City Council Budget Recap – Night One, Part One

A brief summer of roughly the first 4 hours – public input and 9th ambulance, with related budget cuts including the independent auditor (also amendment 4)

You can watch along here if you’d like:

GETTING STARTED

Mayor calls the meeting to order.

Roll call with every present except Syed Abbas who the clerk says “will be joining us shortly”.

Mayor says that they will take public comment on both operating and capital budgets first, then depending upon the hour they will take up the operating budget and then the capital budget and then other business to enact the budget.  She says they have an overflow room, but there are still open seats in the galleries.  If you would rather go to the overflow room it is in room 354 and she will be calling a couple of names in advance to give folks in the overflow room time to get down to the meeting. She asks observers to be quiet so the council can hear, if you feel the need to show support for a statement that was made please use your hands (holds her hands up over her head waving and shows motion of clapping with no noise), sigh language is good as opposed to making noise.  She says people will have 5 minutes of testimony on the budget, but you are not obligated to take the full five minutes but you do have to speak to all of the items that you would like to speak to in that five minutes so if you are hear to testify on more than on amendment you have to fit it in to your time.  Should they need to go to an additional night meetings, they will be in this room again because the county has concluded its budget, there is no way we will beat their record based on the amount of testimony we have, they managed in about an hours.  Since they are done, this chamber is available tomorrow if they need it.

Shiva Bidar moves suspension of the rules to take things out of order and introduce items at the meeting.

They move introduction of the one item on the agenda for introduction.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Mayor sends around the sheets of people who do not wish to speak so they can look through them, she will not be reading them because there is a substantial stack.

Early public comment 

• Speaker in opposition of 1b – works for Reach Dane in opposition to cutting the infant mental health consultant position to provide support for teachers.
• Mahlon Mitchell, President of Firefighters 311, he brought 50 firefighters and paramedics with him to speak in support of a 9th ambulance.  They are not asking that employees don’t get raises or take money from the young lady that spoke before him, but they are asking that they make it a priority for a 9th ambulance.
• Lt. Ted Higgins – firefighter in favor of 9th ambulance. We have one ambulance for 32,000 people.
• Eric Schroeder – supporting number 1 – paramedic for City of Madison.
• Jen Bailey – opposition to 1b – Executive Director of Reach Dane in opposition to cutting infant mental health consultant funding for Head Start.
• Nicholas Cleary in support of 2a – West District Neighborhood Resource Officer for police department.
• Joseph Tiller in support of amendment 1 in all versions, works for Madison Fire Department.
• Shadayra Kilfoy Flores in opposition to 1c and 4, keep the independent auditor.
• Amelia Royko Maurer in opposition to amendments 1a, 1c, 2a, 2b and 4 in support of the independent auditor.  (She runs out of time and they wouldn’t extend)
• People registered available to answer questions
  • Sue ? in opposition to 1a, 3c and 4.
  • Eric Halvorson in opposition to 2a.
  • Joseph Gangler in support of amendments 1a, 1b and 1c
  • Gary Mitchell in opposition to 1a, 1b, 1c and 2a
  • Neil Rainford in opposition to 1a, 1b, 1c and 2a
  • Rick Marks in opposition to 2a.

Questions of Early Public Comment Registrants

Donna Moreland wants to ask Jen Bailey a question but she left.

Public Comment

• Bill White in opposition to 1a on behalf of Olbrich Botanical Society, he’s the former board chair.  They raised $6M to match the city’s $6M to build a building and it wouldn’t make sense to take away the employee and leave it sit empty.
• Bob Schaefer opposition to 3, 11 and 12 and support of number 7 and wants to speak on 2a and 2b.  Support of police department, not in support of BRT.  He is in support of the Reindahl Library.  Doesn’t support lowering speed limits, we need more than that.
• Virginia Schultz in support of Capital Amendment 9, money to purchase the Hartmeyer land, she wants to preserve this wetland.  She also speaks in support of an additional ambulance.
• Liz Dannenbaum? in opposition to 1b.  President of Friends of Pinney Library in support of Pinney Library staffing.
• David Blaska isn’t opposed to BRT, its probably a good thing but that is what is driving this budget, he’s there to support more police, against police auditor.
• Lara Marinella opposition to 2a.  President of Madison City Attorneys Association in opposition to cutting employee wages.
• Bob Schaefer in support of 2a, 2b and opposition to 3 and 4.  He says we should support the police and give them the tools they need.  He is in opposition to the wheel tax, its not being used to repair the roads, but supplementing public transportation, its regressive.  He asks who audits the auditor?
• Greg Gelembiuk in opposition to 2a, 2b, 4, 1a, 1c and 1b.  Crime is not rising, its declining.  Adding police won’t decrease time, investing in social services does.
• Paul Terranova in opposition to 1a and 1c.  Executive Director at Lussier Education Center, please don’t reduce funding to community building and engagement.
• Michael Meloy (sp?) in support of 4, 3 and 1.  Madison police officer, fund more police not independent monitor.
• Patrick Melloy (sp?) in support of 4 and 2.  Retired Madison police officer (33 years), before you have a police auditor consider the impact it will have on them.
• Stephanie Franklin in support of 7 and in opposition to 1a and 1b.  Executive Director of the Madison Parks Foundation speaking on Warner Park funding.
• Sharon Irwin in opposition to 4, 1c – support the independent auditor, it will save money in the long run.
• Latoya Greer in opposition to 4.  Supports the independent auditor.
• Chris Raeder in support of 2a. Downtown resident concerned about panhandling on State St. because people don’t think it’s safe.
• Paul Milner in support of 9. Works with parks friends groups, its important to have urban nature and natural spaces.
• Sondra Meier amendment 2a and b. lives downtown, owned a business for 30 years and works at the retirement center and is concerned about the decline of the quality of life downtown.  Wants to add more police to address aggressive panhandling, the camping the public urination and the dangerous thugs and gangs that haunt the square.
• Walt Jackson in opposition to 1a, 1b, 1c and 2a.  Vice President of the City of Madison Employee Association AFSCME Local 6000 and treasurer of State of Wisconsin AFSCME Council 32.  Supports a pay raise, reject reducing that raise.
• Anthony Cooper in support of 5.  CEO of Focus Interruption Coalition, violence interrupters and supports the additional $25,000.
• Jackie Morris – had to leave so Jerome Dillard speaks, all in support of Focused Interruption Coalition.
• Dennis Cumberford (sp?) in support of 1a and 2a.  He supports the ambulance but not Bus Rapid Transit and he’s a bus rider.
• Wendy Klugman didn’t want to speak but was there on amendment 1
• Gerald Thomas in support of 5, President of Thomas & Associates Services, Metnal Health and Substance Abuse and Race Relations Agency.  Was Chair of Board at MATC, he works with the Focused Interruption Coalition and supports funding them.
• Steven Morgan in support of 1a, 1b and 1c.  Doesn’t speak.
• Andrew Muir in support of 2 and 4.  Madison police officer.  He also speaks to needing new ambulance as well.  Concerned about details of independent auditor.
• Kim Jorgenson in opposition to 4.  Supports independent monitor.
• Dan Rolfs in opposition of 2a.  President of the Madison Professional and Supervisory Employee Associations (MPSEA), please reject the cut in the pay increase, we need pay equity.
• Keith Findley in opposition to 1a, 1c and 4 – Served on Ad Hoc Police Policy and Procedure Review Committee for past 4 years and has been co-chair for the past two years.  He is a supporter of the MPD, he isn’t there to oppose more officers, but it is not fair to treat it as a trade off with the office of independent auditor.
• Miles Pringle (sp?) in support of 1c and 2a – He’s with Dylan ?, he’s the president of a fraternity on Langdon St., Dylan is Vice President.  They are there to support Madison Police and against independent auditor.

Questions of Registrants

Syed Abbas asks Keith Findley about the job description for the Police Auditor, how did they come up with $200,000, why not $150,000, why not $160,000.  Keith Findley says the committee didn’t set a figure, it was the mayor’s suggestion.  They just said it needed to be funded at a sufficient level to hire an appropriately qualified professional plus support staff and associated expenses.

Sheri Carter asks Keith Findley about the research on the independent auditor, how many staff did you find in those offices.  Is it one or three people.  Findley says its depends upon the size of the city.  Carter asks if they came up with a range of staff people.  Findley says that Denver has a number of staff people, but its a much larger city.  The office they are recommending is unique, borrowing pieces from various model and there was no other model like they are recommending. They thought it would take at least one full time monitor and when the monitor started doing the work they would be able to assess the volume of the work and if additional staff were needed but they could start with one person.

Barbara McKinney says she respects the work and commitment of the committee.  She reads from the report on the recommendation and asks how much time they took to come up with this recommendations.  Findley says the independent auditor is the central recommendation of the report, because they think it is important to have civilian oversight of the police and they think it is the best way to improve the police department relationships with the community.  All of the other 176 recommendations they made need to be implemented fully and continue generating additional recommendations.  They knew it would be one person, but one of the responsibilities is to take independent complaints against personnel.  They have very little information on how many times that would arise.  That is the kind of thing the committee thought could only be learned through experience.  Their view, which they discussed extensively, was that they needed to get it started and see what the volume of work is.They discussed all aspects of the independent monitor over the course of many meetings quite extensively and a significant part of that was not only what the position would look like but how busy they would be.

McKinney asks about the comparison to the PFC, was there any consideration of the PSRC (Public Safety Review Committee) because that has civilians as well.  Findley says that wasn’t discussed as extensively because they thought that committee had a different charge and different make up than they thought was needed for the civilian review board they were considering.  A tremendous amount of debate and thought went into the sections of that report.  This is the most detailed section of this report.  A lot of thought and detail went into how to create the civilian review board and if you compare that to how PSRC is constituted and the tasks are quite different.  The way that committee is constituted is essential to its success and its quite different.  Could the existing committee be turned into it yes, but in their view it would have to be reconstituted in really significant ways.

McKinney says with the current make up for the PSRC it does not fit the parameters that are important in this report, but if the committee was to be reconstituted to be more in alignment would that be a possibility.  Findley says it would require reconstituting the committee in ways that are in line with the make up and mission and responsibilities and authority that they ascribed to the new civilian review board.  You could have it be one committee instead of two, but it would have to look more like what is in the report than what the current committee looks like.

Samba Baldeh says that one of the speakers said the qualifications of the office has not be created.  Does this person have to be an ex-police officer?  What would their training be?  Findley says they did not write the job description, that could go in a lot of different directions and they were deferring to the council and mayors office.  He says it should not be someone who has worked with the Madison Police Department because when you are talking about oversight, one of the things that has led to failure in other jurisdictions is when the overseer is too tied to the body being overseen you get “administrative agency capture” which diminishes the capacity.  It shouldn’t be someone from within the Madison Police Department.  Could it be someone with policing background from another jurisdiction, conceivably, but truthfully what would be really important is someone with legal training, a lawyer who is steeped in policing issues, the OIR group came heavily engaged in the legal arena and were so knowledgable about policing.  He would envision someone with that kind of background would be outstanding.  It needs to be someone who understands policing, who is trained in that and has a lot of contact with policing but doesn’t necessarily come from policing.  But also has the strength and courage to stand up to policing when needed and to work well with police and at the same time keep an appropriate distance from police.  There is not just one type of person that would fit that job, but those would be some of the considerations that a hiring committee would discuss.

Baldeh says they didn’t have any discussions around it, you just sent it to the mayor’s office.  Findley says they talked about it, they didn’t vote but it was the consensus that they needed to be knowledgable but also have distance from MPD.  They looked at monitors in other cities where they are lawyers who engaged in policing issues, could be someone from legal academia or an organization that studies policing, but they did not specify what that should look like.

Baldeh asks if this passes tonight if they will reach out to the Mayor’s office because this was not recommended.  Findley says they would be delighted to work with the Mayor’s office to provide input and come up with hiring criteria if that would be helpful.

Zach Henak thanks them for their work.  He wants his opinion on if the independence of a monitor reporting to a political official that gets elected every 4 years, how do we take the political aspect of this position or are you worried about that.  Findley says that is always a concern.  One way is to create a long term contract and the more you can do to build in independence the better served they will be.  You folks probably understand the political process better than we do to figure out how to incsulate employees or offices from political influences and anything you could do to ensure the independence of the monitor would be a good thing.  Henak asks if he is worried about the position reporting directly to the Mayor the council, would that worry you.  Findley says not entirely, the independence from the police department is more important. The monitor would be providing recommendations to the mayor and common council.  In some respects he doesn’t think it is entirely inappropriate for the political process to be telling the independent monitor what things are important to the city.  There is room for that kind of input.  In other jurisdictions the failure has been were the monitor was not sufficiently independent from law enforcement to provide a meaningful oversight function.  There is a need for some exchange with city leaders but you make a good point about needing independence and if you can build that in that would be appropriate.

Shiva Bidar thanks the committee for their work.  She says there was some communication issues, they were told were wasn’t a lot of work around the job description for the independent auditor and she points back to the 7 page section on the independent monitor.  There were 2 pages that outline the role.  Findley says yes, that is the most detailed part of the report that considers in great detail the powers, responsibilities, authority of this position.  That is the job duties, what they didn’t do was write the job qualifications, but the description is in detail in the report.

Carter asks when the report was completed.  He says its on the report – October 18th.  She asks when the report was distributed to the council.  He only knows when they completed it and forwarded it to city officials, he doesn’t know how it was disseminated.

Carter asks if he said the auditor would need knowledge of police training and practices.  He says yes.

Henak asks about the job description from the committee in the report that hasn’t been voted on by the council.  Findley says the full report hasn’t been voted on, but the council voted on the recommendation separately.  Henak says this position is in the mayor’s office – would the mayor’s office do a job description.  Mayor interrupts and says that is not a question for Mr. Findley, but she would be happy to answer questions after public testimony.

Donna Moreland asks about page 29 of the report that says the MPD did not oppose the independent auditor position.  Findley says the feedback was that they did not oppose it and they could see merit in it depending upon how it was done.

Rebecca Kemble asks Amelia Royko Maurer about when she was cut off when talking about officer Anderson and how an independent monitor might have been a good fit for that point, can you finish.  Royko Maurer says the reason she brought this up was that she thinks its someone who deeply engages in root cause analysis and investigates something with the purpose of uncovering facts rather than starting with a desired outcome and working it backwards.  It’s important and here’s why.  On Oct 2 Officer Sarah Anderson forgot her AR-15 rifle in her squad car, another officer found it and returned it to the armory, this is not an unusual occurrence among officers.  After being shown the rifle Officer Heimness tried to figure out “how to embarrass her” – she is reading from a police report.  Officer Drolinger (sp?) dismantled the rifle and Heimsness hid it in the armory with an unsigned note to Anderson.  Anderson goes to work on Oct 7, finds her rifle missing, she reports it to the officer in charge, Lt. Stephanie Bradley Wilson, another supervisor finds it on the back shelf hidden under some cases.  I read the interview with officer Anderson and she was terrified.  Shaken so badly by the fact she could not find her gun.  An internal investigation is launched, Heimsness is suspected to be involved. On Oct 7 Anderson tells supervisors she felt harassed and worried about Heimsness slashing out again.  He was on the union board at the time.  Heimsness lied to Lt Wilson when asked about his involvement in the incident.  On Oct 7, Lt Kristin Roman who is now the UW Police Chief forwarded Heimsness’ response to her commanders noting “Heinsness it was, good that he feels like he should take things into his own hands like this”.  On the 8th Heimsness denies involvement in an email to Anderson which he forwarded to Roman.  On Oct 15, Captain Carl Gloede in the central district told Roman that the incident had been brought up to Chief Noble Wray during a management team meeting and he was inquiring about it.  Roman responded she would schedule interviews with Anderson and Heimsness the following week to investigate, but she didn’t.  She waited until January of 2013 after Heimsness had killed Paulie. On Oct 19 2012 Heimsness messages Sergeant Galon Wearing on the police computer that Anderson “didn’t dig our peer to peer counseling methodology”, “not harassment” Wearing responded “it promotes best practices.”  Oct 19 2012 Heimsness told another patrol officer that Anderson was a “whiner” who “crapped a brick” claiming we harassed her and ran to a Lt. and she is apparently getting written up for it.  On the 19th Heimsness wrote to an officer who’s name was redacted “oops, that didn’t work out like you thought, did it, lol.”  Oct 29 Roman and Lt. Radovan detail their concerns not about Heimsness fitness for duty but Anderson’s and insist that she needed a break and she was encouraged to take family leave or she would be put on the less honorable administrative leave.  No matter what, it was not optional.  On the 29th they let her know that she was forced to take family leave.  The complaint was made on Oct 7th and she was forced to leave on the 29th.  Roman had time to interview them, Roman claims she didn’t have time and then Anderson was gone, but she was not, she was there for at least 22 days.  On Nov 9th Heimsness encounters unarmed Paul Heenan and he shoots and kills him over a brief struggle on S. Baldwin St.  Between Oct 29 and Nov 9th, Heimsness had made statements on the police computer such as “I’m the right cop for the wrong job, no witnesses, no problem”, “I’m about to snap”, he said he wanted to go up to dispatch and shoot people and that he just wanted to shoot someone, co-workers, anyone. He also let people know he had gone to executive management asking them to fix something about the 911 call center – they were reporting incidents as if every single thing was a homicide.  No one was listening to his complaints, none of his colleagues were letting anyone know that he was writing like an active shooter on the police computer.  On Dec 27, District Attorney Ozanne clears Heimsness of any criminal neglect in the killing of Paul Heenan. On the 9th Chief Wray announces Heimsness followed departmental protocol and that he would return to duty.  On Jan 14th Anderson emailed her supervisors asking about the status of the investigation.  Anderson is why they looked deeper into Heimsness background, not because he killed an unarmed guy.  On Jan 17 Heimsness is finally interviewed about the missing rifle and admits his involvement.  On the 17th he tells Roman about Anderson that “she doesn’t need to be pulled in for discipline” our intention at the time was that we wanted some peer to peer counseling with her.  In his mind he’s still thinking she would get disciplined not him.  Why is that.  On Jan 7th they met with Chief Noble Wray and asked him if he trusted Steve Heimsness to be honest and safe, and he said yes.  On the 31st Anderson is interviewed on her complaint for the first time.  Complaint was made on Oct 7 and she is interviewed for the first time on Jan 31.  Feb 1st Wray tells reporters Heimsness is being investigated for reasons unrelated to the Heenan shooting, including an incident in Oct 2012.  The officer who initially found Anderson’s rifle acknowledges he only found binders and folders in the trunk of the squad car and it wasn’t something he was upset about, he didn’t think he needed to address the issue with Anderson.  For goal setting Kelly Donohue writes that Anderson who was a mental health liaison officer is often complimented for her ability to work in difficult populations and calls for social services.  The department never raised concerns about her fitness for duty until the rifle incident.  On April 4th Anderson is given desk work, which no officer wants, its really humiliating apparently.  A month later her supervisors inform her that a doctor who’d performed a department ordered mental health exam had found her unfit for duty, she was removed from the force, she is denied disability retirement benefits.  On June 21st Chief Wray files a complaint with the PFC seeking to fire Heimsness, alleging not 5, not 10, not 20, but 118 counts of misconduct by Heimsness in a 3 month period.  These included his alleged harassment of Anders, the mishandling of her rifle, a pattern of misrepresentation, commission and false statement, including violent, racist and sexist statements.  Heimsness is accused of a number of departmental policy violations during those months including insulting, defamatory, obscene language, lied on duty, violated firearms safety protocols, disrespected a supervisor, misused city property, violated policies regarding harassment, discrimination and work place violence prevention.  Dan Frei, the President of the Madison Police Officers Association (MPPOA), the union, defended Heimsness’ conduct at the time, said he was just misunderstood by the public and that he wasn’t the only one that behaved like that.  On June 28th Heimsness agrees to resign by November 2013 before the complaint is heard by the Police and Fire Commission, he gets full state disability.  The Isthmus filed open records, Susan Anderson is again denied disability and gets zero representation from the MPPOA and WI organization.  Heimsness was also reprimanded in 2001 for shooting at a car full of people in a parking ramp, he was put on unpaid leave for 15 days.  In 2006 he beat a man so severely in State St. Brats the one of the worker went and hid in the cooler and called 911 on him.  And then we have all of this. An independent monitor and civilian review board would have saved Chief Wray the embarrassment of exposing his severe lack in oversight that wouldn’t occur if there was a civilian review board.  They wouldn’t allow it to occur.  She spoke to civilian review expert Joe Lapari (sp) who headed up the Syracuse citizen review board – and asked if the civilian review board caused discord between the Mayor and Police Chief and he said they have no evidence of that.  A chief that runs a clean department welcomes review because it increases trust.  There is zero evidence that there is more hard to officers because of an independent monitor.  But if there is some objective mechanism that isn’t afraid of being unelectable or demoted that can review officer behavior with root cause analysis with everybody’s best interest in mind, we can prevent tragedies like this. This death wasn’t a split second decision, it was a series of cascading events over a period of 15 years.

McKinney asks someone if they registered to speak – didn’t hear the name.  McKinney asks who wrote the job description for the independent auditor.  Greg Gelembiuk says that the duties were written collectively by the committee, they met over many meetings, discussed at great length and collectively came up with the description based on various sources and elements were taken from different modals, much was based on Denver.

They close the public hearing and they take a 10 minute recess.

OPERATING BUDGET

Bidar moves adopted as “adopted” – I think she means “amended” by the Finance Committee, there is a second.

Amendment 1a – 9th Ambulance/July Recruit – Cut Police Auditor, Community Building, Warner Teen Specialist and Gym Monitor and Olbrich Staffing 

Alders Henak, Tierney sponsor

Add 10.0 FTE Firefighters to the Fire Department budget to staff a 9th ambulance housed at Station 14 and appropriate $577,600 for salaries, benefits, supplies and purchased services for the recruits to begin in an academy in July 2020.

• Make the following reductions totaling $499,432 in the General Fund:
  • Eliminate the Police Auditor Position: GF Savings=$200,000
  • Eliminate the increase from Community Building & Engagement: GF Savings=$115,000
  • Eliminate funding for Warner Park Teen Specialist and remove increase for Gym Monitor: GF Savings=$81,500
  • Reduce Olbrich Staffing to half a year (GF Savings=$57,500)

Analysis: The amendment proposes creating 10 additional Firefighter positions to staff an ambulance at Fire Station 14. Beginning in 2021, the annualized cost of these positions is $826,000.

The amendment proposes funding these increases by a variety of reductions to General Fund expenditures totaling $454,182.  With the exception of a half year of staffing for Olbrich, all of the savings proposed in the amendment will be ongoing.

Motion

Henak moves “substitute 1a”

Add 10.0 FTE Firefighters to the Fire Department budget to staff a 9th ambulance housed at Station 14 and appropriate $577,600 for salaries, benefits, supplies and purchased services for the recruits to begin in an academy in July 2020.

Make the following reductions totaling $457,500 in the General Fund:

• Eliminate the Police Auditor Position: GF Savings=$200,000
• Eliminate the increase from Community Building & Engagement: GF Savings=$115,000
• Eliminate funding to increase snow and ice control on arterial shared use paths that was added to the budget via FC
• Amendment #21: GF Savings=$65,000
• Reduce Olbrich Staffing to half a year: GF Savings=$57,500
• Eliminate funding for Digital Equity that was added to the budget via FC Amendment #16: GF Savings=$20,000

Questions for staff

Henak asks Chief Davis to give an example of the difference or volume of calls fire related vs. EMS calls.  Chief Davis asks if he means citywide?  Davis says that for 2019 they have had 28,000 calls for service, about 68% are EMS related, an ambulance call. Henak asks when the last time they purchased an ambulance was?  Chief says 2010.  henak asks how long they have been looking to add a 9th ambulance.  Davis said 2013 when they talked about Station 14 and they worked with Alder Jill Johnson and Denise DeMarb.  Henak asks about the differences in response times.  Davis says the goal is developed through the NFPA standards and they make recommendations for cities our size and they recommend a 5 minute response time for basic life support – the engine companies that have EMTs and basic life support and an 8 minute responses time for the ALS ambulance to arrive on scene and the goal is 90% of the time.  They meet the standards about 78% of the time.  The number of that percentage has gone up with the introduction fo the Basic life engine with a  paramedic at Station 14 because that was a big hole in the city, they met it 68-70% of the time before Station 14 came on line, they have seen a 10% increase over all.

(I couldn’t hear who this is) I’m guessing Lemmer or Rohrer.  She asks if the they can’t provide the ambulance in 2020 would the physical ambulance still be of use in 2020.  Davis says yes, they would take the physical ambulance, last year this body took a step to put it in place by increasing the paramedics by 12, a last minute negotiation.  They worked this year to get them in place.  Right now the issues isn’t trained paramedics, but its the 12 bodies to replace the 10 bodies on the engines now.  The ambulance would be a step towards providing the service.  But if there are no staff they couldn’t use it.  She says that she will introduce and alternate to purchase the ambulance in 2021.

Syed Abbas asks how many staff are needed for one ambulance?  Davis says 10.  Abbas asks, “not 6?”  Davis says there are 3 24 hour shifts and each one of those positions for an ambulance requires 3 to 3.5 people per shift, so that is how they get to ten.  Abbas asks if they have a reserve ambulance.  Davis says there are 8 front line ambulances and 6 reserve ambulances which are used when the physical ambulance goes down for maintenance or it breaks down.  Abbas asks if the reserve ambulance can be used for a 9th ambulance – Davis says yes.

Carter asks the response time before Station 14 and the response time now.  Davis says 12 minutes when it was served by station 5 on Cottage Grove Road and this year it is around 5 minutes.  4 minutes and 35 seconds on average.

Henak asks if the times are for basic life support or advanced life support.  They have one paramedic assigned so it is Advanced life support. The engine can get on scene and the paramedic can provide advanced life support but they don’t have transport capabilities.  Henak asks if the response time of the ambulance is significantly longer?  Davis says the ambulance for conveyance is still around 12 minutes.

Martin asks if there are statistics or knowledge about how often fire departments from other jurisdictions serve Madison addresses and how often the City goes outside the City to help.  Davis says that he doesn’t have the statistics in front of him.  They go out 2:1 ratio.  it’s a little tricky because they have an agreement with surrounding municipalities that have paramedic services that are like services – Middleton, Fitchrona, Sun Prairie, Monona – that they have a border drop and the closest ambulance goes to that address.  Some of the data is skewed especially on the South West side with station 7 on McKenna Blvd, where Fitchrona is physically closer and they are sent automatically instead of Station 7.

Discussion

Henak says that this was brought to him from Tierney and residents in his district.  He says they have been needing a ambulance for a long time and there is one district that has a different level of service than the rest of the city.  We can’t get the political will power because it is only affecting one alder.

Michael Tierney thanks Alder Henak.  he says this is the most common issue he hears about in his district.  He says people understood when the district was still in development and why it took longer to get the services established but now that the subdivisions are build out and they get their tax bills, they wonder why it takes so long.  It can be 12 minutes on a good run, it can be even longer.  There are frequent calls to HoChunk, so when the medic from station 5 goes there it leaves a gaping hole in Southeast Madison and they relay on the station on W. Badger Rd or Lien Rd.  It has a huge impact.  Business owner in his district that is light industrial where there is lots of opportunity for accidents and business owners and workers are worried about their safety.  We have a budget system that goes back to before levy limits in 2006 and in the past an alder or mayor could put this in the budget and sell it to their constituents and show there was a need.  it’s highly frustrating the position the state has put them in, they are forced to make tough decisions with limited dollars.  He takes great exception to the speaker who said this was unethical.  The fact is we can try to re-write the budget and make cuts to agencies but that’s not going to work.  Our budget and provision of services to residents is efficient, we don’t have a lot of fat to cut and the room we have under levy limits and the formula is insufficient.  It puts us in the position to make decisions they would rather not make – he put his name on an amendment to reduce salary increase, he doesn’t want to do that.  If he has people in his district that are concerned that their children with medical conditions may end up dying because an ambulance won’t get there, or elderly people who are concerned if they have a stroke or heart attack that the ambulance isn’t going to arrive, then those are the kinds of decisions he is willing to make.  In terms of the police auditor positions, if its going to be truly independent, he doesn’t know if it should be city funded, perhaps there should be another funding mechanism.  He says they talked a lot about influence from the police and city government over the auditor position, but what protection is there from people who have it in for the police department.  Is that person going to be chastised and gone after the first time something goes wrong and they review it and they find no wrong doing.  He says they can hold off at this time if they can save lives every day by having another ambulance in service.

Bidar appreciates Tierney’s comments, especially the levy limit predicament. And the important of the 9th ambulance across the city.  She wants to remind them of the words from alder Carter able the deep care we have for the entire city and not just our district.  She hopes they don’t continue the narrative about caring more or less about parts of our city because it is not their district – that is not what she sees in her colleagues. They are deeply committed to the fire department.  It took a lot of political will with the previous executive administration to get station 14 built and many of us here today have many  scars to prove what it took to get there.  We have seen improvement, we aren’t where we want to be, but all of the cuts being proposed are also things we care deeply about.  She cannot support cuts to community building and engagement, she can’t think of a more important speaker tonight that spoke about the neighbors and how they help with public safety.  She can’t cut the police auditor which was a cornerstone of 4 years of work by the committee.  She can’t cut Olbrich staffing, the child mental health specialist.  None of the amendments gets them holistically to $826,000 that 1 b requires.  She personally will work with the Mayor, Chief Davis and others to think about how to get the staffing for the 9th ambulance in 2021.  She can’t see a path forward for 2020.  She says it saddens every one of them to not be able to do more and it the constraints placed on them.

Levy Limit Update

Mayor asks finance department to update them.  Dave Schmiedicke the Finance Director says after finance committee and an adjustment that needed to be made, there is $136,000 remaining before reaching the maximum allowable levy.  With this substitute, if it passed there would be $16,000 of levy room.

Vote

• Aye – Skidmore, Tierney, Abbas, Baldeh, Henak
• No – Moreland, Rohrer, Rummel, Verveer, Albouras, Bidar, Carter, Evers, Foster, Furman, Harrington-McKinney, Heck, Kemble, Lemmer, Martin

Amendment 1b – 9th Ambulance – July Recruit – Eliminate Newly Created Positions

Moreland, Tierney sponsors

UPDATE: Originally not included in the packet

Amendment 1c – 9th Ambulance, Fall Recruit/Various Reductions

Tierney and Skidmore sponsor

UPDATE: Originally not included in the packet

This is getting long, so I’m doing a second post which is here!

MORE

All 5 posts in this series are here:

• Common Council Budget Recap – Night One, Part One
• Common Council Budget Recap – Night One, Part Two
• Council Budget Meeting Recap – Night Two, Operating Budget
• Council Budget Meeting Recap – Night 2 Capital Budget (Amdmts 1-6)
• Council Budget Meeting Recap – Night 2 Capital Budget (Amdmts 7-12)