Resolution No. 88-29 CITY Of TIGARD, ORL-CION
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TI:GARD CITY COUNCIL AUTilORIZ1NG BASIC: 9--1- 1 SF.RVI.CES CONTRACT
NEGOTIATIONS WITH TUALATIN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISIR:LCT.
WHEREAS, the Citi-s of Tigard, Tualatin, Sherwood, Kinv City. and Durham, in
cooperation with tf,e Tualatin Rural F-ire Depa:....�-..t, desire to assure the provision
of effective Public Safety communication services in an efficient and least cost
manner; and
WHEREAS, the Cities contract with the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District for
Basic 9-1--1 emergency telephone system service; and
WHEREAS, the Cities and the Lisirict wish to enter into a formal, written contract
for the continued provision of Basic 9--1-1 services, defining responsibilities of
the parties and setting a. method for determining the cost of service provided; and
WHEREAS, the Cities and the District have commissioned a joint study defining a
methodology and formula for costing Basic 9--1-1 services from the Fire. District.
NOMI, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
Section 1: Tigard formally receives t-he Crust-of--Services for Emergency Calls
St-ud_v Report prepared by Economic Resource Associates, Inc.,
attached as Exhibit "A". and Li—L __ c_•«tv='- -
negotiate a Basic 9-1-1 Services Contract with the -Tualatin Rural
Fire Protection District using the: unit costs per call pricing as
defined in the study results, renewable annually with a six--month
written notice submitted by either party of desire to renew and
price change notification frum the District.
section 2. A users Boc+rd, composed of key staff from each participating City,
Lie established to advise the District o., c0ntr'tA0- policy and
pricing issues.
Section 3: A copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to each participating
City Council and the Diisttrrjiict/ Board upon enactment.
PASSED: This � �_ day of -�=F. C� x(1988
ATTEST: Mayor - City of Tigard
Cn. a ���—
Deputy City Recorder - City Tigard
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
C
i
C
City Recorder
3atel
ew/4214D
RESOLUTION NO. 88-13LC
Page 1
op
for
TAXING
9-1-1 EMERGENCY CALLS
at
TUALATIN RURAL DIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
COMMUNICATION/9-1-1 CENTER
I
i
t
} MAIRCN, 1988
Prepared by:
Economic Resource Associates. Inc.
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
i
IffCON00110r RE oUR+CE
ON
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
'r
SUMX&RY AND CONCLUSIONS 1
t EXISTING CONDITION AND METHODS Z
^1UALATIN RURAL FIRE DISTRICT OVERVIEW 3
POPULATION _ 8
WORK VOLUME ESTIMA.TES AND PROJECTIONS 10
TASKS AND TIME VALUES OF DISPATCHER AND CALL TAKER
POSITIONS in
STAFFING OF THE CENTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
CALLS HELD 19
HISTORICAL COST AND REVENUE ESTIMATES' 20
9-1-1 OPERATING COSTS 20
COMMUNICATION RELATED CAPITAL OUTLAYS 21
COMMUNICATION CENTER CAPITAL COSTS 23
f 9-1-1 CALL TAKING RELATED CAPITAL COSTS 24
ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD COSTS 23
TOTAL- COST OF CALL TAKING - 26
t COST BY CENTER 27
REVEriuc B-7 c-----R - - 29
BALANCE BY CENTER - THE BOTTOM LINE 30
PROJECTED COSTS AND REVENUES . . 32
COST PROJECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
PROJECTED COSTS BY CENTER 33
PROJECTED CENTER REVENUES . . . . . . . 34
i P.n03ZCT= y."-.93:CE BY CRINTER_=H$ BOTTOM LINE . . . . . . 36
FROjZCTED Bi r^AMCE BY JURISDICTION 37
APPENDIR . 39
{
ECON®WtdO RESO�JRiCE
- A990CWES
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The city of Tigard and other governmental entities providing
1- ♦ire Tu latAn, R--r=1 ?ire Prot ^.
emergency nePvi%2B NaPtSCiz,BtB -1 • -�-
tion District communication/9-1-Y Center's 9-1-1 system and share
in paying for the system's capital and operating costs. The
purpose of this study is to review these costs and determine the
appropriate share distributions among affected agencies.
The city of Tigard's participation in funding the Tualatin
Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center's 9-1-1
system began in 1982. when telephone excise tax receipts became
available. Since that time, the city of Tigard and other juris-
dictions have paid the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District
Communication/9-1-1 Center one hundred percent (l00%) of the
funds from this source. Oneof the primary questions to be
addressed in the course of the work is what portion of these
funds should be paid to the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District
Communication/9-1-1 center for tali taxi+•y -a�.��-�•
Te Center provides distinct and separate services. it
serves as a primary Public safety Answering Point (PSAP) far six
h
(6) separate telephone central offices. These offices serve most
of Southeastern Washington County and Southwestern Clackamas
County. Fire and medical calls coming to Tualatin Rural Fire
Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center are dispatched
y directly by the Center. In addition, the Center dispatched
j police calls for the city of Sherwood in 1986. The Tualatin
Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center also
serves as a fire alarm office for the Fire District. This service
involves dispatching fire and medical equipment for seven fire
stations in a ilo square mile area.
Howeverunication
enter
not been
specifically
the assignedts Of to eacheofotthhe servicescprovid provided. Thus. It
1 as not readspa
is not readily apparent how much each of the jurisdictions should
pay for the call taking function.
The approach employed in this study is to first determine
the nature and function of the woric to be accomplished. The work
=teff•- - 4---nt and other costs of the 9-1-1
then daces:==ir=o ; �a-y• -i=-r-- 4-- riarticipating in the
center. Fair-cost shares to coam •=t--
Center result from the tasks which are required to complete the
work demanded. To this end, we have developed an analytical
framework which relies upon the demands for service (work volumes)
by communities in projecting and allocating costs to each of the
i`
i ECONOfN/C RE"U Cr
assocrerEs
F
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 2
® agencies =" --,vice from the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection
District CobwAv_ icacian%`-�-1-1 Center.
In the first part of the project, the work volumes which
have occurred at the Center are reviewed, analyzed and associated
with communities and participating agencies. 4ext, needed tanks
and their time values are identified to establish a basis for
separating "joint" costs into call taking and dispatching func-
tions.
l
In the following section of the report, costs, resources,
personnel and capital related information is gathered, analyzed
and categorized. Operating expenses are separated from other
costs and split into those needed for each of the Tualatin Rural
Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center's functions.
Capital costs receive special treatment to determine depreciation
ret.. - vn equity.
I "Coat-of-Service" estimates are wade for the call taking
functions of the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Com-
munication/9-1-1 Center. comparisons are then made between the
estimated and projected cost assignments and the actual and
I ` projected receipts from the telephone excise tax.
The primary conclusions of this report are:
` While the operating expenses of the Tualatin Rural Fire
Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center are
•n or
EM I CALL TAKIW-' COST BY FISCAL YEAR
Mae
a"
-46
220
g 0GO
t M Iso
168
140
+s73@ 120
ISO
80
80-61 83-84 Si-97 99-90 92-9a
Fiscal YgSr
o E
opRATINC + ADMIN. o CAPITAL
a
_ E�a7NVARi� irs'avvaFvs
assocurEs
.=
-ME
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service page 3
expected to increase with inflation, the total cost of
providing call taking services to the participating
jurisdict±one is expected to remain at existing levels
throughout the projection period.
The cost per call handled by the Center initially
Increases. However, because of the decreasing cost of
capital, the cost per call is expected to decrease
throughout the projection period. By 1994-98, the cost
per call will have fallen two dollars, from a high of
+
$6.46 in 1983-64 to 84.46.
IMUT I C O-S-T PER CALL
s �
� 4
2
/ � 1
90-99 93-04 ee-97 99-96 9c-93
i Fisuatl Ysmr
j{ The receipts to the participating center= from the
r
-Sao- coamw TIN IMCMITS
A 23E
1 �v
90-99 83-94 861617 O9-l9 e2-gel.
F1sca1 YOmr
or TIGARD a CLACKArk S a VAMgV"CTOM
_l
ECONOMIC
ASSUCIAT�
i
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 4
f
�......6.aoe f,•�m
telephone excise iaSi -----
about one hundred seventy thousand dollars ($170,000)
currently to almost two hundred and fifty thousand
dollars ($250,000) by 1994-95. This projection assumes
that the tax will be continued by the Oregon State
Legislature beyond its current sunset of 1992.
Charging jurisdictions for service on the basis of the
telephone tax receipts collected has resulted in over
and under charges.
A more equitable means of charging for call taking
service is9 to calculate the costs per call. Each
center will then be charged for the number of calls
i handled.
During the first two years of Tualatin Rural Fire.
Protection District communication/9-1-1 Center operation
after the telephone excise tax, the receipts from the
jurisdictions were not sufficient to pay for the costs
of the service provided.
1{ Starting with the third year after the inception of the
telephone excise tax, the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection
District Communication/9-1-1 Center's actual and pro-
jected receipts exceed the estimated cost of call
taking service.
1
TLINATIN CEhInZR'S BAI.AHM
tee
so
1 so
I FN
s �'1
w o
80--61 93-8.4 96-87 89-9G 92-93
Ffsaal Yaar -
rXCAMDCLACkCAqAS w^sHIr4a-ro N
I
E00NOMIM RESOURCE
ASSOCUTES
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service
Page 5
1
At the end of 196b-el, the prior ca'i eas+m+y
and receipts were almost in balance. The Tualatin
Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1
Cex+ter is estimated to have expended nineteen thousand
dollars ($19,000) more than it received.
The three communication centers receiving service from
the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communica-
Eioa/9-1-1 Center are projected to pay more than the
cost of call taking service if all of the telephone
excise tax receipts are contributed to the Center. In
19a7-88, they are estimated to overpay the Tualatin
Rural Fire Protection District Communirati_.^_/9^1-1
Center by only one thousand three hundred and forty one
dollars ($1,341) . By 1994-95, a fifty seven percent
(57X) surplus contribution will be made oy the centers
If the formula for contributing funds remains unchanged.
1 The Oregon State Law specifically allows cities to
spend less than the total telephone tax distribution on
emergency telephone service. According to section 2$
(2), "moneys not then being used may be invested by
city or county."
ar
ryr` OPERATX"G COSTS PER CALL
I a 3
` t 2
1
1 a
TUALA7Il1 SALEM METC074 PC LK
' Cp�aX+i eaEior+ C•er6�z'
i The costs per call of the Tualatin Rural Protection
District Communication/9-1-1 Center were compared to
some other centers in Oregon. On the Basis of some
very cursory information, it appears the operating
` costs per call of the Center are higher.
1
. - ECONOMIC RES®S�I�C�
Y ASSOCIATES
J) t;
{
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page s
t
i .
Economic Resources recommends that:
7 A pricing method for caii taking be established by
the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Com-
munication/9-1-1 Center which is understood and
agreed to by the purchaser of the service.
A written contractual relationship between the
Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communica-
tion/9-1-1 Center and the participating centers.
Call taking prices be established each year prior,
I to participating centers, hi--dgnt Urgnaratllon an
the basis of then current cost of service.
Participating centers be aivcra 4iaa vy�,vi-�.asai s`T
review and comment on call taking prices prior to
their adoption by the board of Tualatin Rural Fire
Protection District.
The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Com-
munication/9-1-1 Center coapare its costs to other
centers in Oregon.
The benefits and costs of consolidating and enhanc-
ing the communication centers in Washington County
be undertaken in an effort to provide more of-
fectire1 Zfflclar.t ica o r>sidarate of the County. +� v aG..
1
1
a
4
EcowoJVec RESOURCE
EXISTING CONDITION AND METHODS
t _ -
Iu tisis chapter _
- of r
' epnvt work volumes, staffing.
�: —z - --j. -ai r les rroie^, t10n
District Communication/9-1-1 Center are discussed. The information
presented has been derived from a variety of sources. Much of 1t
has been provided directly by the Center. The cooperation and
openness of the Center's staff is very much appreciated. To our
knowledge, the information is the best and most accurate data
currently available. However, care should be taken in the sue of
the information as in some cases it is derived from observations
during brief periods of the year and some was derived through the
application of experiences in other Oregon centers.
TUALATIN RURAL FIRE DISTRICT OVERVIEW
The followin.- information is intended to provide an overview
I of the facility, staffing, equipment design and capabilities of
the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1
1 Center.
7 The Center provides three distinct and separate services. It
i serves as a primary Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) for six
(6) separate telephone central offices. These offices serve most
of Southeaster Washington County and Southwestern Clackamas
County. By name they are:
Tigard,
Stafford,
Tualatin,
Sherwood
Wilsonville, and
Charbunneau.
There are currently fourteen (14) 9-1-1 circuits which come
from the telephone central offices into the Tualatin Rural Fire
Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center's system. Law
enforcement calls are transferred to the appropriate agency for
t screening and dispatching. Transfers are made to the following
j agencies:
1 Washington County Dispatch (also serving Tualatin in
1986),
Clackamas Dispatch (also serving Wilsonville and River-
grove in 1986) ,
Tigard Police Dispatch, (also serving King City and
Durham in 1986) ,
Lake Oswego 9-1-1 Center,
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
j - ASSOCL47ES
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 8
Oregon State Police/Beaverton,
Newberg 9-1-1 Center, and
Other Centers and Agencies.
Fire and medical calls coming to Tualatin Rural Fire Protec-
t1on District Communication/9-1-1 Center are dispatched directly
by the Center. in addition, the Center dispatched police calls
for the city of Sherwood in 1986.
The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-
1-1 Center also serves as a fire alarm office for the Fire
Dis-tract This service involves dispatching fire and medical equip-
ment for seven fire stations in a 110 square mile area.
Lastly, the Center has recently become a contract dispatch
center for all the fire departments in Washington County except
fox' Laic f=r Meete_n Mwtie._ wi the The lmrem includez -e
additional fire stations and approximately 225,000 citizens in
I about 500 square miles.
I Ahe Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-
1-1 Center is staffed with twelve (12) positions each working 24
hour and then getting 48 hours off. For each shift, one of the
positions is assigned to be Shift Supervisor. This position is
responsible for shift activities and reports. According to Piro
District Personnel, "cine cperator from each shift is dedicated to
and runded by
POPULATION
The population of each of the jurisdictions served was
JI provided by the Tualatin Rural Fire District as shown below.
At the start of the decade, the population of jurisdictions
being served by the communication center currently stood at under
50,000. Because of the rapid growth in the cities, current
(1987) population is just under 62,000.
I
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 9
TABLE 1
FOPI]IATIOK OF JORISDICfIONS
JLRISDIClION 1980 1981 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1907
WASEIDIiT114 L%XN1S 9.711 10.019 10.019 9.996 9.903 9,889 10.238 10.420
MALATIN 7.483 8.700 5.700 9.464 9.752 10.154 10.364 10.625
9633iOM 2.386 2.425 2.427 2.554 2.520 2.5% 2.6% 2.880
! L idw 707 700 700 700 680 685 720 705
KIG cny 1.853 1.860 1.880 1.860 1.800 1,800 1.830 11965
TIGNRD 14.799 15.500 16.094 18.004 18,221 19.111 20,266 20,702
CIACows taxwN 8.630 8.697 8,573 8.664 8.613 S.UM 8,725 8.897
WIISONVIUE 2.970 3.385 3.385 3.390 3.320 3,475 3.705 4.180
RIV@87RVE 314 325 325 325 320 329 310 310
1,013
I _� ••••�•• 1.013 1,12A 1.124 1.124
49.886 52.584 53.096 55.969 56.142 97.847 09.975 61.928
In Table 2, the population of the
jurisdictions articl
pacingt.a : aI*t3nPcral Fire Protection District Communcation/9-i-
:enterarc projected. The projections were made r3n a trend
line basis from the information provided in Table 1. The projec-
tions are, therefore, rough estimates of expected changes in the
number of people served. By 1995, almost 25,000 people will be
served by the Tualatin By Fire.Protection District Communica-
tion/9-1-1 Center_ It should be noted that these are only the
Jurisdictions which were served in 1986. Now allowances have
been made to changes in service territory since that time.
The population figures shown above were obtained form the
State of Oregon 9-1-1 Distribution reports for the first quarter
Of each year. Population figures were 1980 and 1982 are consistent
with the Census of Population and the Official Population Estimates
for Oregon Counties and Cities July 1, 1977-July 1, 1982 by the
Center for Population Research and Census at Portland State
University. Populations figures for .*sake Oswego and Clackamas
County were obtained from a population study conducted by Clackamas
( County and Portland State University In 1985 for 9-1-1 planning.
ECON®AAI/C RE40UA tCE
ASSOC44 S
i
i
Tigard 9•-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 10
i
'rABIE 2
F'CPt!t7'IOH�_s7FLTTT_UM
JUtISDICCIM 1986 1969 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
WpcHINMM MUM g 10.321 10.388 10.454 10.521 10.587 10.653 10.720 10.786
WALATIN 11.262 11.678 12.095 12,511 12.927 13,343 13.760 14.176
3472NCW 2,836 2,899 2.961 3.0214 3.087 3,150 3,212 3.275
OLIO I 748 755 762 769 776 783 769 796
KIM CITY 1.874 1.878 1.863 1.888 1.882 1.887 1.902 1.907
TICS 21.868 22.761 23.653 24.546 25.439 26.331 27.224 28.116
erns mury 8,800 8.827 8.853 8,880 8.907 8.933 8.980 8.987
WU_qMWUjE 4.023 4,145 4.267 4.390 4.512 4,&A 4.750
I RI UMM 321 319 318 316 315 313 312 310
IA;OSWBW 1.141 1.161 1.181 1.201 1,220 1,240 1,260 1,280
63.194 64.811 66.428 68.044 69.661 71.278 '1a.6m6
WORK VOLUME ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS
During the latter part of 1985, 1986 and 1987, the Tualatin
Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center staff
1
has been tracking the number of phone: calls coming into the
center by the cantral telephone office from which they originate.
In addition, they have recorlea the 7ZAP to which each of the calls
was transferred.
On average, during the three years the Tualatin Rural Fire
Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center recerear."vtotal
of almost thirty nine thousand (39,0^0) calls per
he
greatest proportion of the calls received were eealt with directly
at the Center. The remainder (about 40%) were transferred to
other agencies.
Every four (4) citizens called the center once a year on a
police related matter which was transferred to another agency for
dispatch. This level of demand is the same as 9-1-1 calls received
and dispatched by the Salem Communication Center for police related
Incidents. However, there is a considerable diversity by agency
in this statistic. The Washington County and Tigard PSAPs are
within an acceptable range of this standard considering that they
serve a more rural area than Salem. However, the Lake Oswego
1
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
nssecrares
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 11
experience at more than one call per person is very high and has
not been explained.
MANr 3
CALLS AND TRAP
TELEF DNE CENTRAL.OFFICE
PSAP TIGARD SH IWXM WIL9OMLIE TUALATIN STAFFORD CHARBaC FAU TOM PER CAPITA
WASHINGTON COUNTY 2.199 382 124 2.060 15 0 4.779 0.23
CLACKAMAS COUNTY NT'Y 623 67 1.041 44 457 67 2.299 0.18
IAR6 OSVIM 882 0 2 16 651 O 1.552 1.38
TICS4.128 170 O 716 0 O 5,064 0.22
CItEaM STATE PCT ICE 501 45 307 131 21 0 1.005 0.02
01M 182 9 40 14 0 0 "�. 0.00
Trn'Ai TtANSFEM 8.514 672 1.514 3.022 1.144 67 14.934 0.25
�r ;ecru in_9F8 2.710 4.392 3.391 1.&14 288 19,913 0.52
TUALATIN
CitA[ND TVI'AI. 19.473 3.382 5.906 6.413 3.008 333 38.545
According to Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Com-
munication/9-1-1 Center staff, the number fire and ambulance calls
I during this period was 3,454 with another 181 calls handled for
Sherwood police. On a per capita basis, one call was made for
every sixteen (16) persons within the district. Once again this
is comparable to the experience in Salem where one out of every
thirteen (13) peopie called.
The values shown in the per capita column of Table 3 were
j used to make estimates of the work load of the Tualatin Rural
j Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center. The results
are shown in Tables 4 and 5. It was assumed that the following
agencies were served by the PSAPs:
Washington County Dispatch - Washington County Sheriff,
Clackamas Dispatch - Clackamas County Sheriff, Wilson-
ville and Rivergrove Police,
Lake Oswego 9-1-1 Center - Lake Oswego Police,
Tigard Police Dispatch- Tigard, King City, Durham and
Sherwood Police,
Oregon State Police/Beaverton - Oregon State Police, and
Other Centers and Agencies.
I r
1 _
ECOIiPOlt9�0�3EEO�f_4GE
i
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service page 12
0
i
TABLE 4
WOW MIME ESIIIMCES
0019MCATION CENTER 1960 1961 1962 1963 1984 1985 1906 1967
WASKINGt(ON COUNTY 2.503 2.563 2.583 2.577 2.553 2.549 2.639 2.686
CLA KAMAS COUNTY 2.389 2. 54 480 2.463 2.493 2.457 2.505 2.555 2.an
Loo OSWEGO 1.554 1.554 1.51.554 1.554 1.725 1.725 1.725
TIGA D 6.703 7.165 7.332 8,C121 6 117 6.455 6.831 9.118
OREGON STATE FCLICF 929 979 989 1.042 1.046 1.077 1.117 1.153
j ( tTIIER 225 236 240 253 254 262 271 280
TOTAL 7PAIMMS 14.304 1!5,019 15.161 15.994 15.961 16.573 17.138 17,639
FIELD CALLS 19.131 20.067 20.276 21.305 22.3374 22.164 22,321 23.590
1UALATIN 3.205 3.388 3.421 3.610 3.622 3.728 3,868 3,994
GRAND TOTAL 36.644 36.494 38.659 40.845 90,977 42463 43.925 45.223
i
i
d TABLE 5
II WDW VQIM FROJECfIMS
MMI- TICATION CENn R 1988 1909 1900 1981 1992 1993 1994 1986
WASHINGTON CORM 2.661 2.676 2.695 2.712 2,729 2.746 2.763 2.781
i CAC MM'S COMM 2.635 2.605 2.895 2.725 2,754 2,784 263
.813 2.6
1 LAIM OSMM 1.751 1.782 1.812 1.642 TOM 1:903 1.934 1.984
TIS 9.500 9.640 10.161 10.521 10.862 11,202 11,543 11.883
i
OREGON STATE POLICE 1.177 1.207 1,237 1.267 1.197 1.321 1.357 1.388
If Unm 268 293 300 308 315 322 330 3;717
TOM 7PANSFM 18.010 18.465 16,900 19,375 19,630 20.285 20.740 21,196
fiBfA CABS 24.037 2-4.595 25.304 25.912 28.521 27.130 27.736 28.347
TUAdATIN 4.076 4.181 4.286 4.391 3.496 4.601 4.706 4.611
GRAM TOM 48.173 47.342 46.510 49,679 50.847 52.016 53.184 54.353
I
ECONOMIC 0-wcm
1
I
E
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 13
i Over the fifteen year parit-d from 1980 to 1995, the work
volume of the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District commuuiaa-
1 tion/9-1-1 Center is expected to increase by almost fifty percent
(50%) . The most Significant growth component results from the
agencies served by the Tigard PSAP. The demand for communication
service from this these areas is calculated to increase by almost
eighty percent (80%) ap a result of rapid increases in population.
TASKS AND TIME VALUES OF DISPATCHER AND CALL TAKER POSITIONS
Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1
Center personnel musr carry out a variety of tasks when a call is
j received, transferred and/or dispatched. Not only do they need to
an"wer the phone and dispatch police or fire agencies, they must
make calls, monitor alarms, write reports, have conferences,
operate the computer. . .etc.
- Tasks shown in the TAhle A j are the -__•-lt: GfoLt ""Er =va-
tion of people doing call taking and dispatching atfMETCOM Center
(a communication center in the Salem, Oregon metropolitan area) .
Writewell Writing Services conducted this Task Performance Evalua-
tion Project which was completed in April of 1984.
Economic Resources has since presented the results of this
study to other center personnel for confirmation of the accuracy
of Writewell's findings. While no other center contacted had pre-
cisely the same information, there was unanimity that the tasks
and times shown in Table 6 were "reasonable" and consistent with
their experience. In addition, the manager of Tualatin Rural
Sira Protection District Co®muanication Center reviewed and
concurred with the use of these statistics as reflective of the
Center's operations.
The average amount of time required for each task is shown
Table 6. For example, each computer operation requires 1.17
minutes and each report takes 1.75 minutes of an operators time.
The Metcon study went into great detail on the volume of
work which is conducted by Center personnel. The amount of time
and activity conducted by an individual actually at the work
station was provided for each function.
S
t
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
ASSOCL4TES .
t
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service
Page 24
TABLE
TASKS AND TIMES OF
CALL TAKERS AND DISPATCHERS
UNIT NUMBER TOTAL
TYPE OF ACTIVITY ---TIME UNITS ---TIME
-------
OTHER CALLS 1.04 92.62 96.32
INCIDENT CALLS 2.00 33.01 66.02
MAKE CALLS 1.17 26.85 31.41
c0mr-'uz-ER uPEF-aTmar 1.i 7 40.96 47.92
RADIO OPERATION 0.45 232.33 104.55
f ALARM MONITORING 1.00 1.38 1.38
1 REPORT WHITING 1.78 22.92 40.11
CONFERENCES 3.50 6.54 22.89
MISCELLANEOUS 3.50 12.05 42.18
PLUS REPORTS 0.00 0.00 0.00
t ---1.02 468.66 ti90.00
s( as:asaa aria--- saaaaa-
Calls are separated into those which generates an incident
and "other" calls. The reascn for this is that Incident calls
/ generally require considerably more staff time than those which
do not result In an incident. In the case of the Tualatin Rural
Z Fire Protection District 00mms nIcation/o-1-1 Ce=ter, e Cnlr
Incident calls are those assigned to Tualatin. These are the
calla dispatched for fire or medical purposes. All other calls
either do not result in dispatch (those are held and addressed
directly by Center personnel) or they arb transferred to other
PSAPS such as the Tigard Police Communication Center.
Table 7 shows the assumptions aade about activity to call re-
lationships.
l
i
{
c+ep47WiC 1S®�/ACE
ASSOC TES
Tigard 9-1-1 Cast-Of-Service
Page 15
TABLE 7
UNITS PER KEY PARAMETER
TYPE OF ACTIVITY
TOTAL INCIDENT
- CALLS CALLS
OTHER CALLS
INCIDENT CALLS 1.00
MAKE CALLS 1.00
COMPUTER OPERATION 0.21
RADIO OPERATION 0.19 1.05
ALARM MONITORING. 7.04
j REPORT WRITING 0.0.
1 CONFERENCES 0.69
MISCELLANEOUS 0.05
0.10
For example, we could not decide whether making a call was
more closely associated with an incident or another type ca call.
Making a call was thus associated with the total call volnee
! (incident and other) Comin
that approximatel
(5) calls tamg into the Center. It is anticipated
i five y one (1) call will need to be made for every
ing
in the Into the Consolidated Center_ Items shown
rncident Calls
sociated with an Incidentlumn Of call
all than With
7 are more closely as-
the center. Thus it with other calla coming into
is expected that more than seven radio
operations and more than one computer oA"r='ticr.
for every f--4,a__. ---
-- :a++nrx3ed b Will be Performed
Center, y dispatchers in the Consolidated
1 Once again, the values
the type of call were and the assignment cf activities to
Rural Fire Protection District Cwith
h the manager of the Tualatin
O
unication/g_,_1 Center.
To determine the number of Positions b
Rural Fire Protection District Communicaticntype
9 1 in the Tualatin
of the activities was assigned to call takers, ,Center, each
administrative functions. For example, "other calls dare primarily or
the responsibility of call takers. Therefore, the timerequired
for this activity was allocated to the call taker positions.
Likewise, radio operations are primarily made
an incident. As incidents are the in association with
In responsibility of
- --
r _
j
ASSSOC/ATES
i
f Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 16
dispatchers, radio op-crationz were aiso ml2ocated to theme po-
sixiU11W.
Discussions have taken place with Center personnel regarding
the staffing issue. One of the concerns expressed by other
4 centers is that the dispatchers work is incident or emergency
I related. 8urthermore, the work will not come to the center in
the smooth manner. In order to address these concerns, one
' dispatch position has been added to each hour's work and is kept
In reserve to assure the Center is able to process emergency and
incident related work without interruption.
It is unreasonable to assume that every minute of each day
will be filled with work for Center personnel. A forty percent
(40X) factor has been built into the final tali taker personnel
components for "slack" time. In the case of dispatchers, the
"slack" time has been incorporated into the added position assigned
to this function.
Lastly for the purpose of this study. Center personnel are
allowed eight (8) hours of sleep time for every twenty four (24)
hourm on duty. The sleep time hours are important in determining
the total number of positions required by the Center. A lesser
number (as suggested by some Center personnel) would not affect
the distribution of costs between call taking and dispatching
functions.
The results of the calculations are shown in Table S. The
? distribution of :cork by time of day wan taken from 4-1-1 call
J! logs of the Salem Center. There is no reason to believe that
emergencies would be distributed differently at Tualatin Rural
F1re Protection District Commun1cation/9-1-1 Center. Thus, at 1
o'clock in the morning (0100), 133.60 minutes of time are required
to carry out all of the assigned functions and to provide for
sleep and relief.
f
1
I
A 41,11A naCi 01%, 96A
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 17
i
TIME ALLOCATION BY FUNCTION
CALL ADMIN. WITH WITH
TAKERS DISPATCH TIME SHIFT SLEEP
HOURS RELIEF TIME
0100 18.67 65.82 3.18 100.20 133.60
0200 15.37 64.80 2.62 94.62 126.16
0300 9.88 63.08 1.69 85.32 113.75
0400 10.43 63.25 1.78 86.25 115.00
0500 7.14 62.23 1.22 80.66 107.55
0600 4.39 61.37 0.75 76.01 101.35
f 0700 7.14 62.23 1.22 80.66 107.55
Mann I!s_37 64.80 2.62 94.62 126.16
0900 7.69 62.40 1.31 81.60 108.79
1000 20.31 66.34 3.46 102.99 137.32
1100 25.26 67.88 4.31 111.36 148.48
1200 17.57 65.48 3.00 98.34 131.12
1300 21,41 66.68 3.65 104.85 139.80
® 1400 31.30 69.76 5.34 121.60 162.13
1500 30.20 69.42 5.15 119.74 159.65
1600 26.35 68.22 4.49 113.22 150.97
i 1700 28.55 68.91 4.87 116.94 155.93
y 1800 26.35 68.22 4.49 113.22 150.97
1900 31.30 69.76 5.34 121.60 162.13
2000 39.53 ?2.33 6.74 135.55 180.73
2100 28.00 68.74 4.78 116.01 i54.69
2200 24.16 67.54 4.12 109.50 146.00
2300 28.00 68.74 4.78 116.01 154.69
2400 30.75 69.59 __-5_24 120.67 160.89
} TOTAL 505.12 1597.58 8G.15 2501.55 3335.40
s:sass- sa::ass =ssaa:: as:axes sass--:
Fro. this analysis, it would appear that twenty four percent
(24%) of the time of the shift positions of the Center are ded-
icated to call taking with the remainder carrying out dispatching
functions.
I STAFFING OF THE CENTER
` In Table 9 below, the Center staffing is presented
1
i
' .•wwar�rsiaw O_C_@AllQP_C
i - ASSOCIATES
3
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 18
® which results from the time commitments show., in ♦-•-
tae
positions shown are ltlustrative of the total level of staffing
required for the Center given the current work volume and pop-
ulations served. It is surprising how closely the estimated
staffing conforms to the actual staffing which existed at the
Center in 1986-87.
TABLE 9
TUALATIN COMMUNICATION CENTER POSITIONS
- -IONS 6.95
VACATIONAND SICK LEAVE 0.96
TRAINING (10%) 0.69
• TUR!f OVER (AX) 0_35
DIRECTOR 1.00
TOTAL POSITIONS 9.95
iThe position requirements shown in Table 9 were calculated
on the following basis:
The assumption is that out of each 3089 hours in a joar
for a position, actual on work time will be 1800 hours.
Training time is estimated to take approximately ten
percent of the time on shift.
Allowances arN made for a five percent (SAG) Turn over in
staff each year. Four positions will be needed to meet
this requirement.
Thus, the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communica-
tion/9-1-1 Center is estimated to be staffed with ten positions.
This estimated result is consistent with the actual staffing of the
Center prior to the current fiscal year.
In summary. using work volumes supplied by the staff of the
Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1
Center, task and time statistics developed from observations at
the 14ETCOM Communication Center and work load distributions from
- - �wwuw��ww a�swswwwE
F �6iVi�Vlll/YI I7i�7VM'AVG
I ASSOCLtTE$ -
i
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 19
i
! the Salem Communication Center, Seven (7) shift positions are
' required to accomplish the 1986-87 work volume of the Center.
The other three positions were required for training, turnover,
vacation and sick leave relief and management of the Center.
Just under one quarter of the shift positions work involved 9-1-1
call taking work. The remainder of the positions are required
for dispatching activities.
CALLS HELD
To determine how the calls held should be distributed,
Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1
Center staff was requested to monitor the calls held for a one
week period and record the purpose of the call. The following
results were obtained.
iTABLE 10
PURPOSE OF CALLS HELD BY CENTER
PURPOSE NUMBER PERCENT
- ---------------- ------ -------
NO ONE ON LINE 126 46.2
PERSON CONFUSED 41 15.0
^.HIT...DR IC z7 9.9
j GENERAL INFORMATION 79 28.9
TOTAL 273 100.0
-----a ------
It appears that the "held" calls are not specific to any ane
f center. They are as a result of the 9-1-1 system being availsble
j and should, therefore, be allocated to all of the users of tNe
system on the basis of their service demands.
f
j
i �
�sws�aiw-asA ATA/fds+s
6MVR'fN�/Ff AiiOYYAa1s�►
HISTORICAL COST AND REVENUE ESTIMATES
1
i In this chapter, the current costs ons -=---r.=cc =f the
Tualatin Rural Fire Protection Distri+::f Cu,�suricati�r„3- =�
Center are analyzed to determine the appropriate per unit amounts.
These are then used to estimate the historical costs and receipts
of call taking by center.
9-1-1 OPERATING COSTS
The staff of Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Com-
munication/9-1-1 Center was requested to provide detailed in-
formation on the expenses Incurred by the Fire District on com-
munication services since 1980-81.
The communication operations were accounted for in two
separate divisions. One was the General Fund Communication
Division whose detailed expenses for each fiscal year are shown
in Table 1 of the Appendix. The other was the 9-1-1 Fund of the
1 Fire District. These expenses are shown in Table 2. Because the
pct nmintsisA _-_oietentiv wince 1980-
81, the operating expenses of the Communication Division and 9-1-
1 Fund were combined and are shown in Table 3 of the Appendix.
The combined direct operating costs of the Tualatin Rural
Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center are as follows:
TABLE 11
OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE COMMUNICATION CENTER
FISCAL YEAR AMOUNT
----------- --------
FY 80-81 $318,858
FY 81-82 $315,753
FY 82-83 $464,628
FY 83-84 $555,740
FY 84-85 $478,572
FY 85-86 $512,941
FY 00-87 S534j 130
j To determine the amount of the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection
District Communication/9-1-1 Center's operating expenses which
are needed to carry out the call taking (rather than dispatching)
function, the ratio of call time to total shift time required was
used applied to these operating expenses. In other words, the
ratio of the amount of time dedicated to each function by the
t
i
�csi�v�ss: n��vva+a�
io
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 21
SN►
I
center, The ratio is 505 minutes out of every 2,102 or 24%. The
one exception to the use of this ratio was for the TELEPHONES-
EMERGENCY line item. This was allocated totally to the call
taking function. The details of the computations are shown in
Table 4 of the Appendix and are summarized in Table 12 below.
TABI:E 12
CALL TAKING OPERATING EXPENSES
FISCAL YEAR AMOUNT
FY 80-81 5 92,104
FY 81-82 $ 81,527
FY 82-83 $129,191
FY 83-84 $166,152
gY n4-R5 $132,544
FY 85-86 Slztf,695
FY 86-87 S147.399
COMMUNICATION RELATED CAPITAL OUTLAYS
Since 1980-3i, c;e Aire District has expended funds for
communication related equipment. The amounts :yponded for the
equipment in the year of purchase is shown in Table 13.
TABLE 13
CAPITAL OUJI" rr--E
FY 80-81 FY 81-82 FY 82-83 FY 83-84 FY 84-85 FY 85-86 FY 86-87
maUaVE S1S11M 5871.548 533.968
�.nM S57B4 5172.7ft S44.434 $50.013 $76.486 $700 $5.580
911 PIEW BQU114M 3233.103
or"922 BQUP $5.660 $14.983 328.016
OMKNICATICHS BWIP %103.141 570.561 $76.603 $5.934 $11.068 $5.746
Tam S233.103 $275.906 S986,543 $106.233 $97.403 $11.768 $37.342
Thus s2nce 1980-51, the Fire District has expended more than
$1.7 million on communication related equipment. The following
types of equipment are included within the iteas shown in Table
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
ASSOCLAMs
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost--of-Service page 22
j 13.
1 A Siemens SD192MX computer-controlled private excha_rage.
1111 It has a 192 station -tine capacity and 64 trunk line
capacity.
The Communication Center is equipped with plant telephone
equipment, 100 button call directors (5) . Currently,
these are at 2!3 of their capacity.
The radio system has the following configuration,
- Washington County Fire Frequencies F1, F2, F3, F4 and
State Fire Net with transmitters located at Mt. Road,
Bald Peak and Cooper Mountain.
- County receiver coverage on all frequencies.
Ccm- ter -tr=2lo;ft oiaC;O,1wr which Con'Cains all
tones for Washington County fire and medical emergen-
cies, as well as a 50 button plectron encoder at each
position.
�'. A 20-channel Dictaphone recording system. This is a
24-hour continuous recording system for all telephone
lines and all radio frequencies in the Communication
Center.
The communications Center is aided and functions totally
on a computerized dispatch program. This dispatch
program is part of an overall configuration of a dis-
trict-wide management information system. The geographic
base file of the computer is used to determine the
J appropriate police agency for a location given by a 9-1-
1 caller. The computer aided dispatch function assigns
1 the appropriate record keeping numbers and also keeps
track of the responsible agency.
The Fire District is totally operational with a 96
channel redundant microwave loop system. A total of is
misro`.rave channels are utilized for 9-1-1. This system
has increased radio transmission capabilities from both
Mountain Road and Bald Peak. Costs of many telephone
radio and data lease lines have been eliminated through
the use of the microwave system.
ASS40Ct4TES
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 23
j
OOMMUNICATION CENTER CAPITAL COSTS
The amounts shown above are the expenditures of the Fire
District for communication related equipment. These line items
do not represent the use of the equipment rather they are cash
outlays. Suci. an accounting is adequate in most governmental
operations because the commodities and services produced with the
capital is either not sold or sold to
sim" jurisdiction which bought the equipmentle living within the
However, when part of the service is sold to Jurisdictions
which did not directly pay for the equipment and these agencies
have no ownership right to the capital, more appropriate means
must be developed to recover the cost of capital. I.-. additlon to
operating expenses, the owner ne rhe =vital (1sa finis case Tualatin
Rural Fire Protectlon District Communication/9-1-1 Center) is
entitled to recover:
Capital Depreciation costs - This is a charge for the use
Of capital. In this case, it is assumed that all capital
has a useful life of ten years. Thus the value of the
depreciation is equal to one tenth (1/10) of the original
cost of the equipment.
F-et-rn ar Eq"zl t'r - W-an capital is purchased, cash is
Invested� In capital. This cash could be earning a
return for the Fire District If it were put into finan-
clal instruments. The District i8, therefore, entitled
to earn a return on the equity (original cost less
depreciation) . In this study, we assume a seven percent
(7%) rate of return on equity.
Using the above assumptions, the total cost of communication
equipment in each of the years is shown in Table id.
ASSOCWW
® Tj-gerd 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service - _ Page 24
TABLE 14
CAST OF OCMMCATIQd i=PMDM BY),"EAR
FY 80-81 PY 81-82 FY 82-53 FY 83-&1 FY 84-85 FY 85.56 FY 88-87
MOM(WAV6 SYSUM SO $0 587.185 90.562 $90.552 $90.552 $90.552
Oavurm SYSM So $17.276 521.720 5225.721 534.370 S34.440 534.998
911 PHOM HQUUMMT $23.310 523.310 523.310 373.310 $23.330 $23.310 523.310
ODM 912 QIP SD SO 50 5366 $2.063 52.063 $4.686
00t84WCATT(M BQUIP m $10.314 $17.370 $19.030 $19.624 520.731 523.306
9C$-TMAAL IZPfECIATION $^.3'.310 550.901 5149.555 $190.178 $169.919 $171.096 5174.83D
I CAPTLUL gMW 5209.793 $434.797 S1.291.785$1.237.840 S1.::45.324 5985.98: $848.509
FSTUF t O:7 awny $24.685 530.436 589.025 585.249 S80.173 589.02D 558.'. '
a-M.^2KZ Al '-1-T.. $81.337 S-2135.580 9246.427 S25O.091 SM.115 5234.225
The annual cost of communication equipment rises to ap-
proximately $240,000 in 1982-83 and then stays at approximately
that level to the current time.
1
9-1-1 CALL TAI INU RELATED CAPITAL CCSTS
Only a portion of the capital costs shown in Table 14 are
related to the call taking function. The following assumptions
are made In allocating capital cost:
i As 18 of the 96 channelsavailable in the microwave
t system are utilized for 9-1-1, the microwave costs were
split on this basis.
The computer line item includes costs for the purchase
e,4f two Computers. One financial/administrative and the
other for communication purposes. These computers back
each other imp. Computer costs were first split to
Isolate the communication computer. The ratio of call
time to total shift time was then applied to this
amount.
`` All capital costs associated with equipment specifically
1
3 _
e Assocures
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 25
® purchased for the y-1-1 ctInn --a included.
Other communication equipment was split on the basis of
the number of consoles dedicated to the call taking
function (1 out 5).
Return on equity is assigned to the call taking function
on the same basis as depreciation shares.
I
the result of these assumptions are shown below.
TAKE 15
9-1-1 PORTION OF CAPITAL COM
FY 80-81 FY 81-82 FY 82-53 FY 83-84 FY 84-85 PY 85-86 FY 86-87
MCFUWAVE so so $16,342 $18,978 $16,978 $16.978 $16,978
CCHPU 2R SYS1::v. SD 58.638 S10.86o $13.361 517.185 $17.720 $17.499
911 RMW air a $23.310 $23.310 57^3.310 523.310 $23.310 $2+3.310 523.310
OII M 911 sum SO 50 $O $585 $2.05.3 $2.063 $4.665
OCMMCATIONS Eg01P so $2.063 $3.474 53.808 $3.925 $4.146 $4,251
S78-IUM 11EPRECIATICN 523.310 $34.011 $53.986 558.020 563.462 583.718 $66.713
9-1-1 SHARE OP EQUrrY $14.685 $20.337 532.136 530.879 529.943 SM.704 3?2.665
9-1-2 CAPITAL COST S37.996 554.348 586.1P2 588.899 498.405 588.422 399.378
The call taking portion of the capital costs rise to ap-
proximately $90.000 a year and remains there for the remainder of
the period.
i ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD COSTS
! The Fire District incurs some costs for the Tualatin dural
Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center which are not
includ_ I directly within their budgets. These are the costs of
administering the operatiozsl units of the District. Among the
costs which must be incurred are budgeting. finance, personnel
administra.tion. . ..etc. The budgets for these activities are
maintained in the Administrative Division of the General Fund.
Without a detailed analysis of the budgets and activities of
i
s swnarns�ot� O��d�sf3EE
I
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 26
®
the Fire District, a common means used for allocating the ad-
ministrative expenses to the components of an agency is to apply
a percentage of administrative expense to total dollars spent.
The activity budgets of the Fire District are shown in Table 5 of
the Appe-tdix. Overhead computations percentage computations were
made using this information and are shown below 1n Table 16.
TABLE 16
OVERHEAD/ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
FISCAL YEAR PERCENT
FY 80-81- --4.830-
1 FY 61-aL 25.iu
FY 82-83 6.01
Fy 83-84 5.49
FY 84-85 7.00
FY 85-86 7.54
e FY 86-87 8.75
J( The general overhead percentages appear to be in line with
what can be expected for other units of government. However, it
should be noted that there is an upward trend in the percentage
of costs being allocated to this function. The amount shown in
FY 81-82 is anomaly resulting from a one year change in the Fire
District's accounting practices. In that year, it centralized
all personnel benefit payments within the Administrative Division.
1 TOTAL COST OF CALL TARING
The various cost items noted above have been combined in
Table 17 to demonstrate the total cost of call taking by fiscal
year.
1
l�AAf�LI11�IfNa H�ai$A1I.HSSC "
cwRsia+�eav ssrv�rvowc
1
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-Of-Service Page 27
l
t
I TASW 17
y 9-1-1 IMM COM
FY 80-81 FY 91-82 FY 82-83 6Y 83-84 FY 84-85 FY 85-98 Py 86-87
OlFd=CPMTyyG 592.104 $01.527 $129.191 $196.152 $132.544 9128.886 $147.399
AUNDUSMATM $4.451 $20.505 $7.76D $9.128 $9.283 $9.0-98 $12.808
CApMAL 00619 S37.WS 554.348 $89.122 566.899 $90.405 598.422 $89.378
mTAi.9-1-1 Ao6T 5134.551 6156.380 $223.082 S284:181 S2Z ..'�'�':
COST 43Y CLIZTEP
The costs for call taking were allocated to the centers on
the basis of the Calls received by the Tualatin Rural Fire PzOtec-
tion District Communication/9-i-1 Center. The first step in the
process of allocating the costs to the centers was to determine
the cost per call_ This was done by dividing call taping costs
and calls in each fiscal year. The results are shown in Table
18.
TABLE 18
COSTS PER CALL
_1 FISCAL-YEAR COST/CALL
FY 80-81 $3.58
FY 91-82 $4.04
FY 82-83 $5.60
"Y 83-84 $5.46
Fy 84-85 $5.64
FY 65-86 $5.27
FY 86-87 $5.60
The price per call shown in Table 18 was then applied to the
l
ECONOMIC REST-i�C1E
Tigard 9-1-1 Cos:-of-Service Page 28
l
1
number of calls estimated to bre
e received for each center (Table
4) . The results or tnls computation are snown in Table i;,.
TABLE 19
(Wr PER CMM CNLY
C04 MCATION @RYR FY 80-81 FY 81-82 FY 82-53 FY 83-84 FY 84--65 + 88 FY 86-67
I %%SHIiJGRU COMM $9.108 $10,443 514.441 $16.562 $14.384 $13.683 $14,915
CUMMIIS OOLMY 58.720 $9.994 $13.843 $15,949 $13.968 $13.342 $14.652
LAKE OSYEM 55.567 $6.285 $8.701 S'J,038 $9.245 59.097 $9.661
TIG4W $24.869 $'29.347 $42,970 $52.107 546,721 $45.588 $50.270
W SSA-An Fmiaia ."3.416 S3.9?9 SSM-685 $6.741 $5.964 $5,786 $8,358
OTHM 562.9 5966 S1.380 51,637 $1.453 $1,42 $1.544
= �4 w.._""^. �m (m tot.'775
TO1AI,'uv�iorr�cs a`o�.oav 588.899 391.401
HEW CALLS $70.228 $81.601 $116.382 $137,799 $122.742 5118.sw $130,285
1VAiAMY $11.813 $13.766 $19,660 $23,349 $20,715 SM.022 Sn.015
GVM 7UM $134.551 $156.380 $223,082 $264,181 S235.232 SM.816 $245.681
Thus, for example, the cost of providing service for all
i calls transferred to the Tigard Center is estimated to be just
under $25,000 in 1980-81. Because both the number and cost per
i call increased, by 1986-67 the direct service cost had risen to
over $50,000.
The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-
1-1 Center holds a considerable number of calls. Most of them
are "Junk". The remainder are requests; for information. These
calls are part of a call answering system and are not specific to
any one of the centers. In Table 20, the cost associated with
the "held" calls are distributed to the centers on the number of
calls received for each of the centers. As a result of this
adjustment, the cost to the Tigard Center for the 9-1-1 call
answering service has more than doubled.
i
1
t �
EcAEESOaJRCE
lASSWArES
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service
Page 29
■ TABLZ 20
006T PER CENTER INQ17Dlx;isA:+CA.---
Oq,44MC,,TION CtNM FY s"i FY 81-82 FY 82-83 FY 83-84 FY 84-85 FY 85-86 FY 86-'67
WAS{MMUN COLMy S1&.= $21.839 $30.191 534.620 S30.9M $28.619 331.185
QACMMS 0=?- tt8_240 $20.899 528.941 $33.339 $28.2.52 $27.907 ^30.636
511.645 513.144 $18.192 $210.962 $1a.= S19.-- 520.200
[/1!Q 061tr700 S52.021 $61.371 $89.839 S1OS.920 597.693 $95.346 $105.106
TIGA[m
(IMOM SPATE POLICE 57.146 $6,320 511,9&5 $34.091 $12,514 5325-102 S13.294
OTHER $1.735 $2,ceO 52.888 $3421 $3.038 52.938 $3.228
alA
To�A THA SFERS $109.840 5127.593 5161.3cso sA�. 1191,_Q
i-m 41855.939 $203.651
5o so $0 50
d6`7171Ac.� l��e td1_g'17 $46.030
TUALATIN 524.711 528.787 $41,147 izo.rnio --
OVM TOM 5134.561 $155.380 5223.082 $264.181 $236,232 $227,616 $249.681
REVEMMM BY CENTER
The actual receipts to the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection
District Communicat1e3n'i9-1-1 Center from jurisdictions curr*Atl"y'
served by the centers was used to construct Table 21.
7
TAKE 21
}! 9-1-1 FUM BY CeIIYR
cMIER FY 80.81 FY 8182 FY 82-e3 FY 83-84 FY 84--85 FY 85-88 F'85"87
WSRU r9TN $5.280 $24.508 527.415 $29.496 532.918
OLACKWAS S8.7185 530.100 585,982 335.801 540.068
TICAM $13.672 $91.10, $98.381 $102.1+47 5118.318
TOPAL $87.717 5325®774 5211.757 Slfffi,044 SM-293
For example, Clackamas County, Wilsonville and Rivergrove
receipts are shown 35-_ the row entitled Clackamas as these three
tiSSOGWES
l
f
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 30
jurisdictions are being served by the Clackamas Center. In the
same manner, the innntes frcr, Tigard, Durham. Tualatin, Sherwood,
ana King city are in the. eow callod Tigard C'wnter.
To verify our computations and for use in projections, per
{ capita computations on Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District
Communication/9-1-1 Center receipts from the centers were made
and shown in Table 22.
TABLE 22
RECEIPTS PER CAPITA BY CENTER
CENTER FY 82-83 FY 83-84 FY 84-85 FY 85-86 FY 86-87
-------- ------ -------- -------- --------
WASHINGTON $0.53 $2.46 $2.77 $2.93 $3.19
CLACKAMAS $0.71 $0.82 $6.95 $2.82 $3.07
TIGARD $2.36 $2.78 $2.92 $2.93 $3.19
Since 1985-86, the receipts of funds has been consistent
among the centers. The Tigard and Washington centers contribute
more per capita than the Clackamas Center. Clackamas Countv
makes based on an intergovernmental agreement with a
J population figure fixed at 8,308. No provision has been made at
this time to change the population figures.
BALANCE BY CENTER - THE BOTTOM LINE
To determine whether the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection
District Communication/9-1-1 Center was overpaid for the services
provided to the centers, the allocated estimated costs and re-
ceipts by center were subtracted from each other. The balances
for the years in which the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District
Communication/9-1-1 Center was supported by contributions from
the centers and not from property tax revenues are shown in Table
23.
�S
_y
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
f Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 31
l
® ``!
TABLE 23
AV CpVTER
` CENTER FY 82-83 FY 83-84 FY 84-85 FY 85-86 FY 86-87
-------- -------- -------- -------- --------
1 WASHINGTON ($24,912) ($10,113) ($2,664) $877 $1,733
CLACKAMAS ($20,177) ($23,239) $56,710 $7,694 $9,420
TIGARD ($16,167) ($17,753) $681 $7,601 $11,211
TOTAL ($ 2,363
=1-RR=) ($51,106) 354,727--=6=R $
=R,172 $i
_=iR=iRR f=RR -=---
Z-caa-.
oa 'i Y�>---�«♦ 4.v tlR f�1 s�`lrama! CRntl2` 8tld naVmlIIt -_
for service less• than estimated cost by the other two centers,
the first two yer.rs of call taping operation resulted in sig-
nificant -aver-expenditures- by the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection
District Communication/9-1-1 Center. The receipts worm not
sufficient to cover the psti=.t2d cost of providing service to
the three centers.
l Since 1984-85, the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District
Communication/9-1-1 Center has been receiving more monies than it
costs to provide service to the three communication centers. In
1984-85 this occurred primarily because the Clackamas Center paid
up its arrears. Since then, it has occurred because the receipts
exceed the cost of service.
In summary, If all years over and under payments are ag-
gregated, it appears that the :ualatin Rural Fire Protection
J District Communication/9-1-1 Center has been underpaid a total of
. $19.099.
l _
ECONOMIC RKSOUPICE
PROJECTED COSTS AND REVENUES
® in this chaps—r the costs, revenues and balances tar call
taking of the Tualatin Rural Fire- Protection District Communica-
ticn/9-1-1 Center and the participating centers are computed
through 1994-95. Operating costs are inflated at a rate of five
percent (5%) per year to offset the effect of inflation.
j COST PROJECTIONS
Current cost of call taking is projected in Appendix-Table 6
i using a five percent (5%) rate of inflation for each year. Costs
of the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-
1 Center might be understated slightly using this approach as
somecost changes might occur with increases in expected work
load. When 1994-95 work total work loads (including dispatching
of calls) was placed into the model, the personnel requirements
...f the Conte.. changed • ___ itio.. Thr. ..sing
�. u"y" i as tiaaia --- pas.�....... �
only inflation adjustments�is realistic in making the Centers
cost projections.
Capital requirements are projected as indicated in the
capital sections above. Depreciation of each capital line item was
canciiauad —=t!! the original value was entirely depleted. It was
assumed that:
No additional equipment would be needed over the pro-
jection, and
Equipment, although depreciated, would continue to be
available for use.
TA8i8 24
CALL TAKIIT 00SM PFUJELMO
FY 87-88 FY 88-89 Fy 89-90 FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-23 FY 93-94 FY 94--86
DOEXT M4TIN: S154.769 5162.507 $170.633 $179.164 $188.123 $157.529 $207.405 5217.775
AMnas RATIVE 512.382 51 .001 $13.651 $14.333 $15.050 $15.802 516.592 517.422
CAPITAL,0031" 584.706 $80.038 575.389 $46,862 $43,493 56.421 $4.990 $4.638
IMAL 9-1-1 COST 5251.859 $255.546 $258.652 SM,380 5246.6W $?21.752 $228.987 5238.836
f
1
ECCI91®A�IlC R�$Ot/RCE
ASSOCIATES
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 33
In spite of direct operating expenses rising at an estimated
® ' five percent (5%) per year Ovar the Frcjectioh neriod, the total
cost of call taking is expected to decrease. The reason for this
is that the cosivi cn-' "'311 fat t over time as the Fire
District's equity in the system decreases and expense recognition
is discontinued on equipment fully depreciated.
PROJECTED COSTS BY CENTER
Once again, the total call taking cost were transformed into
per unit costs and then applied to the projected work volumees by
center to estimate the costs applicable to each of the participa-
ting communication centers.
TABLE 25
GGS a een CAL-
T--FISCAL YEAR COST/CALL
FY 87-sa $5.51
FY 88-89 $5.47
FY 89-90 65.42
FY 90-91 $4.90
FY 91-92 $4.91
FY 92-93 $4.31
FY 93-94 $4.35
FY 94-95 $4.46
The cost of handling a call at the Tualatin Rural Fire
Protection District Communication/9-1-1 Center is expected to
decrease by more than a dollar by 1994-95. The cost implications
for each center are shotrn in Table 26. Once again, the cost for
"held" calls were distributed to participating centers on the
basis of their relative shares of the work load.
i
f
EyeZlliC�/E�
{ _ assO IAIES
iTigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 34
I`
ad I
TABLE cr
! r.M,...",,.,o."2s
ZY
C..m VICAVAN CUGM FY 87-88 FY 88-88 FY 89-90 Fy 90Y91 FY 91-92 FY 92-96 FY 93-94 FY 94-AJ5
( WA9IRVIUi MMM 530,8003 530.498 530,426 527.669 $27.909 $24.673 $23.067 $25.543
q dAS COLIM 530.604 $30.284 530.354 $27.7,!2 $W.100 524.964 $25.464 526.365
1! LAKE O6ii530 S20.0PA $20.181 $20.349 $18,099 $19.055 $17,015 $17,456 $18.168
TICS S107.252 $110.484 $113.374 $105.903 $109.673 599.421 $103.479 $109,197
ORSOM STATE POLICE $13,423 $13.618 $13.M $12.814 $13.153 $11.827 512,215 $12.796
Onm 53.259 53.306 $3.360 53.111 $3.1903 $2.871 $2.986 $3.107
TOTAL'IItAN ERS s W.365 1200.3Fra 5211.7x5 $196,%a $201.063 SIW.76i SIM.M6 $196,476
HELD CALLS 5o SO so s0 s0 50 s0 s0
TUALATIN 546.494 $47.174 $47.949 544.402 545.582 Son-M1 Se2_�17 It"--vn
CRA[D TOTAL 5251.859 5255.546 $2250.652 SM-300 S2 R..eM x;+.752 $M.987 $239,836
Call handling costs for the Washington and Clackamas centers
In expected to decrease by between fifteen and twenty percent (15X-
20%). On the other hand, total call taking costs for the Tigard
Center are anticipated to remain fairly constant because the
Increases in work volume offset the decreases in per unit costs.
PROJECTED CENTER REVENUES
Telephone tax revenues are derived from a three percent (3x5)
excise tax on phone charges. Section 10 to 20 of chapter 533,
Oregon Laws 1981 provides:
"There is impose' or. the amount charged for exchange
access services a tax equal to three percent of the
amount charged."
This section shall apply to taxable years beginning on
or after January 1, 1982, but before January 1, 1992."
The distribution to be "to cities on a per capita basis
and to counties on a per capita basis for each county's
unincorporated area."
ASSOCtATES
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 35
I
i he a=c%-'nt of 3^.cnies cc. jlected is therefore rejeted to the
charges imposed by the telephone company. As a .result of the
restructuring of the telephone industry, rates have risen dra-
maticall'; since 19so (about 187 per year). This trend is not
expected to continue. According to sources at the telepnone
company, they estimate future price changes will be no more than
3% per year. After a one time adjustment in 1987-8a for downward
adjustments in telephone access charges, we are projecting the
following receipts per capita from the telephone excise cast.
TABU 27
' PER CAArrA EXCISE RECEIPTS BY CMnER
ICOMWCATI(IN CWPER FY 87-88 FY 86-89 FY W-90 FY 90-91 FY 91-W. FY 92-93 FY 9C3--G4 FY 94-96
WASM20 ( $2.79 $2.96 $3.05 $3.14 $3.23 53.33 43.43 $3.53
I
CLACKMAS $2.69 $2.85 42.93 $3.02 43.11 $3.21 43.30 43.40
TIGAM 22.79 $2.96 43.05 53.14 $3.21 43.33 $3.43 $3.53
It should be noted that we have extended the excise tax
receipts beyond the January 1, 1992 cut off. The reason for this
i is that there is a high probability that the tax will be continue
' in some form. if thio dvas Hvt iwppvn, thck 10cal juriodictior-aa
must find some other source of funds to offset the call taking
costs. It is outside the scope of this report to devise such
alternate funding sources.
Once again, the Clackamas excise fee is below that shown for
I the other two centers because of an imposed administrative fee by
J ---ackamas County.
1In Table 28, the telephone tax excise fees are applied to
the estimated populations served by center to determine the amcunts
expected in each of the fiscal years.
I
1
l
i �
i _
�cviv�wvic� �avacitrc:�
Tigard 9-1-1 Cost-oY-Service v Page 36
TME 289
EXCISE FEC=1Pr rAYM NLb Wr CEr 71in
CCMNICATION @IIfR FY 87-86 FY 6.-89 FY 89-90 FY 9091 FY 91-32 FY 92-93 FY 96-94 FY 9495
WASHIM" $28.906 $30.619 $31.740 $32.900 $34.102 $35.346 536.634 $37.967
CIAMMA.S 535.574 537.660 539.223 $40.835 $42.530 $44.279 $46.094 $47.979
TIGAfm 5105.520 $116.290 $123,996 5132,061 $140,497 $149,321 $138.548 $168.194
TUM $170.000 $184.569 $194.959 5205.606 $217.129 $228.945 5281.275 $254.139
PROJECTED BALANCE BY CENTER-THE BOTTOM LINE
To determine whether the telephone excise fee receipts are
i sufficient to pay for the cost of call taking in the future, the
balances (receipts less costs) were calculated for each of the
centers. The results are shown in Table 29.
TABLE 29
FRMI]CIM B LQKF✓(WtX-E7ENDIIZRE) BY(}2M
i
! COWNICATIOy CENrf]ZR FY 87-88 FY 88-89 �Y 89-90 FY 90-91 FY 91-J2 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95
WASRINGiM ($1.897) SIM $1.314 $5.232 58,193 $10.673 $11,567 S32.IPA
CiACKAMfiS 54.970 $7.376 58,868 $13.113 $14.430 $19.325 $20.631 522.614
TIGAFV ($1.732) $5.806 $10.622 $26.226 $30.824 549.900 555.068 $58,987
TOTAL Si.:Ai S13=2 520.806 543.473 $51.446 579.897 S87,205d $92.734
The three communication centers receiving service from the
Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1
Center are projected to pay more than the cost of call taking
service if all of the telephone excise tax receipts are used to
pay for this service. In 1987-88, they are estimated to overpay
the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District Communication/9-1-1
Center only slightly more. By 1994-95, a fifty seven percent
(57X) curplus contribution will be made by the centers if the
formula for contributing funds remains unchanged.
ECOMOMiy MMMT IOeBAMCC
{ ASSOCi ET ;
}
Tiaard 9-1-1 Cost-of-Service Page 37
® i
i
PROJECTED BALANCE By .'.URISDICTION
To assess the impact of a change in pricing on the jurisdic-
tions being served by the participating centers, population and
calls are projected in Appendix Tables T and S. These values
were then applied to the telephone tax receipts per capita and
I the cost per call. The results are shown In Table 30.
The accumulated balance of telephone tax receipts between
1982-83 and 1994-95 would be more the
eight hundred thousand t
dollars ($800,000) after payment of he cost of call taming. it
is important to emphasize that the amounts below refer only to
th,r portion ^f the served by the Tualatin Rural Fire
Protection District Communication/9-2-1 Center.
1
l
J
1
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
assocures
Tigard 9-1-1 cost-or-service Page ass
s
TABLE 30
PFKIIEMM FINANCLIL VALUES BY JURISDICTION
FY 87-98 FY 86-89 FY 89-90 FY 9"1 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-96
WASKLIGIM COIN1Y
(WXIP15 528.906 530.619 $31.740 332.9U-0 $34.102 $35.346 $36.634 $37.967
QTS $30.803 $30.499 $30.428 527.669 $27.909 $24.673 $25.067 525.843
BALANCE ($1.897) $120 $1.314 $5.232 $6.193 $10,673 $11.567 512.124
TUAIATIN
RECEIPTS $30.539 533,959 $36.247 S38.641 $41,147 $43,769 $46.510 $49.377
c0915 531.041 532,263 533.142 530.996 $32.120 $29.142 $30.356 $32,067
BALANCE (9`501) $1.695 53.106 $7.645 $9.027 S14,626 $16.154 $17,320
SHMOOD
j(j'Ellp.-I $1.975 58.488 $3.904 $9.400 S9,W5 $10.390 4$$0.918 ..11.4M
00523 $8,106 $8.065 $8.169 $7.540 $7,716 $8.918 X7,126 $7.445
RALAK7. ($131) $424 $765 $1,860 52.169 $3.472 $3.792 $4,022
RI*M
IiEMIMS 52.139 $2.225 52.312 52.404 $2.498 $2.586 $2.696 $2.803
00915 52.174 $2,114 S2,114 $1,928 51.950 $1.729 51,761 S1,820
BALANCE (;3.") SM S19s; 5476 5648 5886 $903
KING crry
I RE EIITS S5.356 $5.554 $5,735 $5,922 $6.115 $6.314 $6,519 $6.731
y (LETS $5.444 S5.277 $5.244 $4.750 $4.713 $4.204 $4,255 $4.370
BALANCE ($88) 5277 5491 $1.172 51.342 $2.110 $2.284 $2.351
TIGAIV
RECEIPTS 589.510 S66.064 $70,768 $75.684 $80,852 $88.252 $91.908 $91.815
cam 560.487 562.766 $64,705 SOD.718 563,114 $57.429 $59.962 $63,505
BALANCE ($917) $3.298 $6.063 $14.978 517,738 528.824 $31.921 $34.310
CZACVAMAS G14
RROUP^5 $23.711 525.112 525.944 $26,803 $27,680 $28.608 529.532 $30,53D
cam $20,399 $20,194 $20,Ma $18,198 $18,7.95 $16,121 516,325 $16.771
BALANCE 53.312 $4.918 55,668 $8.606 $9.395 512,485 513.227 $13.753
WU_gUIVn.EE
IMXEIM 511.016 $11.637 212,345 $13,085 $13.858 $14,888 $15,510 $16,391
4 cO= $9,477 $9.358 $9.554 $G,884 $9.156 $8.285 $8.568 WOW
BALANCE $1.539 $2.719 $2.791 $4.201 S4,702 $6,401 $5.942 $7.384
REC8IPTS s847 $911 S834 s958 5082 $1.007 $3.032 $1.058
1 COSTS $128 $733 5723 sm 3849 $587 5810 5682
7 BALANCE $118 $178 $211 $308 s333 5430 $462 5477
TdM 51.341 $13.302 SW.SM $44.473 SM,446 $79.897 SM.265 $62,734
l
c
ECONOMIC AWAKNO/NCS
ASSOCIATES
J
r.
I
1
l
E
1
1
1
J
l
E -
a�socr�
APFE.`:IlZX
Page 4r,
Cts
APPUMIX---TAME 1
j EXPENDTlIiMS FOR C944MICATICM DMSION-GFSaM&FLM
FY 80-81 FY 81-82 FY 82.83 FY 83-84 FY 84-85 FY 85-88 FY 88-87
OOM1NICATIONS SPECIALIST $159.250 $128.877 $141.323 $231.952
14MUL]RIM SPECIALIST 5229.197 $235.510 $167.851
30 SO so W50
43ECIPJICAIBMTI ICER SO 528.55'1 522,326 $29.786 $33.672
SO 526.439 527. $32
18D .695 $14.842
�{. SwT SLRRYI902 $0 532.520 $31.018
067A'TIAE Q r r r SO SO
1
�L-�'�*+" $4.863 518.693 534.630 42 $2.633 SOOIAL SF7CR7RITY $14.206 531.162 563.442 $41.652
'S CSP $12.175 $22.189 522.606 $21.718 $18.245
E24DFLOYMW COMPENSATION S1.108 s7l $1.416 $8.226 $9,048
34.728 50 $
i�l'IREAENI' 531.'171 52.825 SO
1 �. $31.792 $45.952 $46.816 SO:443 $33.
,
�FF1�4c5�IC��"-1 w"1S 1 1-1 R1 S13.4� $2c2.311 530.722 $25.795 $25.233 $15.310
`�.•,['RM etn7iarerc t cr-an.m S1a2_
OFFICE SUPPLYiB - 823
52.414 $3. 50
1 SiTATICN StIPLIFS $= $5 $752
PH=SUPPLIES 5139 $104 S55 $259
GAS 8 OIL AUMS $45 $17
MAPPING Pp-nM $919
FOOD SO 58.575 $2.42$
.MM STATION BWIP5fIT 598 545 SO
RM O3 AIINICATItri3 swap. S10.706 $21.153 $22.791 $61.480 so 532
O
+ OIDRAOT MATCH SERVICES ($2,023) $13,151 $16,692
RRM SPATIONS SO $3.147 $2.322
7 IMM STATION EQU PWM S75 $18 � $123 sms
11 I(riAi.SS{{,�. 6 $24 $82 $184
EMKINS $1.235 SO $116 $4.055
PHY5ICAL3 5404 $859 $300 5,269
TELEpHMZS-BWDjESS $1.116 51.197 $1.597 $1,390
$8.886 $10,556 $11.476 $12.885 $13.427 $30.757 $13,547
E=WCTTy-FQCMWVg 153 $7.581 $2;1.175 ".397 SO $7.356
$3.064
SCFrKARE�Mr $1.429 $3.423 $2.43e
�0 42.834 $185 $-1.292
''4"` 5896 $915
LIlVIM E 51.362 sm 131 $1.790 $619 $295
DUES&9IffiOtIPTIU2S 5184 i Si :1.�6 $1.115
ly"ITIONsm *M$613 S1 $75 $125
MINE EQOIAA@VP ,Zril $67.19:5 SD SW9 $1.583 $1,689
TELEPME BQI1I1NM-LEASE
AITTS2"7TTVE EQUIR4W '�'S
O�lA1C4TICM BQUIP $103,142 $70.561.561 516,803.543
I $5,934 $11.068 $5.746
Tom
$271.902 $349,509 Sdm_ _
33ec.34_3 5425,586 $5c3,822 $379.481
l
j - g�CoIVOM/�RESOURCE
® i APPENDIX Page 41
APPENDIX-TABTE 2
E IEMI'IURES CCWWICATICT"S-9111 P0:'U
FY 80--81 FY 81-62 FY 82-83 FY 83-84 FY 84-85 PY 85-86 FY 86-87
%ACE5 3 FRINMS 548.950' $96.409 $121.273
CO MNICATIOUNS SPECIALISM $85.951
RESOURCE SPECIALIST
Ca tMCATIOa OFFICER S3.649
E EcrRmICS TECH 524.172 $3.446
CCDM. S,Fr SZFMM9C3R $1.417
OJWDE S CALU14ICK $14.786
90CIAL SFiUR Y 57.639
iat OM'S OCMP
U DVEOf 4 Nf COWENSATION
f�Cl—ltri *14.155
I EEALTH/LIFE/DISABILIIY IINSUtANE 57.655
a1VCT!`iiII
(ENEtAL MATERIALS Q SERVICES 516.227 53.118
OFFICE SYYPLIFS
STATION SUPPLIES
Pm1m SUPPLIES
MAPPIIS 070..:°3'1'
Iom S26
RSM STATION ETU FWff
1 Rai!OI W&WCATIONS EYx MMr 514.111 $1.467
COND7ACT DSPAIM SERVICES
RSM STATIONS
RSM SMION BWU-F U
PRDFFSSIOMAL SERVICES
CENnom
PESSICALS
1EUNIKHM-E SI2ffiS
$2D.425 $22.230
ELECIRICM-NICH(MVE 9187 5-187
TRAVEL
E3PWSES
LIVIM EXPU SES
DMS do SUBSCRIPTIONS
7UITIOV
NICRMAVE PLWIPl0f1NP
TEENEM W11PPOC-LEASE S82.C137 575.458 575.606
AUMVrIVE BQUnMTf
OP442NIG'kC m E¢IIP 52'3.519 $285 $6.404 $23.187 $24.500
TOTAL 5158.532 $188.379 $199.999 $8.404 $82.106 $187 4184.984
ECOMON- IC RESOURCE
ASSOCL4TES
t
f
APPENDIX _ Page 42
IAPPENDIX-TAKE 3
OPERATING EiPENDMHU C CMINED GENERAL.FUND AND 911 FIPD
FY&3-81 FY 81-82 FY 82-83 FY 83-.84 FY 84-85 FY 85-86 FY 86-7
WALES d, FRINGES 546.956 596.409 5121.273 50 s0 s0 s0
1 COMNICATIORS SpECIALISf $159.250 $128.877 $141.323 5231.952 $229.197 $235.510 5253.802
I RESU[IRCE SPDCIALIST s0 $0 so SO s0 s0 $0
C(WMICATIONS OFFICER SO 528.557 522.326 529.786 S33.672 $32.695 $16.491
1 CICS TFC $O so S26.439 527.180 524.172 532.520 $34.464
OLM. SErP SLFlWVISOR SO s0 s0 so s0 $0 $3.250
OWEgpgg S CpLLR4p( 54.883 so 516.693 $34.630 $31.162 543.442 556.439
SOCIAL SECIRIIY $14.206 $0 512.175 522.189 $22..b06 $24.718 $25.884
womo Ply$034P $1.106 $0 $1.416 56.228 $9.046 s0 $0
Uf F[DYM W COMPENSATION S280 s0 s0 $4.728 $2.825 $O so
r_rryuc9axr X1:771 so $31.792 $45.962 $46.816 Se8,443 S47.317
HEAL7HILIFEMISABILTIY 513.420 SD 522.311 $30.722 $25,796 $255.233 571.954
PEIYSIC�ILS 5526 $O $724 $0 $182 SO SO
CEN, MTERIAL a SERVICES so Us.= $3,115 Su S6 x+ ai+
OFFICE SUPPLIES s0 $0 52.414 S3.923 5355 S5 S752
STATICN°IRPLI04 :vas aaair $104 $55 $259
1 FMU SLFPLgLrS $0 $O $0 so S35 545 $17
OAS h OIL XJTW so so $919 5o w so so
1 KVFIM PFCOOCT so SO $0 SO so 58.975 52.423
FOOD so 5D so $71 so $o
f6lM STATION HQ6IMENT' So So $48 m 40 $32 so
FFM CCK&WCATICM EQUIP. S10.70F $24.153 S=.791 $61.460 $12.088 513.197 $18.158
/1 CCNUV T ESPATCH SERVICES SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $3.147 $2.322
MN STXPIas SD $D $o $938 $123 $508 $o
IM!STATION WpIR4Wr $75 So $188 S257 $24 $02 $284
J( PROFESSIONAL SERVICES so $0 SO 50 So $116 $4.055
Lvnx s $1.236 So $404 $859 S300 $289 SO
PHYSICALS so $D so $1.116 $1.197 $1.597 $1.390
TEEEPHONES-BUS 58.865 550.558 $11,476 512,885 $13.42.7 530.757 513:547
S2o.153 $7.561 $23:175 638.`97 S?^4255 $7,355 $r' 273
ELECTRICITY-FMICROWAVE s0 $o so SD $187 $187 s0
SCFIKAM S1.429 $3.413 52.438 SD SO so SO
TRAVEL x1.834 $0 $185 $1.292 S258 $898 615
CONFERENCE EXPENSES so s0 S23 $131 $1.790 $619 $295
LIVING MWENSMS 51.382 s0 $651 $775 $1.868 $1.296 $1.115
DUES 8 SUESCRIPTIOHS $184 SD s211 s203 5236 575 $125
2UMON $613 s0 $115 s0 S6o9 $1.583 $1.688
IMICROI AVE EQUIPMER r
1 TELE IUM BWI*OM- LEASE
AUPIMITIVE eQuiFmw
O34drtlCll Cw MUIP
QVM IWAL 5318.858 $315.753 $464.628 $555.740 $478.572 $512.941 3534.130
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
ASSOCIATES
APPENDIX Page 43
APPENDIX-TABLE 4
9-1-1 OPERATING COSTS
FY 80-81 F"81-82 FY 82-83 FY 83-84 FY 64-85 FY 85-86 FY 86-87
ItUES Q FRINGES $11.269 523.138 529.106 m $O 50 SO
COMMCATIONS SMIALIST $38.220 530.930 533.918 $55.668 355.007 $56.522 350.912
AESOIFM SPECIALIST 50 SO 30 30 30 $O SO
034KWCAT-LCM OFFICER Sfl $6.854 55.358 $7.149 $8.081 $7.847 $3.958
ELWERONICS ISM 30 $0 $6.345 56.523 $5.801 $7.805 $2.271
CONK. SHFT SUPERVISOR 50 SO so 30 SO SO $1.020
OVERTDE g CALEBACK S1.172 50 $4.008 $8.311 57.479 510.428 $13.545
SOCIAL SEUHITY $3.410 50 $2.972 $5,325 $5.425 $5.932 $6.212
t�MN'S COW $266 50 5340 $1.494 S2.171 50 $O
(AE_I � $0 Sfl $4.728 $2.825 50 SO
(REMEMENr S7.625 SO 57,630 $11.028 $11.236 $11,626 $11.356
}P/1aRmIPE/DISABILITY S3.221 SO 55.355 $7.373 $6.191 $8.056 $5.511
1315t5ICAIS 3i 75 SO $241 $O 761 a+ w -
i -
PERSONAL SERVICES S65.638 S15019M $95.221 $107.601 $104.278 $106.215 $110.786
GEN. Srsua�cLil.8 SERVICES $0 $3.894 5740 w aJ $O $0
OFFICE SUPPLIES 50 SO $379 SD41 $85 $1 $180
STATION SUPPLIES 50 so $0 $33 $25 $13 $52
PHOM SUPPLIES $0 $O $O $O 56 $11 $4
GAS R OIL AUI08 30 5o 5221 So $0 $0 50
l K4PPIEG PACVECT SO $9 SID so 50 $2.058 4581
FOD $O 50 $O SO, $17 $0 $0
ASN STATION EQUIPMERr 30 50 $12 so $O $8 SO
ASN CMUNICATIONS EQUIP. $2.569 45.797 $5.470 414,750 $2.901 53,158 $4,358
CCNIRECF DSPATCN SERVICES SO so SO 50 SO 5756 $557
ASAI„MCNS so 50 30 S?25 $29 $122 $O
A8N SrmCN EQUIPMENT $18 SO $45 $62 $B $20 544
PACWIOi4L SERVICES 50 30 $0 $0 30 $28 5973
UNIFlaw 3257 50 SS1 $208 S72 $68 SO
FlftWCAIS SO $0 SO 3286 $287 5334
' -"INES3 S2.= $2.533 $2.754 MOW $3.222 $7,382 $3.251
520.153 57.561 $23.175 536.397 $20,425 $7.35`5 325.273
ELECIRICnY-NICFDKIRVE 50 SU SO 30 S45 $OLS $0
SOFfKACE $343 $819 $585 SO SO SO 30
MVEL 5440 50 S44 $310 562 $216 3220
EXPENSES $0 SO $5 531 5430 $149 $71
LIVING EXPENSES $327 SD SIM Si66 $448 5312 5288
DUES A S[ffiCRIPTICES S44 SD $51 549 $57 518 530
7UITIOi $147 $0 328 SD $146 3380 5405
94TFRIAL&SERVICES 326.466 S20.605 533.370 $58.552 528.27 522.461 $36.613
ORAD?MIAL 592.104 $81.527 5129.191 5166.152 $132.544 $1F.8,895 $147.389
ECONOMIC RESOURCE
. ASSOCIATES
i J
APPENDIX Page 44
S
APF'k2DIX-TABLE 5
'Dl(1PAL MTESDT ICS ALL.DDIISICNS (E]¢IMM AM IId1EIMM )
FY 84-81 FY 81-82 FY 82-83 FY 83-84 EY 84-85 FY 85-86 FY 8&87
AIM 5M.454 51.345.761 $382.218 $303.383 $488.479 5510.344 5618.728
OPENAmcfa 52.518.781 S1.989.38.9 52.807.579 $3,320,543 $3.912.760 51.257.619 54.454.785
FIRE PIWVEM71 N 3286.76!7 5228,112 $368.458 3391. 88 464 $519.343 $497.6 $489.150
OOKKICATICNS S271.902 5349.509 $483.536 $572.343 5425.540 5523.8225379.481S481
IR&INXM 5127.083 $87.958 $176.656 $188.660 $155.099 $169.871 $234.078
ENS 5488.341 $432.068 5680.031 5101.234 $109.941 594.790 587.295
SMS $431.969 $340.822 $440.843 _$472.617 533.992 1546.069 $478.270
lum Oi'd Ftm $4.431.297 $4.773.619 $5.139.322 $5.350.446 56.366.154 SO.600.2D6 $6.721.738
CAP PROJE I5 Ftw 5m.sw 5217.886 $850.857
[NDP A SICK IMS SO SD $D $0 50 $1.709 $3.636
F xcw- DWI-ecce ZM tlles.051- tsar mn N.ee..V.. N.cn ^ra
911 FUM $158.512 5188.379 $199.999 $6.404 "a'loa SO $184.894
FIRST AID FUND $334 SO SD $0 $3
PIPE&LIFE SAFM S4 $34 50 SO SO
I=AZAM Fiia'f. 50 52.500 SU $0 so
F[ Y I ' b'Eso SO so SO so $3.68D $109.779
J COMINICATION SWIF. so 50 $0 SD $0 $D $31:243
C[]dFFllg12 l'd2;rpm dP 54 54 SO SD x) SD 536.608
i
AFPtAnUS RESERM $O SO SD SO $419.069 SD $4
11 WIM ALL FtPMS S5.555.190 4.5.350.E $8.358.231 S5.5Z1.44$ $6.974.617 $6.772.178 57.087.86)6
rAUONLSlFJaTW X 4.83x 25.3,x% 6.011 5.495 7.00% 7.54t 8.7,%
J
EC�91f�9iflC ROSO�/RCE
�. ASSWIATES
pow
1 - APPENDIX Page 45
APPENDIX-TABLE 6
IET.2ILkD COST PIWECTIC M
FY 87-88 FY 88-89 FY 89-AJO FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94198
WACFS& FRINGE-- SO SO SO $0 SO SO SO $0
COMMUIICATIONS SPEC. $63.G58 $67.156 $70.514 $74.039 $77.741 581.629 $85,710 S89,995
FE90(RCS SPECIALIST SO $0 So 50 $O 50 50 $0
OC1441NRCAT10%OFF. 54.156 $4.363 $4.582 $4.811 $5,051 $5,304 $5,569 $5,847
cIFX'1RlYVICS TECs $8.685 59,119 59.575 $10,054 510.557 $11,084 511,639 $12,221
COW. SST S1PM. $1.1771 51.125 51,181 $1,240 $1,302 $1,367 $1,435 $1,507
OVFRME:&CALLBACK $14,22'3 $14,934 $15,680 $18,464 317,288 $18,152 $19,060 $2D.013
SOCIAL..12xxl w $6.523 $6.849 $7,191 $7.551 57,928 $8,325 $8,741 $9,178
kL7FYaomis CRAP SO $0 SO $0 $O SO 50 SO
1 IPEI�OaP. so So So So SO $0 SO SO
FST.IRFMW $11.924 $12.SM Si3,146 513,803 514.4w9y
u,2io
FgALTH/LIFEMIS.IPS. 55.787 56.076 $6,380 $8,899 $7.034 9$7.386 $7,755 $8,143
PHYSICALS 3D SO SO 30 SO SO So SO
OFFICE SUPPLIES $190 $199 5200 $219 S23o 5242 $254 $267
STATION SUPPLIES S65 SM $72 $75 579 $83 $87 $92
FHUW SLFP= $4 $5 $5 $5 S5 $6 $6 $6
CAS 8 OIL.AMOS SO $0 su n 40 So $0 $0
MAPPIM PAaJE7CT 5611 $641 $673 $707 5742 5779 $818 $859
FOOD so 50 So SO SO 50 SO $0
FBM STATION EQUIP. $0 SO SO So $0 SO SO SO
f Rsm Com. E7Q(IIP. S4.= 54.8M $5.045 $5.297 55.562 $5.840 $6.132 $6,439
!1 CLEC ISPVCH SERV. 5585 $814 $645 SM $711 $747 $784 $a23
RM STATIC HS SO 50 SO SO SO SO SO $O
imm STATION M.P. SM 549 $51 $54 SSS S59 $62 $65
PI IMAL SERVICE $1.022 S1.073 41.127 $1,183 $1.242 $1,304 $1.389 $1.436
Mipum SO SD $0 $0 so 50 $0 SO
FHYSICALS $350 $368 $366 5406 5428 $447 tem SM
} MMS $3.414 $3.585 $3.764 $3.952 54.154 $4.357 $4,575 $4,804
j SM.537 $27.864 $29.257 $30.72D $32.258 $33,869 $35.562 $37.340
FSECTRICM-ARC RD. So $0 SO $D SD SO $0 $0
SCCtiivm SO $O SO $0 $O SO m $0
TRAVEL. $231 5242 $254 $267 5280 $294 $30B $324
CONFERENCE E78'f1ES S74 578 $82 $86 SOO $95 $lat $105
Lrl=EKPENSES 5281 $295 5310 $325 534.2 $399 5377 $395
C4JES&SUBSCRIPTIONS $32 SM $35 $36 $38 $40 542 $44
°1MICN $426 5447 3489 $493 $517 $543 5570 5599
1 DIFM CPEPATIM SIM-769$162.507 5170.633$179.164 5188.123 3197.529 3207.405 5217.775
.-Ars 'JISMATIVE $12.332 $13.001 Si3.lr51 $14.333 515.050 S35.802 316,5W 537,422
CAPITAL cam 584.706 $80.038 575.369 $48.882 $43.493 $8.421 $4.990 $4.638
TOTAL 9-1-I COST 5251,859$255.546 5259.652 SM.360 SM.885 5711.752$x.228.987 3239.838
ECONOMIC,RESOURCE
ASSOCIATES
I
APPENDIX Page 46
AFFUDIX-TAME 7
POPUTATIUN PRU E TIONS BY JtRI',DIMCN
FY 87-68 FY 88-89 FY 89-W Flt 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-%
' WAWIIsi M COMM CENM
WA,SHnaM N COINIY 10.371 10.355 10.421 10.487 10.554 10.620 10.687 10,753
TIGAiD CFh_E,2
1UAIATIN 10.944 11.470 11.887 12.303 12,719 13.135 13,552 13,968
5 ?.858 21867 2.930 2,993 3.055 3,118 3,181 3,244
VLAWAAM 766 751 758 765 772 779 786 793
Kun CITY 1.919 1.878 1.881 1,885 1.890 1.895 1,900 1,904
TIGAAU 21.325 22,315 23.207 24.100 24.992 25,885 28.TT1 27.670
CIADCAMA3 DOWN CENPFR
CIACKAPFAS CTY 8.828 8,813 8,840 8.867 8.893 8,92D 8,947 8,973
I Wll_gaWUjA 4.101 4,084 4,206 4.329 4.451 4,573 4,895 4.818
RiVERO DNE 315 32D 318 317 315 314 312 311
r, onm
tl I=o5mm 1.133 1.151 1,171 1.191 1.211 1.230 1.230 1,270
TOTAL 62.561 64.002 6.8,819 67,236 68.3,+3 70.470 72,007 73.703
J
j
i
ECONOMIC RE"UNCE
ASSOt:"TES
APPENDIX Page 47
i
APPMOIX-TABLE 8
i
CALL Rl'SK SItBILITY BY JIRISDIC'PION
FY 87-68 FY 88-89 FY 89-90 FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92193 FY 93194 FY 94-%
KAMIITa"CCUNIY CENIER
VASHINMM CCINIY 5.589 5.580 5.616 5.651 5.687 5,723 5.758 5,794
TIONW CENrM
7UMATIN 5.632 5.903 6.117 6.331 6.545 6.759 6.973 7.187
SRER DM 1.471 1,476 1.508 1.540 1.572 1,605 1,637 1.669
OIRaIM 394 387 390 394 397 401 404 406
KIM MW 9m 968 968 970 973 975 977 980
TIMM 10.975 11.484 11.943 12,402 12.861 13.320 13.778 14.237
![1S^!WS CIY 3.701 3.695 3.706 3.717 3,728 3,739 3,750 3,761
j
.. ..i2 1.763 1,615 1.666 1,917 1,868 2.019
RIPE 132 134 133 133 132 132 131 130
omm
LAKE OSWS0 3.633 3.893 3.756 3.819 3.883 3.946 4.010 4,073
OSP 2,436 2.492 2,554 2,617 2,680 2,743 2,806 2.869
^^� =1 wa 6;"- 635 65i tm 681 696
TRFO 8.436 8.631 8.850 9.069 9,288 9.507 9.725 9.945
TJDL 45.698 48.757 47.926 49.094 50.263 51.431 52.600 53.768
1
l
�q
1
e ASSOcuaTES