On Monday, the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District unanimously approved a $337 First Responder Fee during a public hearing in an effort to recover costs for service.
ECCFPD Board President Joel Bryant called the fee a response to what the public had requested the fire board do, which was find every reasonable resource they have access to for additional revenue.
“This has been at the top of the feedback that we get back from the community that we find other ways to do it. Should we move forward with this tonight, that is exactly what we are doing. We are doing what the families of this community have asked us to do which is go for this additional resources,” said Bryant. “This is process that is structure through the Alliance and in going to collect these things; the process is going to the insurance companies.”
Bryant further highlighted this fee was an effort to reduce the burden of financing of this district from the shoulders of the residents.
The District had worked to establish a “First Responder Fee” through its finance committee for more than a year at a cost of $337.61 per call. This fee does not differentiate between a resident or non-resident.
According to the District, they are citing the Fire Protection District Law of 1987, if a district finds it does not have adequate revenue available to provide the services that it is empowered to provide including: 1) fire protection services, 2) rescue services, 3) emergency medical services, 4) hazardous material emergency response services, 5) ambulance services, or 6) any other services relating to the protection of lives and property, it may raise additional revenue pursuant to several alternative methods.
The law states that the District can charge a fee to recover the cost for any service it provides, such as emergency medical response services in cases of illness or injury.
However, according to the December 28, 2015 Staff Report, the First Responder Fee is not going to cost recovery, but going to pay for a recently approved EMT Differential Pay. This is a 5% pay increase to firefighters who possess and maintain the criteria for enhanced Emergency Medical Technicians. The EMT Differential pay raise was included in the recent contract negotiations which granted East Contra Costa firefighters a 5% pay raise.
Combined, some East Contra Costa firefighters received a 10% pay increase which was approved in January along with a 10% salary differential between job classifications.
Those within the community have argued that this fee is not going to cost recovery, but instead to pay for pay raises as stated in the Staff Report.
Former ECCFPD Board Member and Brentwood resident Stephen Smith highlighted the misunderstanding of the fee is quite epic.
“It’s really quite simple, the East Contra Costa Fire crew provides service to a patient and a bill will be sent to the patients’ medical insurance. The fee will help pay for enhanced medical services,” said Smith. “Like any other medical provided, services will be provided whether the ability to pay. If someone cannot pay, the district will not harass them. We are joining every other fire district in the county to have this fee. Confire and San Ramon Valley Fire have been doing this for years and it’s time to join them.”
Vince Wells, President of Local 1230, said he was not there to speak for or against the measure but wanted to offer a clarification.
“First off, I think the attachment of this fee to the contract agreement with the firefighters was a mistake. The money was there to finance the firefighters raise without this fee. But this fee is something that is common in the fire service industry,” said Wells. “This is a fee for service for fire first response that is starting to become a national standard and not an action by this board to go after a double tax and double dip the community. We are hardly reimbursed for the services we provide and equipment used on medical calls and this is just a way to kinda of recover some of that.”
Wells highlighted that this was being “villainized” while the public had asked the fire district to look at new ways to get new revenue.
“Moving forward with it makes sense especially because you are underfunded,” said Wells.
Mark Whitlock, a resident of Bethel Island, said the fee was appropriate and he was absolutely for this.
“The media and certain individuals over the years have beat up, chastised this board for not turning over every stone that needed to be turned over to help fund this district. This is one of those stones that has been looked at and looked under and there is some money there,” explained Whitlock. “It’s the same thing other districts are doing. It is totally appropriate for this board to vote for this and move it forward tonight.”
Director Joe Young stated the finance committee had looked at this and it represents one of those stones that had been overturned with funding underneath it.
“I think we need to move forward with this at this time to help the districts funding stream. The fee was not based on any particular thing going on in the negotiations process. The fee was based on how do we get the additional funding for the district and this was one of the methods and provides additional funding,” explained Young. “Should the District go for additional funding in the future on the ballot, this revenue stream would allow us to decrease the size of that future revenue need.”
Although Chief Hugh Henderson stated in December that the First Responder fee would be charged to everyone, there is now a caveat that they can now waive the fee in some cases.
After than 8-0 vote, Chief Henderson now be tasked with developing policies and procedures required for invoicing, billing, and receiving payments under the proposed ordinance, including a policy for discharging accounts that are not collectible.
The chief will also develop a policy to waive fees when it is not in the best interest of the District to charge someone for service.
By charging a First Responder Fee, it is expected to create more than $600,000 in new revenue for the cash strapped district who will be seeking a potential ballot measure in November to raise more revenue to re-open closed fire stations.
The fee collection will begin in March.
91 comments
What imaginary voices are Joel Bryant hearing in his head that tells him the public is asking to be feed to death? This fee is absurd and if I read this correct, Vince Wells admitted this is not a cost recovery, but tied to a salary increase by calling it a mistake.
I will support the firefighters and what they do, but any ballot measure going forward they do not have my vote.
This fire board is billed with two tasks which are to do the following:
1. Improve service
2. Improve response time
This accomplishes neither and pisses the public off. And people wonder why the last two tax measures have failed.
Nothing smells worse than a double tax. We already pay taxes for them to respond and provide service. It’s time for them to find another way than by trying to add a fee or ask for another tax.
This Board pretends to look at everything, yet they refuse to admit volunteers may be a good way to help reduce funds and provide better service.
The union president admits their raise is tied to this fee and its a mistake. How is this even legal? Who is to say they will bill so they can get a greater raise than this year. Kind of reminds me of why cops write speeding tickets, so they can get more revenue. More revenue = greater pay.
This Board needs to either be elected or thrown in jail. Can’t wait until I leave Brentwood for Nevada.
I love when ignorant people bring cops into a discussion when they don’t know what the hell they are talking about. The revenue generated from writting tickets does not line the pockets of cops. The revenue is splint between different agencies. The portion that goes back to Antioch goes to the general fund. Why would you talk out of your ass and bring cops into this. Stick with the blog
Maybe next time the public can support a ballot measure and pay $100 versus $337 per call. It’s not complicated. Steven Smith is right, so much confusion on this on social media by anti tax folks.
If you are going to get billed by your insurance, upgrade your plan or change insurance carriers.
We are already paying state, county, city, and real estate taxes that should support this matter as well as all the rest of our infrastructure needs. The problem is our county and district politicians won’t undo the damage they did back in the 70’s for not being able to plan for the future and locking all the tax distributions that they will not, change. WE ARE PAYING ENOUGH!!!!! It’s too hard to fix they say! We’ll just charge the tax payers more. That is the always the easiest route for them. That’s B.S. That’s their job!!! Get it done, or get replaced.
I hope these eight get the hell sued out of them the first time someone dies because they were having this “minor chest pain.” I’ll be fine. I probably ate something that didn’t settle right and I don’t want to pay $337 for them to tell me that!
This shows going to a meeting is a waste of time. These decisions are made behind closed doors. I was starting to get on the new tax proposal. This and the QRV removal guarantees my no vote for any new taxes. Watch out when they increase the fee again without public approval. What next , as fuel surcharge? No more trust in this Union run fire district.
Come on PieMan Clan justify this with already recent paramedic enhancement fools.
We don’t have a home phone, and we will never call for help! We will transport our selfs to the hospital if needed. If you call 911 you have a 50% chance of being arrested or sighted and 100% chance of being charged money! I will never ever call 911 ever for any help ever!
I feel bad for our firefighters, but if they think I will even think about supporting any tax this fall, they are not thinking straight after a raise and then a fee for service model. This is a double tax and just plain rude.
Jill I agree 100 percent!
I read this on the facebook page and it sums it up perfectly.
“So let me get this right. They get paid to put out fires and help people, emt get paid to help people. So we now have to pay them to do what they are already being paid to do? This makes no sense to me what’s so ever.”
So true!
No new taxes. This latest stunt just sealed the deal.
First of all, I think it is quite educational to find that people respond to a blog without reading the actual article. If you had read it, you would have realized the the first comment on here actually misquotes what I said, and those who have responded after it, continue to spread that misquote.
I stated that the fire chief tying this fee to a pay raise was a mistake. What I meant by that is this fee was not established in order to give the firefighters a raise. The budget supported this pay raise without it. This fee is charged in the San Ramon Valley, Moraga Orinda, and in Con Fire’s jurisdiction. Why should the most underfunded fire district in the county not be charging this fee? The firefighters are still 35% below the pay of these other jurisdictions so it isn’t enhancing anybody’s salary. You only have 3 fire stations. With three stations and the growth and development you soon will be able to pay the firefighters the pay and benefits paid to other agencies as long as you don’t open anymore fire stations. If the “union” was greedy and self serving, wouldn’t we be telling you that 9 firefighters for 250 square miles and 110,000 people is good enough and that 9 minute response times are adequate? If you stay with this staffing model and as the taxes continue to grow, the firefighters could do well dividing up the money for 27 firefighters in an area that should have double that. Stop blaming us. We have lead the charge to educate the community on how inadequate the services are and continue to try to address the service inadequacies in this jurisdiction. Its insulting to be called the problem when others continue to point blame without doing anything other then launch attacks at those who actually are putting in the time to try to address the situation.
Simple math should be applied here. The Fire District receives funding from its portion of the 1% of taxes allocated to it since prop 13 (1978). It has been stated over and over again that the amount allocated to fire is the lowest in the county. The Fire District staffed up to 8 fire stations once it became a fire district in 2002. It once employed over 50 firefighters. After the economic downturn and where we are today, you now have 27 firefighters, ( 3 shifts of 9) = 3 per station X 3 stations. The firefighters still run over 9000 calls (and climbing as you continue to build and populate east county), with 9 firefighters per day and while receiving the lowest pay in the bay area.
Why should the lowest funded fire agency not charge a first responder fee, when all those agencies that receive twice the funding do?
I don’t get the logic. When you blame the union, you mean blame the firefighters, that is who the firefighter union is.
I blame the district for being so damned short sighted. They cannot seem to make a good decision which is why they have to go. It appears quite likely they will be taking the district down with them. That being said, there is plenty of blame to go around-including the firefighter’s untimely raises. No ones hands are clean in this entire mess.
Vince Wells, nice spin. You are in lala land. Lead what education? All one has to do is read comments on here and social media to know the public will never understand. Keep up the bang up job and pat yourselves on the back.
I think ECT you and your union buddies should get together and come up with a pow wow on what lies to feed the public next. It’s time for some change and it starts with a lawsuit on a conspiracy between the fire board and union.
Like I said is an earlier post on this matter…people are going to die as a result of this added fee (regardless of where the money is to be channeled!). Some people that are on a tight budget won’t call 911 if they know they will be charged. An additional post by another taxpayer confirms this. Instead they will put off whatever it is they may need help for, or perhaps try driving themselves to the hospital. Having a heart attack on the road could very well involve other persons or property. We already pay taxes to include EMT service. Re-channel our taxes paid where they must be, not where you’d like them to be, or just makes you feel good, or warms your soul.
Well put jerry. http://www.facebook.com/EastCountyVoters/
Great explanation Vince. What can the citizens do to have ECCFPD funded like the rest of the county? East County should be provided the same protection as the rest of the county. The way you explain it makes a lot of sense!!!
Not so sure I would agree that this was a great explanation. There is a lot of double speak and when it comes right down to it, the chief’s staff report is stating that the fee is tied to the raises. Now we have this boondoggle with a 337 fee placed on the very same people that they wanted to ask for more money from another tax? That just crazy man! The public has asked the fireboard to look for money + turn over every stone….not pick our wallets.
Vince,
With all due respect you are leaving out some information and misleading without disclosing other information. First of all, Orinda Moraga has paramedics. We just lost 2 paramedics and will be charged for an EMT that has always been there.
Secondly, services were cut partially because the district was mandated to pay more against there unfunded liability debt. Let’s not kid the public. The sequence of events recently have been the dumbest moves by the district and union. You and the district just got funds from the cities and county to last a year. You and the district should have waited for the raise and new fee until after the public passed a new tax. These poor decisions will probably cost the district the ballot measure. You should have waited and made the raises retroactive. Then upgraded some firefighters to paramedics and then charged the fee.
Richard, I’m an easy target. I’ve been arguing with your type in this area for years. Until the folks who have been impacted stand up, you win. Remember that if we respond to 9000 calls for 110,000 people, there are not a lot of customers to spread the word. This reminds me of the Direct Tv commercial with the “settlers” vs those that have satellite TV.
Throw grand ma in the truck and drive her to the nearest hospital while others call 911. Your choice. It reminds me of a line one of our old Captains would say whenever we took a stand that ultimately made our lives miserable. ” We showed us”!
How about we fund the ECCFPD like we do the rest of the county? Everyone is missing the Big picture here. If ECCFPD was allocated funding like the rest of the county it would not be In this situation. It’s time for elected officials, city councils, county board of sups. Union reps. Fire boards,fire chiefs to do the right thing and start the long process to allocate funding correctly to ECCFPD. Why have the job titles if you can’t do the job!!! Stop the myopic petty BS and make a diffrence. Not business as usual. It’s not working.The $$ is there.
@ Fund ECCFPD
The big picture? How many times does it need to be stated? The funding issue is done through the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, not the cities, not the county, fire board, fire chief and certainly not Union reps.
Simply stating that the money is there, is a perfect example of myopic BS.
The $337 IS a cost recovery fee. There is only one true raise and thats the first 5%. The second 5% is to fund the new enhanced EMT that was brought on by the new EMS contract with AMR and Contra Costa. That contract eliminated the QRV’s in east county. So now the FF/EMT’s are being trained at a higher level to provide better care. Anytime someone takes on more job responsibilities, it usually comes with a higher compensation.
@mike
You are full of it, a QRV would reach a patient faster than a engine and AMR. Service has not been improved and not sure you even understand what a pay raise is because they may have got a 5% bump in pay, but they also got a raise for enhanced emt = 10%. Either way, they got a nice bump in salary while seeking more money from the public. The union is destroying the fire department and they do not realize it.
Mike and Richard you have bought into the wrong issue. Just as they want you to. You can’t have adequate coverage without adequate funding. Like brining a knife to a gun fight. ECCFPD does not get adequate funding like the rest of city’s in the county. SO!!!! ECCFPD does not get fire coverage like the rest of the county. NOW, ask yourself how do we really fix the issue? Stay with me here. We need elected officials to think this way too. The answer is in front of all involved if they truly want to fix the issue. The big IF? Re-read what I just sent and see if you can figure the answer out. If you need help I will get back to you. Thanks
@ Fund ECCFPD
It looks like I need help too. What is the big IF? What is in front of everyone? What are you believing you are onto that everyone else is missing? I have re-read what you posted and it doesn’t add up. Maybe that’s why no one else it getting it? Help everyone here understand this plan of yours and please go lightly on the exclamation points. Thanks.
Everyone knows you have to go thru the state to address the funding issue. Some kind of balance needs to be agreed upon by other enitities to help balance the unfair distribution of funds that range from over 20 percent down to 8 percent. If and when this happens, then it would be presented to the state for approval. Until there is a more balanced distribution, people will not approve a tax increase.
Based on the commentary not “everyone” knows you have to go through the State to address funding issues. Balance is important but which agencies would carve into their budget to fund another district which they are not responsible for? I can’t think of a single entity who would do this. Apparently you wouldn’t either since you claim until this is done “people won’t approve a tax”.
Thanks for hijacking my questions to “Fund ECCFPD”. I’m still awaiting answers to my questions.
OK Walter, I’ll play.
Let’s pretend someone crafts an MOU tomorrow which takes money out of the Discovery Bay CSD and cuts services to you. That money is then transferred to another entity in Brentwood. Lets say it’s for building their new library.
You would be OK with that? Do you think everyone in the community would be on board with that plan? Do you think there might be a legal challenge or two based on, I don’t know, Prop 218 or any number of other violations of existing law?
That’s basically what the ECV group is trying to do. But a few of you are working overtime to put lipstick on that pig.
The MOU plan is a deliberate attempt to undermine and circumvent Prop 13/AB 8 provisions. It fails based on that fact.
And if you think you’re going to get 80+1 California legislators to grab a third rail issue like Prop 13 to fix _YOUR_ problem, you are high. Plain and simple. If you’re not aware, it’s 80+1 that must approve at the state level.
So rather that blustering bullshit on message boards, why don’t you cut to the chase and explain how you’re planning to undermine Prop 218 and how many of the necessary 80 do you have on board right now?
Because if you don’t have both of those factors in your favor, you’re not going anywhere. You are just wasting peoples’ time with lies or stupidity, take your pick. You are not going to shame elected officials into taking some half-baked plan to Sacramento. It simply isn’t going to happen.
So from here you have two choices, the blue pill or the red pill. Are you going to take the blue pill and whine that somebody called you out on your BS? Or are you going to take the red pill and actually address the issues which doom your plan to failure? Whine that you’re “being picked on” and try to make it alllllll about you, or own up to the fact that you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
Personally I don’t care. You can waste all the time in the world on a plan doomed to fail while patting yourselves on the back claiming “at least we’re doing something”.
Offering false hope isn’t worthy of praise in my world. Apparently it works in yours.
I’ll bet he takes the blue pill, just like “Unome”.
If you personally don’t care,then why are you blabbering thru your liberal crystal ball?
I do not believe prop 218 nor prop 13 would be a concern unless you key in Mary Piepho’ s promise to redestribute taxes from BB irrigation. So when you talk down to anyone trying make existing taxes redestributed, don’t forget to name call Mary whom just recently bragged about existing tax redistribution. Keep up the good work Fund ECCFPD. They are doing more than the condesnding BSrs on here.
@Blue pill lover, are you licensed to practice municipal law or did you consult with an attorney for that opinion?
………..now go ahead and ask me the same question.
Your group has shown zero ability to self analyze. You continuously answer questions with questions. In the process showing contempt for those wanting to understand your plan. There’s a clinical term for that.
Eventually the BS front fades away and you’re standing there in your underwear because you ain’t got game.
Just for you, bpl, unome and the rest of the voices in your head: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
@ Mac/Blue pill lover
Took the Blue pill?
It doesn’t take a tax expert or much education in California’s political background to know that Prop 218 and Prop 13 are at the epicenter of this issue. Why you would try to cross-pollinate the issue with the Supervisor’s efforts on erroneous district overlaps and boundary considerations?
Promise to redistribute taxes? Supervisors don’t have that power. The Supervisors will have to do whatever the law prescribes. In the interim, you will have to settle for trying to fool people that don’t know better.
It’s called an inferiority complex when you believe people are “talking down” to you, when they are merely presenting a differing opinion backed by factual information.
“…blabbering thru your liberal crystal ball?” -Mac
Please remind me,
Who exactly was name calling?
What is the “good work” that Fund ECCFPD is doing, besides leading an apathetic public over a proverbial cliff? The question has been asked by me, several times now.
Please remind me,
Why do you always respond to the questions here, with obscure questions of a differing nature? That tactic is transparent and demonstrates that you most likely don’t have the answers. Playing the pity card is icing on the cake.
Stated again…Thanks for hijacking my questions to “Fund ECCFPD”. I’m still awaiting answers to my questions. The biggest one being: Which agencies would carve into their budget to fund another district which they are not responsible for?
Condescending and talking down to? I don’t think so. Taking the Blue pill has its side effects, namely whining that somebody called you out on your BS.
Richard makes a good point Vince. Instead of only thinking Union wants, work with the district with a strategy. Also be more truthfull in your information. You site 3 stations for 110 sq miles when 80 sq miles is open space. As far as stations actually there are 4 and come March it will be 5 stations. This is why the public has no trust or confidence in the district. The vote of no confidence should have been the union and the board members not the Chief. Also the enhanced EMT is a farce because it is only an excuse to try justifying the loss of paramedics. That excuse has no merit. The only last ditch effort to save this embarrassment of poor decisions is to put it all on the table for the public. When you put out your ballot make it all or none. Proposal should have three items. First the name change. Maybe provide three options on the ballot. The one with the most becomes the new name. The second item would be an elected board with the names of people running. Third and last would be an enhancement tax to begin a funding correction. It will be tough because of what has just been thrown at the public but at least all your cards are on the table for sincerity. Trust needs to be regained and an elected body and participation of the new name with the public may work in the district favor.
@ Unome
Much of what you say about trust and confidence rings true. If you are confused about the change in medical deployment you should contact Pat Frost with county EMS or the Fire Chief(s) who can better explain it to you. I doubt any of them would agree with your characterization as a farce or an excuse. Short of that, I only see that you are offering up an opinion based on nothing but wrongful personal assumptions.
The name change was not a suggestion -nor was it recommended to be placed on a ballot. The name change is a requirement to be completed by the district itself, meaning the fire-board. How do I know this? I attended the Supervisors board meeting where this condition was applied and I have contacted the district supervisors for further clarification. It was never suggested or recommended that the name change component be on a ballot. The district could decide to do it by ballot but it is unnecessary and not warranted.
The rest of your comments do make sense and are aligned with the conditions set forward according to documents, minutes and public record.
You said it best- “This is why the public has no trust or confidence in the district.”
My suggestion for the final name from a board picked 3 options was merely to involve the public because of mistrust. The actual permanent fix is the one that ” Fund ECCFPD ” has begun. It is logical and fair. The only thing is that it will take a few years. My idea regarding the ballot should be done immediately. I’m sure there are a zillion other ideas. This is just my opinion.
@ Unome
I appreciate your opinion. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the “fix” that “Fund ECCFPD” is perpetuating merely confuses people. It will not happen, not now and not in the next 40 years. The fire district doesn’t have time on its side, so this is no longer an option. This is what happens when you have individuals pushing an agenda that lacks research, credibility and populated by individuals that don’t listen. Their illegal and irrational “plan” is a heartbeat away from derailment. This is why they have been so secretive about the pesky details. Hopefully you are not in that camp.
The fire-board could do some outreach to assist in picking a name. This is a good idea-putting it to a vote is not. It doesn’t have to, nor will it go to ballot. It’s too expensive and the board is too lazy to do the necessary outreach. They cannot even muster the time to meet more than once a month. Don’t you think if you had a problem as serious as what faces the fire district you would meet weekly until a plan was developed? Meeting once a month is merely mailing it in and hoping it gets fixed elsewhere. Face it, the board has ZERO leadership, integrity and hope. Expect more “can kicking” until the situation degrades into necessary action by other leadership. What we have now is not even close to resolving the problem.
Correction 250 sq miles when 200 are open space.
Go to http://www.facebook.com/EastCountyVoters/ for more details it explains that East County Voters for Equal protection is a grass roots citizens action committee formed to address unequal funding of fire and emergency services in ECCFPD. Preservation of life over quality of life.
@ Fund ECCFPD
I see even with all your efforts the group ECV facebook page has barely broken 70 “likes”. The facebook page has no information besides Mr. Bryan Scott’s boorish letters. The subject matter is apparently way beyond his scope and he is rapidly running out of gas. The group is a farce and no one is buying into it. You can expect to hear a large thud very shortly.
You have knocked every suggestion, what’s the answer?
Strong leadership, a solid funding plan and honesty with the voters, creating support from the community.
Sadly, none of those exist at this time.
Richard…..yes, I understand what you’re saying. I didnt imply that the enhanced emt was better service than the QRV, you just made an uneducated assumption based on what I was referring to. I only meant better than what the firefighters themselves were able to provide. Enhamced EMT is a higher level of care than EMT. Next time I will make sure to fully explain my thought for those like you who like to twist things around to better your own arguments. And yes, they have a 10% raise….5% is across the board…which they deserve…the other 5% is for anyone who is an enhanced EMT. I’m not sure if that’s every employee, meaning not sure every firefighter will be an enhanced EMT. My other point was only that the fee only covered 5% for the enhanced EMT and not the entire 10% raise which it seems like you’re implying….oh look…I can make unfounded assumptions too.
The amount of tea-bagger fear mongering on this thread is astronomical. The fear of the government boogyman is so rampant these days. Just a bunch of people crying no new taxes without ever really looking into the facts of the matter. I for one am so happy that the tea-party has ruined the republican party…because thankfully we wont see a republican in the oval office anytime in the near or far future.
Had to bring your bs of politics into a general conversation…
On Feb 3, 2016 at 8:48 pm Mac says:
Had to bring your bs of politics into a general conversation…
..while responding to dumbfounded’s “The amount of tea-bagger fear mongering on this thread is astronomical.”
On Feb 4, 2016 at 12:48 pm Mac says:
If you personally don’t care,then why are you blabbering thru your liberal crystal ball?
I can never remember, is it spelled “hypocrit” or “hypocrite”? Damm wihnblows 10 sepll chekkr.
Now that funny stuff right there! I’ll wager the Mac guy argues with his own PC. Wait, what? Is that an oxymoron or just moron? My PC likes both,
I just love how the same old people who use different names always just try to muddy the waters. Is the district 250,200, or 150 miles. Who cares,it’s big and three engines can’t cover it.
Here we go again after several good exchanges of info. The PieMan Clan has to break the thread down so it ends in nothing accomplished. Just another thorn as usual from them condescending anyone’s comments. So sad. So destructive to ideas.
Coldplay I like you!!! Let’s say you are the smartest in the group. You are so smart you know a new tax will not get approved and will diffently not be enough to fix the ECCFPD. It would buy some time maybe but more then likely not enough new tax to fix the problem. It’s been shot down twice. I say ok, try a third time, give it all you got. Can’t hurt right. I’m in. I’m not anti tax. Just want a descent fire service for our community. I believe in being responsible with tax payers money. But , once again say it does not pass. Even your tax group says reallocation is the answer, but just not going to happen. Now most intelligent people doubt a new tax for the third time will pass.
Here me out. The reallocation group is explaing to people how the problem started,How under funded ECCFPD is . How ECCFPD can not have fire service like the rest of the county because it is not funded like the rest of the county. However hard it will/would be to reallocate it is a option just like a tax increase is/was a option. Get ECCFPD funded like the rest of county fire depts. But both options educate citizens on the problem. Your right the reallocation would have to go through the state. But , would it not make more sense for people who are elected to represent our citizens to have some input and dialog on reallocation? if the citizens have Intrest in reallocation should not the representatives of the citizens intertain it. I have heard from your group it’s the answer but not going to happen. I still don’t see why your group is so afraid of getting the real problem out to the citizens. What’ s wrong with educating people of the true cause of the problem. Educate them,’if it’s not what they want I can live with that. At least they know the problem.
It’s a tough sale but it behooves all 110,000 citizens to have a descent fire service. All groups that would be asked to contribute a portion of there increase in there annual budget towards a fire dept that is under funded compared to the rest of the county would benefit. So there budgets would not go back wards. Just not get as big of a annual increase until we could open 3 more stations. It could take 3-4 years to open 3 stations. long shot your right. Benifit for all involved, you bet.
But once again let’s say you are the smartest in the group. Let’s here your plan to lead us in the right direction. Would love to work with you for the benefit of us all. I personally just want what’s best for community. Let’s keep in mind because you are the smartest in the group you could be right. The community is burned out with the fire dept. I believe they might not really care at this point and we’re headed for more trouble. What do we do? Give up?
My next question is what are the diffrent entities of ECCFPD going to do? What will our motivated elected officials come up with? BOS, Brentwood city council, Oklaey City council, Bethel island, Discovery Bay CSD. I know of some CSD’s that sub out fire service or run their own. I have a feeling it would be very expensive for some entities to go on there own. Contract out to Cal fire. Con fire for Brentwood and Oakley? I know pebble beach CSD contracts with cal fire. The funny thing is this will all be more expensive then if we could all work it out together. Elected officials I know the titles are neat and cool!!! But, Please think ahead and have a plan. I think questions with people wanting answers are coming your way. Please don’t contract you’re decision out and do another study to find the answer. Have an opinion. Do what you were elected for. Save that money to put towards the fire service.
Confused by all the rhetoric in your post. You talk in confusing tongues about 2 groups and suggest you are part of one. How the under funding took place is not really a mystery anymore. It’s also not unique to Contra Costa County. I hope you are not implying that. You made some comparisons to other districts in the county. But in that you didn’t mention several of those get additional money from taxes that their residents pay over and above the 1%.
The conclusion is you are expecting the same service for less money. You can’t say you pay 1% of $500k and say you expect the same service as the property owner who’s paying 1% of a million dollar property. That’s not an honest comparison. That’s in addition to not mentioning the additional fees others pay. Wouldn’t your group, whoever that is, get more credibility if you were more honest with the numbers?
As for capturing forward revenue, that has two problems. The first is assuming there are increases in revenue in the future. We are at the 6 year mark of a stretch of economic growth. Almost unprecedented in our history. Also not likely to continue without some period of correction. Where is that factored into your model?
The other problem, probably the more serious flaw of the two. Your model would amount to budget freezes of all agencies you take money from. Presumably into perpetuity. You don’t offer much detail. It is unconscionable to think department costs would go flat going forward. Meaning your capture of future revenue increases(assuming they even exist) would require cuts in service or personnel going forward by all impacted agencies.
Many of these county agencies have contracts coming up. Their staff have tolerated wage freezes for years during the economic calamity. They would have to accept continued wage freezes going forward under your plan, and in some cases potential job loss as services have to be cut.
I can’t see how your revenue assumptions work. At a minimum your plan puts the entire burden on local agencies and their staff into perpetuity. I would be concerned about the impact on existing services. There will be service cuts under your plan. You have not offered any estimate of the severity. Has anyone outside of this group analyzed your budget figures with a critical eye?
Oh wise one!!!! Lead us to the promise land!!! Serious, help or stay away… This is not about you. Sorry to say. Your self abosorbed. Either offer up some help in fixing the ECCFPD or go show how smart you are somewhere else. I’m not impressed. Help Fix or leave!!!!
The economy has been on a roll for 6 years is correct. Is there another down turn coming you bet. Yes it could slow this plan down to open 3 stations in 3-4 years. Where you get budget freeze from
I don’t know. A small portion of eveyones budget(INCREASE) would take a hit. No increase no hit. Is it worth it for everyone to fund a Fire Dept. that benefits all 110,000 citizens. I pray someday you will get to decide if it is worth or not. You don’t call 911 when things are going well for you.
Most agencies have emergency and reserve funds setting in accounts.Where did you hear they would have to take cuts to fund the fire dept.? Job losses you mention are all in your head. Not making sense. I am talking about PRESEVATION OF LIFE OVER QUALITY OF LIFE. Once again I hope in your future you get to live through the need for help at some point in your life. Once again it would be money taking from a small part of the increase in there annual budget. If it increases. None of that delusional thoughts you speak of. Once again a benifit to all 110,000 citizens covered be ECCFPD. I have nothing to gain from this. Would I allow my pay to not go up as much to make sure your family is safe and gets quality care after a head on collision on Vasco Rd. Yes I would. Even knowing your selfish, greedy mentality I would care for your family in that terrible situation.
@It can be done (we know your real name)… we have asked Bryan Scott or anyone from the ECV group to answer the following questions that continue to be dodged.
Please answer the following questions.
• What exactly do you mean by you are proposing shifting funds and no one will be effected? What does that even mean???.
• What about the cost of doing business which increases each year. If an agency is supposed to get a 2% bump but you take it out of there and give it to another agency… they are now minus 2% due to cost of living increase and the cost of business may actually be higher than 2%. Can you explain how this does not put other agencies at risk?
• You are assuming that there will be future growth, how can you guarantee it?
• With regards to future growth prediction, what occurs in your plan if there is no growth or a reduction in tax revenue?
• If agencies/city’s/county give up income under your plan—what services are then being reduced or abandoned?
• Who are the agencies/city’s/county you are requesting their budges be froze? Please list.
• Have you met with any of these agencies?
• Have any of these agencies agreed to your proposal?
• Are the schools being impacted?
• Has the County, Brentwood or Oakley agreed to give up future funds?
• Let’s say you have 30 agencies in your plan, what happens if just 80% agree?
• Let’s say in year one you have 80% agree, but year 2 you have 40% agree—what happens?
• How can you assure under this proposal this is not a gift of public funds?
• Has any city manager or elected official asked your organization to “give up” this effort and join them?
I’m glad you know my name. Please confront me and talk to me when you see me. I look forward to it.Those are great questions. Very helpful. This is dynamic and evolving. I thought you were going to work on a tax to take to voters? Wish you had not given up. All those questions have answers or are being worked on. Come to a meeting and help work through some of these challenges. Or at least don’t give up on what you started.
Let me reiterate I will not gain one thing from working through this other then a fire dept. that will be funded like the rest of the county’s fire depts. Then the powers to be can determine how they manage, contract out, ECCFPD. If something happens to your family or mine and we did not try fix this it would be devestating.
Another issue to address is the failure of the district. What do our local leaders have planed for that? Let’s use management, not crisis management and think ahead.
Now that you know who I am let’s get together. I think if I was in front of you talking we could hash this stuff out.
What’s with the ” we know who you are ” ? Is that suppose to intimidate people ? When redistributing tax revenue, the people are who you ask. Those are the only people that matter and need to vote. Again this is similar to the Byron Bethany issue. I’m sure BBethany would say no to giving up anything just as all other independent districts would. This would not be asking IF A Redistribution Would Be OK, I’m sure it would be through THE PEOPLE whom the money actually comes from. Maybe there are districts with waste because they are given more than other similar districts elsewhere in the county. Let’s not jump ahead too far ECT, we are not a socialist society yet.
Unome 2 – its because someone wishes to use 3 different names.
I wouldn’t buy a used car from these people. It’s like everyone is asking them the mileage on the vehicle and they want to talk about the weather outside. That kind of dodgy bs screams SCAM. From the train wreck grammar to the guy or gal that hasn’t figured out that redistribution is socialism, it’s like a bad movie in here with some terrible actors.
@ Fund ECCFPD
Thank you for your reply. I hope you didn’t spend too much time on it. For starters, I am not part of any group. I think you might be smart, but you are being misled by a few individuals with insincere motives.
How do I know this? I have checked up, called local officials that they (ECV) have claimed to have met with and I am not getting the same story you are distributing. Ask yourself, why do they (ECV) not share any particular names, or details of what they have been up to? Why do they (ECV) only answer questions with questions? And why do they (ECV) have you doing their work, continually flooding social media with press releases that literally say nothing? These are honest questions you should be asking yourself.
Do yourself a favor and contact any one of the people they (ECV) claim to have met with. You will get a far different story from what they are feeding you and the general public. They are trying to gain some type of credibility by inferring support when in fact it is sorely lacking.
The group (ECV) does not have a realistic plan and therefore it is only a path to public confusion and delays. Haven’t we seen enough of that already? You say it couldn’t hurt, well it does. Setting people up with false hopes is not a plan, nor a solution.
You say the reallocating group (ECV) is explaining to people how the problem started and how it is not funded like the rest of the county. I’m fairly sure we all know how the problem started and the funding issues. What ECV is failing to disclose is that all of the fire districts in the county (including Con Fire) are also experiencing financial difficulties. You can’t print money, take it from those that don’t have it or worse, redistribute it to others who refuse to pay for their own services. You cannot rob Peter to pay Paul. This isn’t a shell game, but that’s what they are selling. You have a “group” of individuals with no experience and who are equally unwilling to listen or comprehend the confines of a system they must work with. Their end game leaves all of us with no solution, only frustration and confusion. It has a zero chance for success. That is the plan you want us all to get behind? I know I am smarter than that, the question is are you?
“There are none so blind as those who will not see and there are none so deaf as those that will not hear”
What are the different entities going to do, you ask? I suggest you spend an equal amount of time contacting them. There is a lot to be learned from a few phone calls or email exchanges. Every single one of the questions you raised has been brought up and answered many times. Asking them again will not yield a different answer. I suggest you start with your own community leaders, then move onto the County (Supervisor, auditor/controller, LAFCO). Those are the people that can give you the right information and realistic options, which will probably not be what you wanted to hear. The question is why haven’t you done that already and why is the group you speak of (ECV), choosing to ignore the laws that govern the situation? It’s not me that is afraid of information.
I agree with you that a new tax won’t pass. It may have had a chance at some point, but now it is evident there are too many issues and too many competing interests. Right now I don’t believe there is a viable solution, but leading people to a known dead end isn’t smart, productive or rational. It’s well known, there is an official task force that is working on solutions. I’m not sure they will find an answer but at least we should let them do what they were tasked, work through it unimpeded by distractions.
Distractions and division being served up by a flood of so called press releases making claims do nothing but stir the pot and confuse the issue. That is no solution and not where we need to be.
Coldplay and ECT, thanks for your response you have been involved with this a long time. I Get your frustration. I have not meet a person that does not agree that reallocation is the correct answer.In person I hear yes that is the long term fix. Then alot of people do say it can’t be done. I can see your thinking and the way you feel because it’s the same people like yourself and our elected officials that have had there hands in this problem and keep coming up with the same negative result. Causing frustration and lots of wasted time.
I am fully aware that this process can take a long time to get the information out. You yourself be lieve there maybe no viable options. The we want a new tax people have been told 3 X that the citizens don’t want a new tax. I encourage them to try again. How long has it taken for them to be told NO 3X?I personally have nothing to lose by them asking a fourth time. EAST COUNTY VOTERS FOR EQUAL PROTECTION have not had a chance to be told no yet. I like you am looking forward to the task force coming forward with there recommendations. You know more then me,having been around this and being involved/part of the problem know it will be more of the same.
The more I read your reply the more I scratch my head. I encourage your envolvement. If I thought you were on to something new I would be interested in getting behind a fix. Dialog is how things get worked out. Do we have a perfect plan? Probably not. Are we looking to tweak/fix the situation with healthy input, You bet. Have we got people talking? YES. productive yet, not sure.
Keep in the back of your head and I know you know this,but the district can dissolve/fail. Call it what you want. I know the county still gets ECCFPD budgeted monies. What then. Thanks for making us relevent. Look for more press releases and hope to come your way. One way or another this train is coming to a solution. Hopefully you can stay relevent and be part of the solution.
@ it can be done
Don’t mistake my rational, for your own frustrations. You need to get your your story straight if your are to gain the support you are seeking.
It was only one day ago that you wrote;
It can be done!!! Feb. 5th at 7:26 pm
ECT is right!!! Sorry, out of frustration. I have posted under different names. Trying to paraphrase what I was addressing. Mt bad?
That should end any debate over who is frustrated.
I hope all know who I am!!!! If you really care about the citizens who ECCFPD SERVES, which by the way is all of us on ECT. You would realize a descent fire service is for us all and our families. All the agencies affected by the reallocation will benifit from the small amount of your budget increase that you give to help fund ECCFPD LIKE THE REST OF THE COUNTY. You would realize anything your TRA( Tax rate area ) gave up would come back to you in your time of need.
Once again!!!! This is not about me. It’s about you our whole community. About the firefighters who would risk there lives to save your children’s life. When everyone else is running out, they are running in. And we as a community don’t want to support them!!! Send them to a gun fight with a knife. And expect them to win. We in east county deserve what the rest of the county gets. You already pay for it. Demand it. http://www.facebook.com/EastCountyVoter.
Please help us work through some of the issues. Come to meetingsc Be posotive and let’s put Preservation of life over quality of life for a short time. Fix ECCFPD.
ECT is right!!! Sorry, out of frustration. I have posted under different names. Trying to paraphrase what I was addressing. Mt bad?
Sorry, two mistakes…… http://www.facebook.com/EastCountyVoters/
Hey ECT I liked your questions. Can we ( EAST COUNTY VOTERS FOR EQUAL PROTECTION) send you press release answering all your questions? Probably have it in a few days. Thanks
Mr.B… I don’t care what form its in, I would just like them answered.
ECT give me a number to reach you at please, The name of who I will give the press release to with all your answers. I hate to go by a fourth name Mr. B but if that’s what you want I don’t have a problem with it. Just get me your name and number and keep it on a even playing field. Thanks for your support. Mr. B?
Not a tax. The insurance company has been required to pay for this for years and they have never been billed for it. Your current premiums are set with this fee accounted for and have been getting away with not paying it! Educate yourselves. The insurance companies have been hiding behind the political negativity this subject creates knowing the general public would interpret it this way. Come on people. Wake up.
Don’t know where you are getting your information, but those most negatively impacted by this fee, namely the poor and the elderly, would not be covered by insurance. Medi-Cal and MediCare do not cover first responder fees. They only cover transport.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015/02/20/275-first-responder-fee-rattles-sacramento-woman-battling-cancer-caring-for-parents/
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/40225
Now here’s a really interesting one. Because it talks about the amount of the fee and determining whether it is proportional to the actual cost of delivering the service. See if you can figure out who gets to decide whether the amount is appropriate and what ultimately gets paid. I’ll give you a hint. It’s not the fire district:
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2011/08/12/210705.htm
Your second premise, the idea that making claims against your insurance policy won’t raise your rates, is too ridiculous from a common sense perspective to get into.
@ LJM
Completely false. Your insurance will NOT pay for this cost-don’t fool yourself and do not attempt to fool others. I have contacted local billing companies (AMR and other ambulance billing services). I have also contacted my insurance provider, State Farm.
The verdict is they will NOT cover this fee unless it is part of an auto related accident. End of story.
Please stop spreading inaccurate information.
Coldplay and ECT here is how I got motivated on reallocation and working though it to make it work. Google Assemblymen Jim Fraziers op Ed. A FIVE ALARM PROBLEM IN CONTRA COSTA. Dated 9/4/15. It was in the Brentwood press.
He is a elected official. He had a moment of clarity in that piece. Very impressive in his comments. We need elected officials to come clean like this. Be honest. He states he is willing to create and move forward/ consider legistion on redistribution. But he wants us to get TRA’s to agree that it behooves us all to take a bite of the bad situation (inadequate funding of ECCFPD). I’m not making this stuff up. He put out the OP ED. Read it for yourself.
A step in the right direction? Can’t make this stuff up. Read it.
@ it can be done
You seem to have an issue with not being able to recognize when you are being played. If you fell for Frazier’s op ed then you are definatly not the smartest guy in the room. He played you.
You need to read the fine print in his piece.
He of all people should know (and does know) that getting all of the taxing agencies to volunteer funding out of their own budgets will not happen. This is why he told you he would put forth legislation IF the agencies were willing to give up their funds. He knows they won’t and just wanted to look good to those that don’t know any better. Those that do, were not amused about how he played on the political ignorance of his constituents.
Frazier didn’t come clean, he knew it couldn’t happen and played you for a fool. Apparently it worked. Don’t take my word for it, contact any other elected official or district representative. Contact Contra Costa LAFCO, Assmblymember Catherine Baker, Assemblymember Susan Bonilla or Senator Steve Glazer if need clarity.
Frazier wants you to do what he knows cannot and will not be done. How does it feel to know you were played?
I know you didn’t make it up, Jim Frazier did.
Better yet you might want to come to the understanding that this isn’t a district only issue. Changing reallocation at the State level would have an affect in 58 counties. Good luck getting 81 Assemblymembers to get behind a proposal that would effectively reduce services and end their careers.
If you think that is going to happen I believe Mr. Frazier has a bridge to sell you.
How many times have you asked for a tax? What was the answer.
@ it can be done
I haven’t asked for any tax. You must have me confused with someone else.
We are getting the fire services we pay for.
I don’t believe a tax will pass until everyone understands this.
If you don’t wish to properly fund the fire department, don’t expect someone else to. Just like building a bridge across the ocean, it may be possible, but not probable. Shuffling money around affects other services that are also needed and will not happen. That is the fundamental problem with Bryan Scott and Hall Bray’s (ECV) plan. It’s all about having “someone else” pay for the service they want. It surprises me that I actually have to spell it out for you; It doesn’t work that way. It all proves certain people are just slow learners or refuse to listen. It will play itself out and the ECV group will have to learn what everyone else already knows. Willful ignorance has a price.
Another thing why would I believe coldplay and ECT? You both have complained about everything. Not offered a solution to fix anything.I’m still Triying to figure out what you guys are getting out of this mess. Try putting some effort in your life into helping people and not being self absorbed and selfish. Put the citizens and firefighters before your selfish self Intrest and see what answers you come up with. Or do you prefer business as usual bcause you have been effective?
Mr. Broocker,
Believe ECT? We are simply putting out the info for our audience to form their own opinion. While we have asked questions and did so finally in the public, it was due to questions that were either dodged or went unanswered. There is also legal issues that are not being addressed by a proposal including possible Brown Act Violations and Serial Meetings. While its true the Brown Act does not apply to citizens, they do apply to elected officials. With all due respect, there are many conversations occurring than simply what is being shared on this website–please do not misunderstand me when I say that. Based on what is being said by a select few, we have verified it with the County Auditor, County Comptroller and others. As simple and as polite as possible, its an unrealistic concept.
Regarding solution, I believe we have ALWAYS been clear in our solution, get Sacramento to fix the allocation issue from Prop 13. It cannot be done at a local level by law as currently being discussed. That is not an opinion, but a FACT. In the short term, a bridge is needed with some sort of tax, however, we highly doubt the public gets behind that at this time.
So, finish your story. How about being constructive with ECV and head to Sacramento . Has to start at this level before you can go to state. Fraser stated that in his Op Ed. He would be willing to write legislation in the Brentwood press in September. Seems to make sense to check with all entities involved before going around them to state. Seems to me like we agree on a lot. Dialog is constructive and getting the word out makes a lot of sense. Seems you have a lot to offer when not slamming someone. The thing about using people’s names seems a little off but hopefully when we meet we can talk about that. Look forward to it. Thank for your constructive comments
@Brooker (it can be done)
First of all, its Frazier, not Fraser… second of all, of course he would say that. He knows it would never happen. Per Bryan Scott, he said yesterday they have met with very few agencies (failed to mention which ones. This was the Q& A:
Have you met with any of these agencies?
“Very few. We’ve met informally with members of two city councils and the Board of Supervisors” said Scott.
Your right, it is evolving. Here is a thought. Finish your story. Why don’t you and I the union,(local & State) ECV go to the state. We can try and get a minimum funding allocation for a district the size of ECCFPD. There has to be a avrage through out the state. Set a floor on allocation to a district this size. And yes we will keep meeting with the public, cities and counties, agencies. This is not about changing prop.13 either. I think you agree. PRESEVATION OF LIFE OVER QUALITY OF LIFE. Putting the citizens and the firefighters that protect them first. Not about me.
@ It can be done
Your comments are not making sense and contradict one another. I believe we all want a fix to this but going about it in a scattered and disassociated way won’t get you past the front door. This is exactly the very same reason Hal Bray and Bryan Scott are not taken seriously at any level. I don’t really think you know what those two are up to and why their uneducated plan won’t move beyond their press releases. They keep the details out of the public and know if they disclose them, the gapping holes will be exposed. Expect them both to go full tilt the minute they try to move from suggesting to demanding and they get told no.
No one with a shred of credibility wants to be associated with those two or what you call ECV. If they did, they would have a list of political supporters. They have none. Doesn’t that tell you something?
This guy is good ECT. This is the kind of positive energy that can succeed.
What’s really exciting is that it comes from Discovery Bay. With so many negatives coming from some Discovery Bay people on the fire issue, this is a fresh change in the right direction. This is the kind of person we need as a Supervisor. Keep up the great work Brooker. You are onto something. Your positive energy should bring people together in support.
Exactly right Caring Citizen, we had a fire department with much less population, and now with a larger paying population we have none! That makes no sense. Something is not right, we had it,lost it, and still paying. Question for Ect. Who gave you permission to post Mr Broockers name? Thought that was never made public!
Mac and his dillusiional buddy took the blue pill.
Based on the whining, they took a handful. What’s wrong Mac, afraid you will be exposed next?
Exposed? For what clown ? You have control to write the names in when it states never to be made public? How is that whining clown? You and your bunch are the whiners clown. Your threats and demeaning statements to others that comment are Stupid and unproductive, clown. Expose away clown!
Mac is right Burk. I think u done messed up buddy.
No, you are trolling under multiple names Mr. Brocker to make it appear you have support when its really you posting to back yourself up. We have asked people to post under one name. You have chosen to abuse this page with consistent posting under multiple names and sharing other peoples editorials.
Burk I said back a few responses ago I had messed up. I was using names to paraphrase the subject I was talking about. I MESSED UP. Once you told me I tried to stick with on name. My bad.
You could have just as easy said stick to one name. But you choose the drama.
Let’s get back on task and focus on fixing the problem ECCFPD inadequate funding. Answer my question !!! You admitted Sacramento was the answer…. Are you willing to work with union,’ECV, to address the problem in Sacramento? Yes or no. Not about you and me. About working to fix the problem in Sacramento. Or is it buisness as usual with you?
Mac Clown… per our own guidelines, we have asked folks not to use multiple screen names. He is not following the rules outlined.
Burk, you have my email address. Please email personally. We can meet for coffee. Talk. Work some of this out. Look forward to it. It will be just the two of us.
Comments are closed.