our c ity, however the aforementioned items serve to clearly substantiate our conclusion of this finding. Further, while a majority of our emergency responses are EMS-related, many of our EMS responses require additional specialized training and skills for situations such 696

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 7 as vehicle heavy rescue that only professionally cross -trained firefighters are qualified to handle. Consequently, every CMFR Firefighter, like all OCFCA Fire/ALS agencies, is cross -trained and certified as an EMT (Emergency Medical Technician), capable of providing BLS (Basic Life Support) emergency medical care. For those patients with more serious problems, the CMFR has 30+ Mobile Intensive Care Paramedics who have received additional training and are licensed to provide ALS (Advanced Life Support) emergency medical care.

One of core elements of CMFR’s mission is focused on minimizing death, disability, and injury by optimizing patient outcomes with superior quality medical care by professionally cross-trained firefighters who conduct themselves with Respect, Integrity and Compassion. Because, like all branches of medicine, Prehospital EMS is a science that is constantly changing due to advances in concepts, technologi es, and procedures, modern day “all-hazard” fire service agencies, such as CMFR, are also continuously adapting, adjusting, evaluating and improving the services we provide according to those changi ng standards, which includes the updating of all emergency response and related protocols when and where appropriate.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F3

FINDING: “ALS staffed ambulances or smaller squad vehicles are often the most appropriate response to medical aid calls and do not compromise the quality of medical care.”

RESPONSE: The City Disagrees Wholly with this Finding.

As such , we disagree wholly with a “one -size-fits-all” approach to define the most appropriate emergency response for a given emergency, incident or situation.

The deployment of emergency resources should be directly related to the unique community risks , needs and characteristics (e.g., demographics, topography, call history, type of incident reported vs. type of incident/situation found upon arrival, etc.) of each jurisdiction, while being integrated into the broader system of standardization and reciprocity between neighboring and regional jurisdictions. The intent of the Legislature with the creation of the 1980 EMS Act and its clear recognition of the importance of local control was memorialized with all possible clarity §1797.201.

A more appropriate and objective finding would be along the line of “ALS and BLS staffed ambulances or smaller squad vehicles are included as part of the many appropriate emergency response apparatus and vehicles (i.e., one of the many valued “tools in the tool box”) to effectively manage medical aid calls and other emergencies when properly deployed. Thus, a “one-size-fits-all” approach is definitively not an appropriate approach, as the goal of emergency medical aid (and any emergency) r esponse is to deploy the appropriate resource(s) as expeditiously and safely as possible to most effectively and efficiently manage the emergency, incide nt or situation identified and subsequently found.

For example, a medical aid in the respective Fairview Park or Talbert Park areas would not be effective within Costa Mesa (and Orange County) without a combination response of appropriate resources (i.e., four wheel drive vehicles, fire apparatus with specialized rescue equipment and tools, and ambulance, etc.). Additionally, in Costa Mesa, and in the fire and emergency services in general, we frequently have emergency medical aids that are the secondary result of a primary incident, such as a vehicle or other technical rescue related accident, which requires specialized expertise of our professionally cross-trained and highly skilled “all-hazard response” firefighters. This is important to note because the value of professionally cross-trained firefighters have the knowledge, skills and abilities to safely and appropriately manage a high risk emergency scene, (i.e., inclusive of the incident 697

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 8 management, safety risk management, technical rescue and the medical aid itself, etc.).

Furthermore, the unpredictable nature of calls for emergency medical services (and many emergencies) include the reality that what is initially reported to an emergency dispatch center and/or responding crews is not always the situation found when emergency resources arrive on scene. Some of our most labor-intensive calls for service, such as sudden cardiac arrest, are often reported as falls, syncope, or other well intended, but not clearly accurate descriptions of the emergency. Our deployment model allows us to adapt and provide the appropriate level of emergency service truly needed, with the least amount of emergency response delay.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F4

FINDING: “There has been a breakdown of communication and trust between OCEMS and Orange County Fire Chiefs.”

RESPONSE: The City Agrees Wholly with this Finding.

We agree that there has been a breakdown of communication and trust between OCEMS and Orange County Fire Chiefs. Specifically, the breakdown of communication and trust began following the transition of the new OCEMS leadership change in 2019, and to be clear, the breakdown in communication and trust appeared to primarily reside with the two lead managers from OCEMS, not the entire organization.

From the inception of the Mobile Intensive Care Paramedic (MICP) by Article 3 of the California Wedworth - Townsend Paramedic Act of 1970, Orange County residents have received the highest quality pre- hospital emergency medical care through the fire service -based EMS system, that is widely acknowledged as the most effective and efficient utilization of professionally cross-trained emergency resources. Although the fire service- based EMS model demonstrates a wide array of benefits to Orange County residents, CMFR recognizes that the quality of our EMS system is not effective if it is not a comprehensive team effort that depends on all EMS system members and stakeholders who each contribute in different ways that are equally important to the overall success of the system. Accordingly, CMFR’s guiding principle continues to be good communication and meaningful collaboration with all of our EMS system partners in the spirit of cooperation and mutual respect, never losing sight or focus on our joint and solemn purpose to humbly and compassionately care for the people of Costa Mesa who we serve.

The Costa Mesa Fire Chief served as the Pres ident of the O range County Fire Chiefs Association prior to, during and following the leadership transition of 2019 and it became abundantly clear that the transition of leadership in OCEMS became adversarial and autocratic in nature, lacking collaboration. The rationale that was provided by the new leadership of OCEMS to the Orange County Fire Chiefs was that OCEMS did not have the staff or the time to regularly meet with the OCFCA on these issues, nor did they need to have the approval of the OCFCA for policy changes. The latter assertion was not one the OCFCA was seeking, the OCFCA was merely seeking collaboration.

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 9 leadership began to get worse instead of improving. One example of this included the OCEMS Medical Director unilaterally putting out policies and orders without meeting to informally or formally confer with the Orange County Fire Chiefs and/or the OCFCA’s EMS subject matter experts , affording the opportunity to provide thoughtful collaborative input in advance of policies being implemented. Instead of viewing and utilizing the OCFCA and OCFCA’s EMS subject matters experts as valuable resources and professional partners, the new OCEMS leadership team treated the OCFCA and the EMS SME’s as adversaries, inclusive of demonstrating a dismissive demeanor that did not serve anyone well in building mutual professional respect. This exclusionary approach and change in disposition of the OCEMS toward the OCFCA was not something that was previously observed and/or noted as a point of historical reference . Moreover, it has been broadly communicated that this same approach was indicative of the tone received by other stakeholders, including, but not limited to the Orange County Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs Association as well as the Hospital Administrators, among others. That said, our goal is resolution and one recommendation would be for the OCHCA to reach out to other stakeholders who regularly work with OCEMS (i.e., inclusive a 360 degree evaluation) to determine the breadth and depth of the breakdowns of trust and communication with all partners to help guide a formal memorialized pathway to help rebuild two - way professional relationships with OCEMS A and all of their related stakeholders. Despite all of this, the OCFCA has and will continue to resiliently look for opportunities to build bridges of trust and collaboration where ever possible.

Again, this was at the peak of the Pandemic and during historic wildfire seasons that this ordinance change became a sudden urgency for OCEMS to bring forward , arguably under the radar. As soon as the OCFCA identified that this was happening, the OCFCA actively advocated to collaboratively work through the issue on behalf o f the Orange County Fire Chiefs and the California Fire Chiefs.

Unfortunately, the OCFCA was met with immediate and continued pushback from the OCEMS Administrator and OCEMS Medical Director, re -stating the urgency to get the updated ambulance ord inance put in place immediately. After continued unsuccessful efforts to resolve this issue directly with OCEMS Leadership, the Orange County Fire Chiefs engaged their respective City Managers and/or legal counsels, among others, including the Orange County CEO, Frank Kim and the OCHCA Director Dr. Clayton Chau. After key leadership representing all of the referenced groups came together in a number of different meetings with CEO Kim, OCHCA Director Chau, and members of the OCEMS leadership team, it became clear that the Fire Chiefs and the respective cities intent all centered around that of collaboration and resolution from start to finish, of which was acknowledged by the outcome of the final meeting and the facilitation by CEO Kim. The Orange County Fire Chiefs and the City of Costa Mesa acknowledged and appreciated the collaborative leadership approach demonstrated by CEO Kim and Dr. Chau, as well as the valued engagement of the City Managers and legal counsels. Subsequently, after all of the stakeholders spent some time working together, including the Orange County Fire Chiefs in direct collaboration with OCEMS, a final draft product was created that was tentatively acceptable to all parties involved.

This final draft product now remains in the possession of OCEMS for a final group review before being formally being brought to the Orange County Board of Supervisors for formal approval. Interestingly enough, as of the date of this Grand Jury response, November 2022, the Orange County Fire Chiefs have yet to see any final closure to the ambulance ordinance update . This example is provided to illustrate that the Orange County Fire Chiefs have committed to and will continue to be unwavering in our efforts to build trust, collaboration and partnerships with all stakeholders, including OCEMS. That said, this commitment needs to be reciprocated by OCEMS and clearly needs to have vesting and accountability going both ways, including transparency.

699

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 10 Lastly, throughout the entirety of the Pandemic, when the OCEMSA and OCHCA were significantly challenged with managing the impacts of COVID and the Pandemic, the Orange County Fire Chiefs and the Orange County Fire Service took the initiative and stepped up to take a lead role in managing a number of areas, including , but not limited to establishing the first vaccination point of dispensing (POD) sites, and thereafter, the super POD vaccination sites, all from the tip of the spear and all while still serving their respective communities throughout the duration of the Pandemic, infused with thoughtful communication, trust, c ollaboration, compassion and partnership.

Lastly, here are a few narrative summaries that are of importance to acknowledge and highlight:

A. Medical Control – Whereas the various Fire Service agencies have the sovereign legal authority over the administration and operational control of prehospital EMS within their respective jurisdictions (HSC §1797.201), the LEMSA maintains absolute legal authority over medical control. “ Medical control” is statutorily defined as, and expressly limited to, “the medical management” and the “ medical direction” of the EMS system, in other words, decisions and actions that directly impact patient care such as assessment, treatments/interventions, and transport destination decisions (HSC §§ 1797.90, 1797.220, 1798(a), 1798.8). NOTE: Costa Mesa and/or CMFR has not ever challenged the Medical Control authority of our LEMSA.

B. EMS Protocols – The main statutory mechanism for a LEMSA to exercise its medical control authority is through written EMS protocols (i.e., polices, procedures, guidelines, standing orders, etc.) that are the basis for all field patient care-related decisions and actions and, therefore, represent the standard of care against which prehospital personnel will be judged in any administrative or civil legal action, and in any disciplinary action initiated by the LEMSA, Base Hospital, or employing agency. Consequently, for EMS protocols to be valid, effective, practical, and equitable, they must:

1. Comply with the letter, intent, and spirit of federal and state law, in addition to accepted medical principles and standards; and

2. Be written with sufficient clarity and in a logical format so that the average prehospital professional can reasonably understand what is expected and how to comply; and

C. Fire Service Compliance – The Orange County Fire Service (and the California Fire Service ), including CMFR, has a consistent history of respecting the authority of the LEMSA Medical Director and abiding by the medical guidance of the LEMSA and Base Hospital physicians and nurses who re present the Medical Director, including following all LEMSA protocols in good faith to the best of our ability. This is especially true in the Orange County EMS System, where the Fire Service and OCEMS A, in conjunction with the various Base Hospitals, have always worked very closely together with an open and constructive dialogue for the benefit of our patients. We are not aware of any time in the past decades where an Orange County Fire Service agency challenged the actual Medical Control of our LEMSA, t hough state history is replete with examples of many LEMSAs —and even the state EMS Authority (EMSA) itself—that had to be addressed with legal action.

This legal action was taken due to their attempts to expand the definition of “medical” control with the utilization of illegal “underground regulations” to undermine the authority of local jurisdictions and the communities they represent. Specifically, the Sacramento Superior Court entered judgment on behalf of the California Fire Chiefs Association (CalChiefs) and issued a peremptory writ of mandat e against the 700

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 11 California Emergency Medical Services Authority (“EMSA”), in California Fire Chiefs Association Inc. v.

California Emergency Medical Services Authority , No. 34 -2019-80003163. CalChiefs, a professional association for more than 8 00 fire servi ce agencies across the state , alleged that EMSA, the State of California’s regulatory agency for EMS had been operating in violation of mandatory state law for at least 30 years. CalChiefs’ verified petition for writ of mandate and complaint for declaratory and injunction relief alleged, among other things, that EMSA’s rules implementing two key statutes regarding local governments’ provision and administration of EMS and ambulance services were void “underground regulations” because they had not been lawfully adopted pursuant to Calif ornia’s Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”). The Hon. Laurie M. Earl, Judge of the Superior Court agreed, declaring that EMSA’s rules were void “underground regulations” and commanding EMSA to cease enforcing its invalid rules until and unless the state agency properly adopts the rules in compliance with the APA. Judge Earl also concluded that CalChiefs should be allowed to petition for an award of its attorneys’ fees for bringing an action to vindicate important public rights (Schouten, 2020).

The good news is that the relationship between the California fire service and the state EMSA has begun the transition to a more collaborative partnership, much credited to both sides working closely together since the arrival and formal appointment of Elizabeth “Liz” Basnett to the position of Acting Director of the state EMSA in November of 2021. Since her arrival, EMSA and the California fire service have been working closely together with all of the statewide EMS stakeholders to rebuild the professional relationships and trust, including the development of an inclusive strategic planning process. It is our hope that this model and approach can be embraced and integrated in the same manner with OCEMSA.

D. Fire Service Input – While it is a true statement that the LEMSA Medical Director has no legal obligation to seek advice or approval from any EMS provider agency when modifying (i.e., creating, revising, deleting) EMS protocols, even though such a change may have a substantial impact on the administrativ e and operational planning of EMS provider agencies and their cities, including significant financial burdens on the citizen taxpayers who fund those agencies. Nonetheless, due to the many and diverse ramifications of protocol modification, and to ensure that the patient care goals of the Medical Director are accurately conveyed to, and understood by, field personnel, input and feedback from the EMS provider agencies that must comply with the protocols is highly recommended. CMFR is grateful for the fact that the OCEMSA has historically been very collaborative with the fire s ervice and all other EMS system members by not only allowing, but actively seeking meaningful input whenever protocol modification or system improvement decisions were being considered. This commitment to strong teamwork and professional partnership is clearly evidenced by our county EMS history in terms of collaborative and effective protocol modification. From the early 2000s under Dr. Bruce Haynes’ OCEMS administration, through Dr. Samuel Stratton’s OCEMS administration, and well before that, Orange County was literally known as one of the most effective and synergistic amongst the many other counties and LEMSAs in California. This is because the OCFCA, OCEMSA, and other EMS provider agencies have traditionally worked together in a manner of great cooperation, collaboration, teamwork, support, and in good faith, even when the re was disagreement. However, with the exit of the Dr. Stratton administration, this dynamic of strong teamwork and highly productive collaboration changed dramatically for reasons still unknown to us.

E. OCFCA EMS Section – To further ensure that the Orange County Fire Service continues to meet the goals and expectations of the OCEMS Medical Director, as well as to provide the OCEMS Agency practical input to help ensure that those goals and expectations are effectively translated to the field, decades ago OCFCA established a sub -committee called the “EMS Section,” which is composed of all the EMS Coordinat ors from the various Fire -Rescue 911 ALS Provider agencies, as well as other Fire agency members in EMS - related positions. EMS Section meetings are routinely attended by Fire agency members, OCEMS A officials, Base Hospital Coordinators, and other EMS syst em representatives for the purpose of maintaining good communication and strong collaboration in our joint efforts to maintain and improve our high quality of patient care. In the post -Stratton era, amidst the challenges with OCEMSA and the 701

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 12 OCFCA, the OCF CA EMS Advisory G roup (EMSAG) was created after being initiated by the OCFCA.

Although EMSAG and OCEMS has had limited success in its meetings and making progress, it is our desire and hope that EMSAG and OCEMSA continue to foster and build a valuable foundation to work from in the future, per the intent of the group’s formation.

2. Facilitate open lines of collaborative communication between OCEMSA and the Orange County Fire Service on all matters that impact the County EMS System.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F5

FINDING: “Over-deployment of firefighters for medical calls contributes to the current climate of forced hiring and firefighter fatigue.”

RESPONSE: The City Disagrees Wholly with this Finding.

Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue does not engage in an “over-deployment” of firefighters for medical calls. Costa Mesa Fire & Rescue has a robust and dynamic deployment model that is continually being monitored to make any necessary adjustments. Most importantly, Costa Mesa always places the health and safet y of our professional firefighters as a highest priority.

Appropriate staffing is a necessary aspect of every public safety staffing model, in some way, shape or form.

Simply put, we need to have sworn and trained public safety professionals on duty at a ll times, based on the community needs and risks of each jurisdiction served. Therein, different variables impact the need for forced hiring, including, but not limited to no firefighter voluntarily signed up to work the overtime; rank specific or department-wide staffing gaps; lack of budgeted and approved sworn and trained public safety positions consistent with the needs of the community ; local, regional, statewide or national emergencies, or special circumstances. At this time, Costa Mesa does not hav e any staffing gaps and the city is currently in the midst of evaluating our Standards of Coverage for the City, as well as entering into the final stage of implementing a new five year strategic plan.

Lastly, firefighter fatigue has been a noted discussion point over the past few years, regionally, statewide and nationwide, primarily due to the extraordinary role that professional firefighters take on every day in answering the call for any and every emergency, from historic wildfires to the COVID Pandemic to the day to day emergencies and operations on all fronts. As an example, from the onset of the COVID Pandemic throughout its peak and wind down phase, professional firefighters, emergency responders and healthcare workers remained on the front lines, start to finish, without pause or hesitation. With that in mind, mental and behavio ral health for firefighters, all public safety personnel and healthcare workers needs to remain a highest priority for all levels of government.

GRAND JURY FINDING #F9

702

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 13

FINDING: “OCEMS has the authority and responsibility to inspect all for -profit ambulances operating in Orange County; however, publicly owned ambulances are not automatically subject to OCEMS oversight.”

RESPONSE: The City Agrees Partially with this Finding.

Costa Mesa agrees that “OCEMS has the authority and responsibility to inspect all for-profit ambulances operating in Orange County .” However, the second part of the finding that “…publicly owned ambulances are not automatically subject to OCEMS o versight” would read more appropriately as follows: “…publicly owned ambulances are not automatically subject to OCEMS oversight as it relates to areas exclusive of medical control.” To that end, all other responsibilities, risks and rights are held with and through the City of Costa Mesa, as legally and lawfully memorialized by state, county, and local statute (HSC §1797.201). We agree that OCEMS does not currently inspect publicly owned ambulances.

However, it is not under the authority and responsibility of the OCEMSA to determine other areas outside of that statutory and regulatory purview, including, but not limited to our emergency response deployment model or determine vehicle related requirements with no defined nexus to medical control (e.g., apparatus /vehicle type, apparatus/vehicle permitting, wheel size/brand, fuel used, etc.).

The City of Costa Mesa welcomes and encourages OCEMS to inspect our ambulances, stations, or EMS system, in alignment with the aforementioned response and in alignment as evidenced by the efforts of collaboration outlined in the City’s response to the Grand Jury Finding 4, detailing the Orange County Ambulance Ordinance meetings with OC CEO Frank Kim and OCHCA Director Dr. Clayton Chau. As an interesting side note, specific to this finding and given the time and effort the Grand Jury placed on preparing this comprehensive report, it was surprising that there was no inclusion of information or discussion on the significant issues related to OCEMSA’s Orange County Ambulance Ordinance update.

GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION #R1

RECOMMENDATION: “By 2024, all Orange County fire agencies utilize criteria -based dispatch protocols and send a single response to those incidents triaged as non-life-threatening (BLS).”

RESPONSE: The recommendation of utilizing criteria-based dispatch protocols has already been implemented.

Costa Mesa’s dispatch center (CMCC/Costa Mesa Communications Center) is a joint Police/Fire Emergency Communications Center. We have historically mirrored, and continue to use, the King County Washington Criteria Based Dispatch (CBD) Guidelines as adapted by and modified for the Orange County Fire Authority. Thus, Costa Mesa continues to use CBD dispatching, inclusive of determining the most effective, efficient and v iable deployment of emergency resources, based on the community risks and needs and all established through local policy (HSC §1797.201) of the City Council, under approved recommendations of the City Manager and Fire Chief.

NOTE: Please review the response summaries to F1 & F3 for further detail.

703

CITY OF COSTA MESA & COSTA MESA FIRE CHIEF RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 14 GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION #R4

RECOMMENDATION: “While OCEMS should recognize how certain policy changes may pose operational challenges to emergency responders in the field, fire leadership should recognize and respect the independent oversight authority and expertise of OCEMS.”

RESPONSE: This Recommendation Has Already Been Implemented

Costa Mesa Fire Leadership recognizes and respects the expertise and authority of OCEMSA as our standard operating practice, highlighted by the acknowledgement of OCEMSA’s authority as it pertains to medical control.

NOTE: Please review the response summaries to F4 & F9 for further detail.

GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION #R5

RECOMMENDATION: “Departments with public owned ambulances should allow OCEMS to inspect their ambulances for compliance with State EMS guidelines and adopt OCEMS recommendations.”

RESPONSE: This Recommendation Has Never Been Denied.

As previously shared, Costa Mesa remains committed to meet and exceed all State and OCEMS guidelines, policies and statutory requirements related to our public owned ambulances, in alignment with OCEMS authority of medical control and the City’s legal, statutory, and regulatory rights, including, but not limited to the California Health & Safety Code, Section 1797.201 and the City of Costa Mesa’s Municipal Code. More over, this recommendation was addressed through a number of meetings related to resolving the updates to the Orange County Ambulance Ordinance, including a final summary meeting with clear consensus on how we would proceed with a mutual agreement of under of understanding. The final meeting included representatives from the Orange County Fire Chiefs, including the Costa Mesa Fire Chief, representatives from the Orange County City Managers, OCEMSA Leadership, OCHCA Director Dr. Clayton Chau and Orange County CEO Frank Kim. NOTE: Please review the response summaries to F4 & F9 for further detail.

704
City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 22-952 Meeting Date: 11/15/2022
TITLE:

PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2022 AND THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT: FINANCE / PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
PRESENTED BY: CAROL MOLINA, FINANCE DIRECTOR / RAJA SETHURAMEN,

PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CONTACT INFORMATION: CAROL MOLINA, FINANCE DIRECTOR, (714) 754-5243 / RAJA SETHURAMEN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, (714) 754-5343
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Receive and file the Development Impact Fees Annual Report (Attachment 1) for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2022.

2. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 2) continuing the citywide traffic impact fee for new development that incorporates recommendations from the Traffic Impact Fee Ad Hoc Committee and staff, which include:

Ø Continue a traffic impact fee of $235 per Average Daily Trip (ADT) for Capital Improvement Projects and Active Transportation projects
Ø Approve allocation of up to ten (10) percent of traffic impact fees towards traffic signal synchronization projects
BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Sections 66001 through 66009), the City Council established certain Development Impact Fees (DIFs) that must be paid by developers of property to help offset some (or all) of the cost of public facilities related to the development project. The DIFs are for Park Development Impact Fees, Drainage Impact Fees, Traffic Impact Fees, and Fire Systems Development Fees. The Mitigation Fee Act requires that City Council approve an annual report that provides information about the DIFs. These fees are required to be deposited into their own separate accounts or funds. The law also requires that certain findings be made in association with accumulated DIFs after the deposit into their

Page 1 of 3 ends

Costa Mesa City CouncilNovember 15, 2022

Costa Mesa City Council
November 15, 2022