||| FROM LEITH TEMPLIN |||
Please take a moment to read this especially if you have not voted. Last week I wrote a response to something in Orcas Island Discussion because I was so frustrated with all the misinformation from the responses however, it never left my computer. I continue to be so frustrated with what is happening to the community I have supported, loved, and worked hard to make it a better place. Naively I thought we were protected here from mean spirited living. We used to be able to have a difference of opinion about issues or candidates but never attacked them personally.
We chose as a community to not vote in 2014 for a capitol levy to refurbish and replace our aging fire department vehicles for the last 10 years. Now ten years later we are at the end of the road. Our vehicles are from 15-30+ years old and there is no money without the current levy to fix or replace them. This will cause us to lose our fire rating of 6, that we have maintained for at least 20 years if not more. Losing this rating to a 7 or 8 will cause all our house fire insurance to go up 14-20% depending on where you live.
It is confusing for me to read all the comments about wanting to get rid of the current fire commission. The continuing diatribe from some community members with a grudge towards the department are trying to convince you of things that just are not true and that the commission needs changing. Well, the commission that they were so unhappy with has changed. The last three yes, appointed members have only been there for 7, 9 and 12 months. They have worked hard to get up to speed at a very difficult financial time when no one else in the community would step up. They were the only ones who applied. As far as the ones they replaced, several community members viciously attacked them through public meetings, articles and emails accusing them of things that all were untrue and verified through investigations.
A well-qualified woman on the commission resigned because she could not believe the way they were being treated and did not move to Orcas to be treated like that (she wrote an amazing letter to the community when she resigned). Who were those men? Well one was retired from being head of the Secret Service for the USA and worked in the White House for four of our Presidents (Bush to Obama), the other is a financial/businessperson who goes all over the world to help large businesses in trouble. Lastly, thank goodness Tim Fuller is still one of your commissioners. He retired from being the Fire Chief for St Paul Minnesota and 30 years of fire and paramedic service. He served on several national fire committees and spoke before the US Senate on Fire issues. He followed his wife to Seattle where she was the CFO for the Seattle Seahawks, Sounders, and Paul Allen’s Vulcan Inc. While living in Redmond Tim was enjoying his retirement until the City of Redmond came to him and asked him to be their Interim Fire Chief and help them recruit a new Fire Chief, which he did. Then the city asked him to step in and be their Police Chief and later their Planning Director. Then he and his wife moved permanently to Orcas. The OIFR commissioners appointed Tim and then the voters elected him. Tim probably knows more about the fire industry than anyone in San Juan County. These three men are the men that Toni Knudsen demanded in a public commission meeting to resign as well as on her Facebook account.
Less than half of our registered voters voted in August so out of 4,688 voters, 1712 voted no for the fire levy.
A couple quick remarks. OIFR only has one full-time (bookkeeper/finance person) and two part-time administrative staff. They have more work than they can possibly do in a week. Two years ago, we had three full-time administrative staff. The mailer that was sent out was developed and printed in the fire house by Chief Holly and volunteers. It was assembled and folded by the same as well as family, community, and commission members. Some things the commission was blamed for had nothing to do with them. Those decisions were made by the Washington State Dept of Health and our SJC Medical Director.
Please, when you vote think about what the commission needs, remember it is not a popularity contest. I think Brian is a good guy and has some valuable experience but is he the one we need right now? He is a volunteer but has only attended one training course (last month) in the last three years. Alan has been past president(8Yrs) of the volunteers and current Director of our Mobile Integrated Health Program and has trained hundred of community members in CPR and updates our current EMTs with their mandatory continuing training requirements. He has been there in all the rebuilding of morale and in the last two years has seen the department become the happy place it once was. Nic Negulescu has brought fresh eyes to the board as well as business acumen and he has dedicated many hours to making OIFR the best it can be. He has no hidden agenda or old knowledge of the damage that some community members have caused to OIFR staff and commissioners. Please vote responsibly. Thank you for reading.
Leith,
Let me start by saying this is not a personal attack on you, but I think it is important to fact check your statements. I also have commentary on a few items you state. There was no “capital” levy nor was there a capital bond measure in 2014. There was one levy intended for maintenance, operations and equipment. Little was spent on equipment as the Chief has stated previously, with rationale she has provided related to the prior chief and his assumptions about costs of operations. I think many feel that capital and operations need separate levy and bonds so this does not happen again.
You were not the only one who applied for your open position, at least 2 others did. I am unaware that anyone even contacted the others who applied for your open position to see if they were interested in these other positions. Maybe then there would have been more applying. Either way, it is immaterial at this point, they will either be elected to their position, or not and replaced by one of the other candidates. This problem, if one actually exists, will be solved in 72 hours. We will have an elected board.
Since you are (were) on the finance committee of the commission lets fact check your numbers. From what I found using the final data sent to the state there were 4677 voters eligible to vote at the time of the August election. Of those, 2337 voted, for 49.96%, so I guess that is less than half as you point out, but only if we go to 2 significant digits and do not round the number. In the prior general election (non-presidential) on Orcas, there was a 76.4% turn-out. So doing the math, should 76.4% voted in the primary there would have been an additional 1235 votes available. Even if all 1235 voted voted in favor (a probability less that 0.26% statistically) the levy still would have lost by 477 votes.
Final two facts – 1. It is illegal, not just wrong, for the fire department to spend department resources on campaigns. This not only applies to the department, but also the commissioners, where one registered with the election office using his OIFR email address. 2. Departments should appropriately anticipate and budget for WA-DOH and local medical director mandates. I am assuming you are aware of the new WA-DOH trauma requirements? Did you budget for them?
Caution opinion – Chief Fuller is indeed an impressive fire service professional having served over 40 years in the fire service and retired from Redmond Fire. A good chief does not necessarily make a good commissioner as different skills are required. Not sure how Martha comes into play and I find it unacceptable that you even mentioned her related to a fire levy. Similar holds for the other firefighters running. The fire commission does not need a fire put out, nor CPR applied, and while they are generally older, they probably do not need enrollment in the MIH program. A commissioner must have knowledge of laws and good governance, not just good fire service experience.
Crabs in a bucket.
Wasps in a bottle.
High School Confidential.
Those are the metaphors that come to mind whenever I read yet another wordy angst-filled letter about OIFD.
OIFD, probably because it has been a somewhat murky male-dominated island institution, has become catnip for certain community activists (doubtless well-intentioned} who find fault with nearly every aspect of how the organization has been managed.
Why don’t we just hire a competent chief and let her set strategy and policy? Oh, wait, did we already do that?
With no guidance apart from innuendo, gossip, irrelevant personal attacks and obvious bias, why would any taxpayer vote to award massive yearly assessments to an organization that cannot govern itself nor communicate? This is a cultural, not a financial problem.
No do overs Lieth or sentimental history lessons please!
Fail the levy again and replace more board members.
As the administrator of the Orcas Island Discussion Forum I am very careful to disallow any and all personal attacks. Respectful discussion is the cornerstone of the page. So when you wrote that there is “mean spirited (commentary)” and “personal attacks” in our community I doubled back and read all of the comments concerning the fire department to make sure I hadn’t missed something. I found none.
Ironically, the only personal attacks and mean spirited comments in social media have been from the inner sanctum of OIFR. Among a few of the more outrageous comments included a friend of yours calling anyone requesting public records “A-HOLES”, from one of your paid (off island) captains -anyone against the levy is “trailer trash”, and the constant barrage of comments such as “disgruntled” or “ex-employees with grudges” has been the consistent and accepted message from you and the administration.
Moving on— I then checked for possible “misinformation” that you said has been spread. Upon review the only misinformation I found has come from OIFR. This is NOT a “one year increase” as your mailers implied. It is permanent. This is NOT an increase from $1.05/K to $1.06/K. This is an 83% increase from $.58/K to $1.06. And the 77% of voters against this levy (and your reelection) were, and are, NOT “uneducated” as the board stated in July when they voted unanimously to put the exact same levy on the ballot in November.
The fact is that our voters are very well educated and have seen the truth for themselves.
I respect and thank the board for their service. I’ve never attacked, or allowed an attack, on them personally. I simply, along with 77% of the voters, disagree with their approach. For the sake of the future success of OIFR we need to change the culture. We need to engage the voters rather than call them “A-holes” and “trailer trash”.
OIFR absolutely needs a new levy. Not a single person I know that is against this particular levy disagrees. They are not the enemy. Quite the opposite in fact. They all look forward to being welcomed into the discussion— and being heard.
Thank you, Leif. I appreciate your knowledge, background, and dedication to this island community. Speaking up in hopes of communicating has been a challenge lately. Thank you for willing to be a voice that tries to help communicate and further understanding beyond social media posts. Our current island dynamics would be an interesting social observation for scholars. (Probably not one any of us would be very proud of)
It’s all been said, but it needs saying again for those late to the party and confused by their ballots, and aspersions of blame cast in the letter above.
Know and understand that there were and still are genuine concerns backed by facts, fiscal spending numbers, and provable data that led to this election and call for change. Understand that showing up and asking legitimate questions is seen as ‘wasps in a bottle, crabs in a bucket’- whenever a dysfunctional power structure is threatened by eyes of scrutiny on it. People who assume authoritarian positions don’t like questions or any upset to the status quo – or insistence on transparency.
And we do insist.
Frankly, I’m sick of hearing about ‘qualifications’ being the only marker of competency for a commission seat. All this name-dropping and rank-pulling, as in the above letter, is manipulative grasping at straws. But since this letter brought it up, I don’t give a rat’s posterior about someone’s secret service position of top-down authority for four presidents. If anything, I find that kind of heavy handed authoritarian ranking and assumed entitlement alarming and a hindrance to democratic process.
What does a candidate stand for, what do they hope to accomplish? How well do they listen? Can they manage a complex budget? Will they obey State mandates on upkeep and replacement of equipment? Will they value safety and morale of our first responders and facilitate their successful effectiveness above all, should a disaster happen? Why do they want a commission seat? Who, and what, do they think they’ll represent or serve? How important is transparency and inclusion of all viewpoints to them? How – in what ways – will they earn our trust? Do they even bother to make or update a statement in the voters’ guide? All of these are telling.
Here are some things for voters to contemplate: (hidden in plain sight in the reprehensible bulk mailer): These are merely one person’s opinions – based on facts.
The huge NO for me on THIS levy – besides the permanent 82% increase over the current one, (bad enough for lower and fixed income taxpayers who will pay almost double on their land taxes) is that this commission and chief needlessly threw our two long-time resident EMTs under the bus. These are dedicated community servants who were volunteers for many years before becoming paid staff. These two are the last holdouts from the mass exodus and the 100% Vote of No Confidence due to administrative mistreatment and what I consider reckless spending on the wrong things. These last two people are singled out today and held hostage to get voters to pass this absurd levy. That’s extortion. The excuses made for this in the misleading mailer the new Chief authored, fall flat – given all the money that this administration and past ones have misspent on operations, hefty pay raises and golden parachutes for the new off island replacements, instead of upkeep and replacement of safety vehicles. Then the two EMTs on the chopping block are blamed in the mailer for all the money the district spent on them to complete paramedic school, which you then blame them for not completing. Ewww, and Ouch. What complete lack of delicacy and class.
The mailer cries ‘wasted money’ on the two sacrificial victims – while it hypocritically has rid the District of people who knew this community and replaced them with people who don’t know us, the lay of the land, or the history leading up to this election. But you are upset that now we voters want to wipe the slate clean of your own misspending and misdeeds? How double-standard.
Of course it’s all copacetic right now. The new hires are all getting paid super well, have collectively bargained for great benefits, while none of them stood up for the two who’ll be laid off to allow the rest of them such cushy benefits and pay. The newbies may be wonderfully compliant and cooperative – that’s great – due to knowing nothing of what went down before – except your versions of the truth, and none of the more disturbing or ugly truths that you blame us for knowing. Good. I hope this means they’ll be all too happy to keep moving forward in a Good Orderly Direction with a more responsive commission. But… it all nauseates me – the sacrificial victims that everyone benefits from, except themselves – and us.
This current commission – including the new Chief – had a chance to rectify or modify this levy and the threats hanging over these EMTs after the Primary. You didn’t. Same exact levy, same threats. If we don’t vote the levy in, these two people are laid off, effective the day after election – you couldn’t even keep them on til the end of the year, when the money to pay these two won’t run out before the end of 2024?! They get cashed out on their earned but unused PDOs and vacation days; no promise of rehiring, even – or severance, if not. So, the mailer and the campaigns lie about the urgency of the money situation. Why are you letting these EMTs go NOW? What an insult to a smart, generous, educated, and resilient community when you-all say there is only ONE way – this levy or the highway.
I could never vote for any commissioner, or feel trust or confidence in a chief who sacrifices their own without standing up to these kinds of tactics, but instead, authored that mailer! I had intended to spare the world my opinions, but this… this is too much.
Let the voters decide. And know, voters, that this same thing happened with the Port of Orcas in 2019 in the middle of a Master Plan gone awry, and the challengers won seats over 3 out of 4 incumbents. For a good while, the commission improved; things got better, wetland violations got mitigated, the Master Plan maps adjusted. It cost the Port a lot of money to fix things, but they did fix them – partly due to the efforts of a few people who kept dialoguing, kept providing them with facts and who contacted Ecology and insisted on a look at things. I thank them. People still came to meetings. Public Access is now at the beginning AND end of every meeting. Not required – but the right thing to do. Minutes are up on the website. Many good changes were made under those commissioners – one is running for reelection and I hope she gets in. The commissioners and new managers were responsive to all stakeholders – not just pilots or the aviation/ tourism industries, or big money. We now have Kim Kimple as our manager. She’s a long time local who knows our community, understands the Public Records and Open Meetings Act and how to facilitate meetings. She is constantly learning, and excited about it. She is there for all stakeholders. It CAN happen, and does – but the caveat is, that people have to keep showing up and stay involved, or backsliding happens in short order – elections go unopposed, and all that forward motion can get lost rapidly. Just as commissions have to work to earn trust, we have to work to keep engaging with them.
We can’t assume anything will stay transparent without continued involvement and dialogue. Vote – Stay involved. Local elections – and more important, the times between them – may be the only place left in government where we have a voice in democratic process. You are still needed after the crises are over! This is the blessing and burden of democratic process. Don’t expect a few individuals to do all the heavy lifting. Many heads, hands, and hearts lighten the load for everyone.
Voting people in is only a start. We then have to support them, and remind them of their campaign promises and the standards they aim to uphold if they seem to go off track.
We really can do better.
I am a 35-year member(retired) of OIFR. I fully agree that the department needs more money. However, the way they have structured the levy gives the commission a multimillion-dollar slush fund unsupervised by the taxpayers. We need a levy for operations and special levies for big ticket items.
I urge you all to vote no on the levy and vote in the a new commission.
The proposed levy will more than double property taxes for the fire district given the 13+% increase in property assessments this year for tax year 2024.
The last OIFD fire insurance inspection in 2019 gave high grades to OIFR equipment. There is at least one fire engine at each of the seven stations … all serviceable. OIFR money has been spent on people and ambulances, and not so much on fire equipment, but given there are fewer than 2 fires a month on average, the fire engines will need replacing, but does the district need five now ones plus to refurbishments in the next six year? Or is this more of wish list. Why not a new engine every three years for example? And should another brush truck be in the mix since most of the fires are in the summer months and (I suspect) are vegetation fires?
The WSRB insurance inspection is later this month. The conclusion Orcas Island will lose their current fire rating is pure negative speculation … could happen, but all the water systems are working, the training is current, and there are a significant number of volunteers. Leith might detail her specific reasons why the OIFD would be downgraded, and I seriously doubt it will because the fire engines are excessively old. It’s not like any of them are overworked … more that some of them may not get enough use and machinery being idle is not necessarily a good thing.
I’ve met nobody who thinks a reasonable levy increase, especially with the impending levy cliff starting in January 2025, is not needed.
Let’s give new elected commissioners and a more reasonable levy a try.
Robert Dashell – The “conclusion Orcas Island will lose their current fire rating is pure negative speculation” is false. According to my chief, It is what was communicated to the Chief by our WSRB point of contact based on 1) average age of equipment with no funded plan to improve and 2) the number of interior firefighters available to each station within 5 road miles. The WSRB are willing to give us credit for recruits committed to starting a near-future fire academy.
1) is part of the reason to seek funding for our strategic plan which includes recapitalization of our rolling stock.
2) is why we a soliciting volunteers before the WSRB visit for a fire academy to start in early 2024 (preliminary meetings in 2023).
Our WSRB review was initially scheduled before the election. We asked to re-schedule to after the election in an effort to improve our chances of retaining our fire rating of 6.
I’m sure the chief and the commissioners will be advocating for retaining our “6” rating, but there are objective metrics we apparently fall short of, regardless of our opinion that the WSRB metrics aren’t justified. I’m also sure that every volunteer and department member will do everything with our skill and resources to earn the highest rating possible.
Bruce Brackett – Passing a new levy will require 60% to pass. While I understand the desire to “fence” money so it can’t be diverted from important efforts like recapitalizing major equipment, I’m also concerned that it 1) is unlikely to pass, making any recapitalization impossible and 2) it ties the hands of what will be an entirely elected commission that should be empowered to make all necessary decisions on behalf of the voters that put them there.
I’ve heard talk of three separate levies (as I’ve seen proposed) will be even more problematic for both passage and administration.
In Reply to Tony Simpson — I welcome input from everyone and look forward to talking more about financing the needs of fire and ems services in more detail. If elected, I hope to call for public hearings to discuss the method of meeting the fire district revenue needs well before a proposal is put to the voters so all of these details can be discussed and analyzed.
A revised levy lid lift in April 2024 is possible and I hope the voters will see new options that are available. To pass, a levy would require fifty (50) percent voter approval. If capital projects and equipment upgrades were put in the same or separate levy lid lift it too would require fifty (50) percent approval, because an excess levy would not be necessary. If capital projects and equipment upgrades were financied with a municipal bond approved by the voters in April 2024, the funds would be available soon after voter approval. If a bond it put before the voters, sixty (60 ) percent voter approval will be required.
The fire district statutes call for districts to create funds for general expense (operations and maintenance); and many districts big and large also create funds for capital projects and and reserves. When received, the tax revenues are placed into each fund by the County Treasurer. It is not “problematic” and is common, and I hope such funds are created promtly with a new board of fire commissioners.
As to the rate people will pay for fire protection insurance, the WSRB makes clear they do not set rates, and WSRB has provided nothing in writing to say rates will change based upon the voter’s choice at the election on November 7. Each property owner’s insurance company sets rates. Anyone who is interested in how the $1.06/thousand levy or an alternative levy or bond in April 2024 will affect the cost of their property insurance is encouraged to contact their insurance agent.
Greg Ayers – See https://www.pdc.wa.gov/rules-enforcement/guidelines-restrictions/guidelines-local-government-agencies-election-campaigns
Quote, “b. The PDC will presume that every agency may distribute throughout its jurisdiction an objective and fair presentation of the facts for each ballot measure. If the agency distributes more than this jurisdiction-wide single publication, the agency must be able to demonstrate to the PDC that this conduct is normal and regular for that agency. In other words, the agency must be able to demonstrate that for other major policy issues facing the government jurisdiction, the agency has customarily communicated with its residents in a manner similar to that undertaken for the ballot measure.
I think it was this information which informed the department’s lawyer to advise that the mailing was authorized and you should note that it did not directly advocate a position on the proposal on the ballot. However, you are free to submit more claim of illegal conduct to the PDC and I would encourage you to do so if you feel strongly about the flyer residents received on Orcas Island.
That a sitting commissioner would share private OIFR training data to caste shade on a candidate is inappropriate and uncalled for.
I think the pass margin is really 50%+. Still…
We will recapitalize the department completely under the administration of a reconstituted board and the new levy to come will pass overwhelmingly. The new board will have broad and voter confirmed empowerment to make this happen.
We have all had a lovely political fight here. Everyone should be proud of our constitutionally provided chance to be involved.
The time has come to sunset our collective disagreements and join hands in support our new board and Chief Holly.
Tony Simpson,
OIFR has not sent out a mailer on any major policy matters so this is unusual per the code you cite. There has been no mailer at all for as long as I can remember. As far as accuracy the PDC can review that as well. That said, I was not going to report it to the PDC ——- but now you are on! Let’s let the PDC review and opine. I will file it in the morning and we will “bet the levy” on it. If you are right and the levy passes, you get your paid OIFR Training Director job. If I am right, and even if the levy passes, it will be ruled invalid as a result of the legal determination by PDC. Want to double down?
Greg, if you think it is a violation, I think it is your civic duty to report it. The department sent out a single mailer for the first ballot measure per the PDC guidance and sent out a single mailer for the second ballot measure per the PDC guidance. I think the chief consulted with the department lawyer who is well-versed in sub-municipal government issues and the MSRC website as well as the PDC. All seem to strongly suggest that it was entirely legal for a ballot measure. The last ballot measure was in 2013 and I suspect there was something mailed for that also.
I’m not “doubling down” on anything. Do what you think is right. That’s what guides me. For example, I do think our AED program needs to be revitalized and I’m working within the system to advocate my position. I’ve worked through our suppliers to obtain quotes and asked for the funding to be authorized to execute the purchase because arguably, early defibrillation may be the difference in a life or death in our district. The present chief seems receptive but I don’t know whether it is financially feasible at this point.
Mark my words. I will never apply for a full-time job with the fire department. That you think I would shows how little you know me. I only volunteered because Kevin O’Brien asked me to and I mistakenly thought it might be a replacement for the camaraderie that I enjoyed in the military. While volunteer morale is the highest I’ve seen it in 10 years, it will never be that kind of community.
“The “conclusion Orcas Island will lose their current fire rating is pure negative speculation” is false. According to my chief, It is what was communicated to the Chief by our WSRB point of contact based on 1) average age of equipment with no funded plan to improve and 2) the number of interior firefighters available to each station within 5 road miles. The WSRB are willing to give us credit for recruits committed to starting a near-future fire academy”
So how many interior firefighters (please define ‘interior firefighter’ for us plebes) are available to each station within 5 road miles? How many would have to come from off-island in the event of a wildfire in, say, Eastsound Urban Growth Area, where there is the largest density of clustered housing, businesses, and almost all of the island’s infrastructure (sitting atop one of the largest contiguous once-forested wetlands that Orcas has/had)?
How many interior firefighters are dedicated by the clustered population in UGA areas? Would that go by population density and how many lives and buildings can be potentially lost – or what? If by population, how many would the UGA area need to put out something massive? Do we have that number?
Wait – what? Starting a near-future fire academy? When? With what money? Who decided that? Who would be hired – as director and instructor(s)? Who’s doing the recruiting? Is this something the tax base and public knew about or knows about and is that needed now? Is this factored-in to the permanent levy without people knowing about it?
How many firefighters live here? How many don’t?
How many EMTs and paramedics live here? How many don’t?
I’m really curious as to why there has been such a hasty and huge push to make so much policy documents, effective Aug. 20, 2023 – and more policy revisions in Sept. 2023. What’s the rush? Why the rush? How does all of this affect incoming commissioners?
So many questions.
Ballots are due TOMORROW by 8 pm. Please drop them off at the Senior Center – there’s still plenty of time to Vote in this important general election.
Any incoming elected commissioners replacing an appointee will sit on the commission by end of November.
Randy, I am told you received this email (below) and it seems incongruent with your statements about WSRB ratings and impacts.
From: Robert Ferrell
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 7:35 AM
To: Holly vanSchaick
Subject: RE: [EXT] Orcas Island Fire and Rescue follow up
Chief vanSchaick,
It was great talking with you yesterday. To confirm your questions:
Yes, currently all seven of your fire stations carry a Protection Class (PC) 6 rating.
Correct, estimated 14% increase for going from PC 6 to PC 7 rating.
Correct, estimated 20% increase for going form PC 6 to PC 8 rating.
These estimates are averages and actual increases will vary from Insurance company to insurance company. Protection Class rating of a property is just one of many factors used by insurance companies to determine insurance premiums. The percent increases are based on only changing the PC rating and holding all the other factors constant, which does not often happen.
I will reply back at a later date with details on the information we have received for the rate update and options for a visit date.
Thank you and let me know if you have any additional questions.
Robert Ferrell, PE
Vice President Public Protection
WSRB
509-228-8062
robert.ferrell@wsrb.com
Sadie, I’m just a volunteer and not the expert but I’ve researched or sought out answers.
Each station is supposed to have 6 interior firefighters available within 5 road miles of the station for it to be counted as a station for a rating of 8 or less (better). This will come up below.
We recently had a wildland fire in the swale from an escaped illegal campfire on August 5th. It was contained and extinguished entirely with personnel from within the department.
By virtue of the population density, the greatest density of volunteer domiciles is in the Eastsound area (Station 21). In reality, the turnout of personnel and equipment is substantial with virtually every available firefighter from the entire island responding to the call and bringing almost every piece of equipment.
The advertisement for the fire academy is on the website and is physically posted in multiple locations. The logistics, timing and executability of an academy were under discussion until very recently and it will be collaborative with San Juan Island. Instructors will mostly be from among volunteers and exempt staff on Orcas with SJ Island taking the lead for remote learning.
The academy is needed now because our delayed 5-year WSRB evaluation is now scheduled for November. To get “credit” for “future” firefighters in the “6 firefighters within 5 road miles,” we need to be able to show that we have a concrete plan to add personnel where needed.
Per the website, To submit a Public Records Request, email the Public Records Officer, Kathryn Barnard, at PRO@orcasfire.org. You can download, complete, and return our Request For Public Records Form if you prefer, but it is not required.
In my opinion, the significant volume of public records requests is limiting the ability of staff to accomplish other important functions. You might direct your questions to the incoming candidates that have been using the public records request process to educate themselves. I would ask you to refrain from adding to the volume until after the new commissioners are seated. You can call me at 360-317-6579 if I can answer more questions.
Thanks for answering some of these questions, Tony; I appreciate your time. I understand this a little better now.
I think I would like to have the other questions answered publicly if possible so that all others who might not know any more than I do can benefit from the answers. From what you are saying, in order to keep our rating of 6, we need to prove we have enough interior firefighters. If we need an academy to show that we will have that number, then I assume we don’t have that number now.
I don’t expect you to answer why not, but I’m curious about it. I’m also curious to learn how many of our EMTs are also still firefighters. If the two on the chopping block are also firefighters, it makes it even more senseless to lay them off now when OIFR is trying to keep the rating at 6.
There is a lot I don’t know or understand, admittedly.
I am in no hurry to submit a Public Records request, but would like to know more about why or how we have a dearth of interior firefighters, which is why I asked those questions since it’s not clear on what that term means exactly, and if local residency affects the count, or not.
Sadie,
My station, 27, is in Doe Bay just past the resort on the right side of the road. The building was built by the community with lumber from Joe and Thurman Bond’s mill and is on School land. The “station” is a 2-bay garage on school land and for many years, the school kept a school bus in one bay of the building. For the last 10 years, I have been the only firefighter that lives in the Station 27 area. During the last WSRB visit, we were able to count enough firefighters in the Olga/Olga flats area (who live within 5 road miles of Station 27) that we counted “6”. I don’t think we had a vast surplus of numbers on that visit and it took a little massaging of the “allocation” to get the numbers in all 7 station areas.
Presently, (using my fingers and google maps) I think we could maybe still count 6 firefighters in the 27 numbers but I know one is going on an extended leave of absence and I think a volunteer can only be counted in two stations, so some of those may already be allocated to both 25 (Olga) and 23 (Rosario). So yes, we need firefighters (and EMTs) and we need to show progress in about 2 weeks for the WSRB folks (who, as I said before, will give us “credit” for a demonstrated plan to increase numbers).
If you made a Venn Diagram (the overlapping circle graph thing), you’d have a big circle of EMTs and a smaller circle of interior firefighters. Probably 1/3-1/2 of the interior firefighters are also EMTs. I don’t have the exact numbers, because, again, I’m a volunteer and not a part of the administration. The initial educational and continuing training requirements are arguably more challenging for EMTs, but the physicality of interior firefighting reduces the available pool of firefighters due to medical limitations and fitness/aging/injury. We generally recommend that homeowners stop climbing ladders somewhere around 50, but our average volunteer age is well over 50.
I missed some of your previous questions regarding paid staff (which, again, for WSRB ratings that influence fire insurance are mostly inconsequential).
To my knowledge:
None of our paramedics live on the island. This has been the case for a few years now. About four years ago, one of our paramedics lived here full-time.
Our Chief lives on the island.
Our Assistant Chief is here approximately and slightly more than 1/2-time in a coordinated schedule with the Chief to ensure we have dual paramedic coverage and “chief officer” coverage (a WSRB requirement).
Two of our career FF/EMTs live on island. Two live off-island (one of these lived here for a long time). Our primary per-diem paramedic/FF/EMT (he fills both rolls based on need) lives off island.
The real issue for the rating is volunteers, not paid staff. For us to use paid staff in a station area would require at least an on-duty staff of 5 at a time, something we’ve never had and could never afford. We get our rating from our number and distribution of volunteers and their ongoing training, records, etc.
I went through WSRB rating manual today. I consider myself fairly competent with math, statistics and formularic calculations and I could not really decipher their methodology. It is clear that we will be deducted points in the “Fire Department” category which comprises 40% of the overall rating. We will likely have deductions for apparatus age (there is literally a line in a paragraph that says apparatus age will be evaluated and the criteria is 15 years) and firefighter numbers and many other areas we have no ability to influence.
As to policy publication, there has been a many-year effort to update our standard operating procedures and guidelines. In some cases simply for clarity or to meet newer accepted practices but in some cases to be compliant with changes in law, etc. I’m not sure which policies have been changed in August and September but I’m not going to go look.
11/7. 2100 hours. 75% voted no….
Again.
Just a quick note on the WSRB ratings and how my insurance company reacts to them. Prior to the WSRB 6 rating the OIFR received in 2018 or so our WSRB rating was a 7. The insurance company uses many data points in their calculations. After our OIFR received the 6 rating in 2018 or so our WSRB rating was still 7 and has always been a 7. Our WSRB rating would go up if for some reason Orcas received an 8 rating. Lopez Fire currently has an 8 rating. SJI currently has a 6 rating. A analysis of equipment between OIFR and SJIFR could reveal where our equipment differs and at the same time would be a double check on the WSRB conclusions to class settings and consistency. There are evidently over 100 different datapoints used in class setting opportunities.
Tony, Thanks for your answers and explanations, including your research and math. I remember Doe Bay Station and the school bus parked there in earlier, much quieter, less populated days; a beautifully made building. I didn’t know that you were the only firefighter out there for that station. Thanks for your service.
Getting answers to these kinds of questions helps not just me but others to understand a bit more about the complexities affecting the WSRB ratings and the need to be able to prove that there’ll be more volunteer firefighters who live within the 6 mile road distance of each station. It would seem to suggest that the volunteers would need to be Orcas Island residents. Otherwise, how could they be counted? What criteria would be used to determine provability of effective response time, in terms of keeping the high rating we have?
If no- residents can be volunteers that count toward this rating, how would they get to the island in time in the event of a wildfire emergency where there are only moments to respond? I imagine all that must be considered. The fitness of firefighters for ladder work would be a factor as well.
Some things perplex me, being new to all this review and rating for fire insurance stuff. The last review was in 2019 – was that tied to a general election? How often are these evaluations supposed to happen – every year? Every 2 or 4 years? Only at election years?
I’m trying to understand what drives this. I thought I read somewhere that we are way overdue for one of these reviews – can’t remember where, so I am wondering how late we are, how or why OIFR held off on getting reviewed and rated. The chief has asked that it be delayed til after elections – so do we have time for the new commissioner or commissioners to be seated and familiarized, before that gets scheduled?
It would seem that not trying to rush this would be in the best interest of all stakeholders. I think we all need some answers on a lot that has happened, both in the past several years and with the current commission, concerning budget and other decisions, and how to rectify them. This insurance rates driver is one example of needing some answers. Knowing the history of how we got here, helps us know how to proceed.
Of course, that’s just IMO while trying to logic things out and learn about some of the drivers in decisions being made. I don’t expect any one person to drop everything and answer these questions and wonderings, but I appreciate any and all answers to questions – mine or others.’
The WSRB ratings occur every 5 years. The last was in 2018 but the news release by the department was in June of 22. We should know our results in early 2024.
We’ve already delayed the visit. It’s happening in November.
Our “Fire Department “ section (40% of total) rating, as far as personnel, is largely dependent on volunteer resident numbers.
As the last press release discussed, we’ve had a 6 rating for now about 35 years. Apparatus age and staffing are 2 areas where we are in jeopardy (I.e. clear changes since the last evaluation). It’s probably intentionally obscure on the part of wsrb whether apparatus age and staffing will push us to a 7 or 8 because they don’t want us to “game” the system.
It’s interesting to me that we purchased a lot of apparatus in 2006-2009 because it seems highly correlated to the apparatus age issue, but I’m not aware of a collective institutional knowledge documenting the rational. We’ll know soon. My back of the envelope calculations suggests a shift to a 7 will cost us collectively on the order of $1M, but I’d bet it’s anywhere between 500K and $2M. It will be virtually impossible to know definitively. Maybe we’ll squeak out a 6. I can assure you that everyone in the department, career or volunteer, is seeking the highest rating possible.
When I was a member of Lopez Fire and Rescue, our WSRB rating was a high priority and the Lopez community (and electorate) supported that. Why the Orcas community does not is mind-boggling to me.
Dan,
Our un-rounded number in the June 2019 report was 5.93. Per that report, every raw number is rounded up, so a 6.01 would be rounded to a 7. As I look at the press release the department put out in 2019, I can see that the department was not sending a message of needing an ongoing effort to maintain our rating and details on areas of concern or opportunity. Frankly, I think the department, commissioners and community neglected to keep their eye on it. I hope that changes and I’ve had internal discussions with the Chief and Assistant Chief about mechanisms to formalize our vigilance on readiness, resources and training with a past-present-future metric driven process.