— by Margie Doyle —
At the November 26 meeting of Orcas Island Fire & Rescue (OIFR) District Commissioners, the plans for a levy amount to replace the current levy (established in 1999) were questioned by Commissioner Clyde Duke. His comments were echoed by some of the public attendees at the meeting. Others cited inflation as the chief culprit in OIFR’s increased costs.
The current levy expires Dec. 31 2014. That 15-year levy provided for capital improvements such as the Eastsound Fire Station, the Deer Harbor Fire Station, and new vehicles; it also provided for improved benefits for Fire & Rescue volunteers. In 2013 the levy was $2.004 million; in 2014, the approved levy for 2014 is for $2.048 million. The 2014 approved budget (at the Nov. 19 meeting) is for $1,947,257, of which $1.687 million is operational expenses, and $259,816 is for capital expenditure.
Chief O’Brien explained that the proposed 2015 levy amount essentially provides for general maintenance and operations and some reserves, but “does not provide for strong robust replacement of capital equipment.
“What I’m proposing is renew the levy at around the amount we are funded today. Down the road we’ll have to look at other alternatives for replacement and refurbishment of other equipment.” He noted that 22 pieces of equipment need to be maintained and replaced on a rotation schedule over 20 years.
O’Brien explained that the current levy rate is just over $1 per thousand property valuation; and the levy rate changes with real estate values (the millage rate).
“If we were to not renew the levy, it would roll back to the “perpetual” fire levy of $908,000. We would have to consider shutting some stations down, cutting staff and volunteers,” O’Brien said
He added that an EMS levy is “not in place, The district has the option to establish one; it would require passage by a super-majority of voters.”
Commissioner Jim Coffin said that, while the levy proposal was “thin on capital improvement, that may be a good thing. The starting point is the current levy [amount] and a term of 15 years.”
However, Clyde Duke expressed some reservations, stating his “pulse on the community. We’re going to say to the public that now our concern is just to maintain [what’s been achieved in the past 15 years]. Even with inflation and the cost of business, I think we’re heavy.
“As a commission, our responsibility is governance; we have to have our finances in place to survive. I think we could sell this because of all the good will; but I would feel that we’re over-reaching.”
Duke referenced other districts that are “moving away from a tax district to a user district,” replacing some funds with fees for services.
When Coffin recalled that “support for fee-for-service was not there two years ago” in regards to insurance companies reimbursing ambulance services, Duke responded, “I was one of them, but I’d support that fee-for-service over this budget.”
Commissioner Barbara Bedell said that she was opposed to fees for transport. “That would confuse the issue and make it more problematic,”
Duke persisted, asking how much operational costs have increased in the last three to five years.
Coffin again repeated his claim that “for necessary capital replacements, this levy is quite skinny. We could cut operating and move into capital reserve and still be skinny in capital funds.
“What additional information do we need?” he asked.
Duke said his concern “is the cost of doing business. It’s a matter of where the appropriate dollars are spent, the balance of capital vs. operations vs. other, which is our volunteers.”
Chief O’Brien said, “The cost of providing any sort of business has gone up over the years.” He cited the inflation rate since 1999 as being 37 percent and gave the example of bunker gear cost which has increased 300 percent since 1999.
He added that call volume has gone up and regulatory compliance issues have increased.
Duke suggested that the commission “engage with our volunteers and the public. I’m a gut guy; I think we’re awesome, but I think we could do better. I think listening is a good thing.”
Coffin asked for specifics on how the district can do better; and Duke said he would bring suggestions to the next meeting (on Dec. 10).
From the public Jobin Suthergreen said, “It’s a truism that organizations tend to grow into whatever budget amount we have. When you have to cut, you start out thinking you can’t; but you find ways to do it.
She recalled that in 1999, the money being asked for was “for a one-shot deal and wasn’t going to be asked for again.
“You have a fiduciary responsibility to the public. I’d like to understand why, when you put this levy forward, you said repeatedly the money that was for capital expenditures will be folded into normal operations. I’d like to see that justified.
“I’d like to see you guys are just as eager to keep a lean budget as we have to with our families.”
Art Lange said he shared Suthergreen’s attitude: “I consider myself an extreme fiscal conservative.” But, he added, “I’ve looked at [the budget] hard and found it hard to find what to cut without a significant reduction of quality of service.”
Lange commented that, regarding the idea of fee-for-service, “Focus groups’ overwhelming message was, it’s fine to charge people who are visiting, and it’s fair to charge insurance companies but not out-of-pocket because we already pay taxes.”
Bob Phalan commented that the current levy accommodates a budget with “top-heavy administration, with wages and benefits.”
Facts:
In 2006 Orcas Fire had 8 full time employees at a cost of $580469.
The 2014 budget calls for 13 employees at a cost of $984395 (plus unclear benefits totals)
That is an increase of at least 60% for paid staff alone.
I would say that Ms. Suthergreen’s statement that “It’s a truism that organizations tend to grow into whatever budget amount we have” hit the nail on the head.
I am very familiar with the Fire Dept Budget and every year we have been adding cost of running the
District. We all got mad when the first assistant
chief position came up for $90,000. but now that
position is costing the taxpayer $85,000. plus benefits and next year we will be adding another
full time position at a cost of 45,000.+. Can this
department operate with a little less money, YES
When the current levy passed in 1999 I knew that even though a good chunk of it was capital improvement an attempt would be made to justify the same amount when the levy ran out. All of the capital improvements should have been voted on seperatly as a bond. The same thing should happen now. If the public wants newer equipment they will vote for it.
In addition changing this equipment every 20 years is ridiculous. This equipment hardly gets used and maybe we should be thinking 30 or 40 years. This is a volunteer fire department with a bloated bureaucracy on top similar to the Federal government. Separate the operating budget from perceived capital needs. Cut the paid staff, we are not Bellevue. Get real you have fed at the trough long enough. The fact that you want to change equipment as often as you do shows how out of touch with reality you are.
Good comments. Maybe provide some options separating Capital Improvrmrnts (Bond) and Operating Expenses (Levy) with varying amortization periods, i.e Bonds for long term and levies for short term all with detailed justifications i.e. Plan A, Plan B, etc. The electorate could then ponder the choices?