A third of a year evaluation of the Public Safety Commission

6/10/2014

While there is no "Public Safety Commission" in the City of Encinitas California, for the last four months, there has been one that was expanded from what had been the "Traffic Commission"  It was  was created and defined with these additional words:

2.40.040 Duties of the Traffic and Public Safety Commission.

A. It is the duty of this commission to serve as a liaison between the public and the City Council, and to conduct analyses and provide recommendations to the Council on matters related to the circulation of motorized vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles, and on matters related to public safety.

 The scope of the commission’s role with respect to public safety includes but is not limited to traffic safety, emergency response for fire, medical and other crises, as well as the City’s efforts to control and reduce criminal activities of all types. The commission may conduct informational and educational meetings, prepare reports and analyses, and work with fire, marine safety,ambulance, and sheriff personnel.

Being only one of two of the now seven members who volunteered explicitly for these expanded activities, I have attempted to define them broadly, as allowing for initiatives that go into the underlying structure of the agencies mentioned in the defining ordinance, rather than our being under direction of the City Manager.  In an information sheet submitted for the last meeting, and sent to city officials,  I wrote:

The city manager has stated that he plans to give instructions to future chairpersons of commissions, what he did not say is that he and his staff would work more closely with such commissions --that their work would be open to us, and that we could build on this research.   His tone conveyed that commissions are an extension of his staff, with the single difference that we are not on salary

Here's my video of the meeting beginning at the issue I recorded until the end. In the absence of this, there would be no record of the details of this conversation among the commissioners. My goal, which was stated in my information sheet as repeated at the meeting, was not to usurp the decision on reforming and unifying the Fire and EMS services of the city,  but to suggest that this commission work with the city staff,  as I contend citizen volunteers have a useful broader perspective. Such video recording must be provided if we are to fulfill the broad mandate of the initiating ordinance.

My question was rephrased by the Chairman as whether we should address this particular issue,  which did not address my central point, that an independent group of non elected citizens may go beyond the constraints inherent in the tension between government unionized employees and elected officials.  There are a myriad of books and articles in the popular and academic literature that explore this reality in depth.   

I made reference to this article STRATEGIC TRANSITION TO A FIRE-BASED EMS SYSTEM: MANAGING THE EFFECT ON THE HUMAN SIDE as an example of a social dynamic analysis that is rarely included in formal evaluations of this type of change which could be picked up by a citizen's group that is engaged in this issue.  While the staff under the city manager certainly should be evaluating this issue, along with the professionals in the fire department, both groups share a common identity of being ultimately employed by the taxpayers of this city, which inherently is the very type of interests that must be disclosed for meaningful studies. 

It is understood that even with the best of individual's intentions, financial self interest has the potential of affecting evaluation of complex issues such as this possible change in our emergency services.   For this and other reasons, I continue to maintain the position that I took in the above linked information sheet in spite of the unanimous rejection by this commission. 

Castle Rock, Colorado happens to have demographics similar to ours, and ironically made the exact same transition from an outsourced EMS to one that is now integrated into their Fire Department.  They had no choice, since about twenty years ago the ambulance company went out of business.  They happen to have a Public Safety Commission that also covers issues of traffic but not as a main focus.  Here's the report of their latest meeting, that happened to be held at their police headquarters.  You should note that a member of the council is usually in attendance as an ex officio member.  Page two describes a particular change in an ordinance that was initiated by the fire department, and the proposal was at this commission for a recommendation before going before the city council.  This citizen commission seems to be an example of the type of coordinated independence I am suggesting.

I also had an extensive conversation with a fire department officer with considerable experience who described the interaction between the EMS and Fire fighters, which in their case are all earning the same salary in the same union.  The integration now is seamless, so when the dispatcher knows an ambulance is needed to take a person to the E.R. there is a better chance of such a vehicle being first on the scene.

Like here, their fire crew go to the super market in their emergency vehicles, with one person staying in the truck to alert the shopping crew to drop their basket and get rolling.  And their roll out time, from the fire alarm from 911 ringing to wheels moving, is a half minute longer during sleep time, which is to be expected.  While there are inevitable activities such as training and upkeep that can delay response to emergencies, others that are accepted here among firefighters and citizens are not accepted in Castle Rock. I will not go into details unless the Public Safety Commission is clearly charged with this type of activity.   
 
Only recently did we learn that hundreds of thousands of veterans have endured month long delays before seeing physicians, something that was widely known for years.  Yet, only "activists" brings such things to the public's attention, as it is so much more comfortable just to ignore the defects that become simply part of the way things are.    

To those on this commission who eschew activism, in my view such a subordinate role does not do a service to the institutions under city auspices.  Only such active probing can spot incipient problems, which is why many larger cities have an office of inspector general, or other appointed entities to head off improprieties before they become entrenched. While we do not desire nor need such a legal department, this function can be done by an active Public Safety Commission such as described in the existing ordinance if affirmed at a meeting with the city council to clarify this.