Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Fire Service topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

El Cajon council approves fee for repeat non‑emergency lift assists at congregate care facilities

2904627 · April 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council voted unanimously to move forward with a city ordinance imposing a $5.65 fee for repeat non‑emergent lift‑assist calls originating from congregate care facilities. Staff said the fee is cost‑recovery based on mutual‑aid OES reimbursement rates and will be subject to the city's normal appeal process.

The El Cajon City Council on April 8 approved a measure to institute a fee for repeat non‑emergency lift‑assist calls originating from congregate care facilities, with the council voting unanimously to adopt the policy as recommended by staff.

Senior management analyst Barbara Watkins presented the proposal, explaining the fee is intended to address repeated non‑emergent calls to fire crews that use resources needed for higher‑priority incidents. Staff recommended a fee of $5.65 per non‑emergent lift assist and described the calculation as based on operational costs — personnel, equipment and time — and tied to the Office of Emergency Services (OES) reimbursable rates used in mutual‑aid agreements.

Watkins said the fee would be applied only to repeat non‑emergent users and that staff had been engaging congregate care facilities in advance to encourage internal processes to reduce 911 reliance for low‑risk incidents. She also explained that the fee revenue would go to the general fund and that the city has a normal administrative appeal process for any party that disputes a charge.

Council members asked whether the fee is punitive or solely cost recovery; staff confirmed the fee is for cost recovery and not intended as a penalty. Staff also said that the number of situations likely to be billed is smaller than initially thought after reviewing CAD data and that the fee represents a first step toward addressing the broader issue of non‑emergent transports and misuse of emergency resources.

A motion to adopt the ordinance was made and seconded; the motion carried by unanimous vote. Staff said, if directed, it would bring a first reading at the next meeting and schedule adoption with an effective date about 30 days after the final reading.