The East Contra Costa Fire Protection voted unanimously to move forward with a Benefit Assessment that they hope the public will support to ensure a five fire station service model.
On Monday, the Board approved its Revised Engineers Report and three Resolutions for the proposed assessment and the assessment ballot proceeding that will give property owners a say on the level of service they wish to receive from the District.
Under the updated calculations, if approved by the public, the District will raise $4.27 million in added revenue to ensure the downtown Brentwood Station re-opens and the Knightsen Station stays open. The District says 93% of the District would pay $104 per parcel while other types of improved property will pay around $175 while other large parcels will pay $250 or more.
If the Benefit Assessment fails, the District will permanently close the Downtown Brentwood Fire Station and the Knightsen Fire Station while eliminating 18 additional firefighter positions. This would leave the District with 9 firefighters at three fire stations on duty at any given time.
Gil Guerrero, Local 1230, he encouraged the Board to move forward with the Benefit Assessment.
“We just can’t move forward with four stations, maybe three shortly after. We are here to encourage you and offer our support,” said Guerrero.
Assemblyman Jim Frazier: commended the Board, the chief and the firefighters for what they have had to deal with in keeping the community safe with limited resources.
“I am here in support of the benefit assessment and I am hoping you put it out there for the public to weigh in because a lot of us take fire service for granted,” said Frazier. “We don’t realize they are there until we need them. This is something that our property tax values will plummet, our insurance rates will possibly go up and as a resident of Oakley I rely on the services of public safety in case there is an accident or incident at my home.”
Frazier praised the firefighters for usually being first on scene and mentioned a recent dinner event in Discovery Bay where a woman passed out. He said firefighters arrived quickly on scene while there was a long wait for transport.
“I am looking forward to support of the fire board to make sure we get this out and take every available chance we have to serve the public notice that they need to step up,” said Frazier. “I have been up in Sacramento with our firefighters looking at other opportunities for funding. Unless we are willing to adjust Prop 13 or reallocate resources throughout contra Costa County, right now our opportunities are very slim.”
Tom Baldocch, Knightsen School Board, noted that the District is a special district and not an independent special district in the county and they do not have a voting right on LAFCO.
“There is a lot to do with reallocation and this board is an important part of the community. We are here to serve so that the public can come to right away. But ultimately, you are still under the Board of Supervisors control in a lot of aspects,” explained Baldocch. “I honestly believe when this District was formed, to be able to put the heat on us locally and take the heat off the Board of Supervisors. Our Board of Supervisors should be reallocating our money to give us the same fair cut of what our property taxes are at. Sure, Prop 13 is set and not going to advocate for a lot of reform on that, but the thing is if we are only giving a few cents on each tax dollar that we put into this fire district we should be reallocating it on our priorities in East County.”
Baldocch noted his own property tax value and where the money was going.
“I believe our fire department is important. I don’t believe I should be funding some welfare project in Pittsburg or in West County, I want to see our money here,” said Baldocch. “This is where I believe we have a fundamental bigger problem than what we have today. “
He closed by saying he would rather pay the firefighters because it’s cheaper than paying his insurance agent.
Brentwood Mayor Bob Taylor: Tonight I do not represent an individual person, I represent close to 55,000 persons in the City called Brentwood. I am only speaking for Brentwood tonight. We cannot survive on 1-fire house. 55,000 people, I can tell you right now it’s not going to happen because it can’t happen” said Taylor. “What is going to happen if this assessment does not go through is we are going to lose a life, a child, a person who we love very dearly. It won’t be because of our firefighters because our firefighters and emergency response people are some of the best people working literally at a handicap.”
The mayor of Brentwood request the Board put it to a vote of the public saying it’s been two-years of working towards this.
“I thought this room should be packed tonight and here is the reason, you are going to make a decision tonight and we are going to know if it’s going to fail. Or if it’s going to pass,” said Taylor. “As a city, we are going to have a make some tough decisions if the thing fails. It’s called a reality check.”
Oakley vice mayor Kevin Romick urged the Board to move forward with the Benefit Assessment.
“I am here as a citizen of Oakley to support your decision and let you know you are headed in the right direction,” said Romick. “You need to get this passed and you need to get it done now.”
Director Ron Johansen noted that those who likely will
“I would like remind everyone that we have heard a lot from the naysayers over the past two years that I have been on this board. A lot of people who have come forward to complain or say they were against the benefit or against the special tax or spending any additional money towards this district, not one of them, including the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association ever came forward with any alternatives that we could utilize or have realistic expectations of success and would have helped stabilize this district,” explained Johansen. “This District has truly evaluated every option available to this District and there are no other options to this District other than the benefit assessment at this time. I want to remind everyone, this is not the end all, will solve everything, but it does buy the district time and time is the most important thing we need at this point in order for other changes to hopefully occur in the near future with either Proposition 13 as well as development within the cities to improve revenue streams.”
Johansen further explained that if this tax fails, three stations is playing Russian Roulette with a bullet in every chamber and the District will lose and in a very dangerous position.
“We are definitely looking at people losing their lives and homes. It’s a decision that I hope we are not going to have to face and an outcome we will not have to face. There is a real reality check here, “said Johansen. “Without it, it’s a district that I am concerned with will not succeed or remain in service and the model of service we will see is a lot different than what we have today. I hope we do move forward with this benefit assessment.”
Director Steve Smith highlighted that for so long the mechanics in why they are going out for a Benefit Assessment and added revenue that it’s time to remind the public why they are doing it. He explained that the board would got to the public one more time and let them choose whether they want to receive grossly inadequate fire service.
“We have publically exhausted all other options and have trimmed this department to a point where we are asking for roughly half the amount as proposed parcel tax that was defeated in 2012. With regards to pensions, this district has taken all actions to control cost to the extend legally provided by law,” said Smith. “With regard to relative allocation of property tax, no local body has any control over that process. It’s set by formula set down by the State. It would take a voluntary relinquishment by somebody in order for us to get the extra amount. I just don’t see that happening from the schools, and other much smaller districts.”
Smith noted the District is stuck with the current allocation they receive.
“We have all heard a lot of uninformed commentary which I no longer take seriously. For those who wish to be informed, we have shared all the same information this board and finance committee receives. We have taken special care to answer all queries and provided documents requested by Taxpayer Association and County Republican Party leadership,” said Smith. “I specifically reject any suggestion that an outside study will accomplish anything. The Fitch Study of CONFIRE… could only find relatively minor changes and even with those changes CONFIRE would still have a revenue shortfall.”
He further noted how both ECCFPD and CONFIRE firefighters have done a great job keeping the communities safe with limited resources available.
“The Benefit Assessment is far more fair allocation than a parcel tax could ever be. It is accordance with the latest property data and legal opinions of the courts and I certainly intend to vote for it,” said Smith.
Director Joe Young – I came onto the board two years ago and the main reason why I came on was because of the defeat of the last one and the feeling we needed to take a close look at the financial situation. We have done that over the last two years,” said Young. “We have a very economical and skeleton budget providing excellent service. If the public understood what they were buying, they would buy the right thing. I think we have gone far extensive effort to lay out what they are buying in the difference between three stations and five stations in the engineers report and how that is benefiting each property. I feel strongly we have put the information there and its time we give the public the opportunity to make the choice. I feel quite confident that based on the supportive comments we have had today, that the buyer when informed will make the right choice.”
In a roll call vote, the District unanimously approved the Measure.
Once ballots are mailed out and submitted, a public hearing will be held on April 27, 2015 at 10:00 am at the Oakley City Council Chambers (3231 Main Street)to determine public interest. The Board will then make the final decision to move forward with the assessment on May 4.
Press Release via ECCFPD
East Contra Costa Fire Protection District Board Votes to Seek Property Owner Authorization of Fire Suppression Assessment
OAKLEY—The East Contra Costa Fire Protection District Board of Directors voted Monday to seek property owner authorization of a Fire Suppression Assessment that will provide locally controlled funding to prevent further service reductions, permanent station closures and firefighter lay-offs.
“Last year’s was among the hottest, driest and worst fire seasons on record, and the December rains could result in a heavier grass crop in 2015 that may lead to more grass fires in the spring and summer of 2015,” said Fire Chief Hugh Henderson. “Even with a dangerous fire season looming, local revenue for fire and emergency response services is far below pre-recession levels. New delays in response to 9-1-1 emergencies and closed fire stations would compromise public safety.”
Because brush and house fires can double in size every 30 seconds, if potential new service reductions are enacted, firefighters may need to shift their emphasis from saving a home on fire to protecting neighboring houses from a spreading fire. The District’s ability to respond to multiple emergencies at the same time would be especially hampered.
Ballots will be mailed no later than Friday, March 13, arriving the following week in a light green envelope. They are due back by Monday, April 27, when a public hearing will be held and ballots will be tallied to determine the Board’s authority to enact a fire protection and response assessment that will provide stable, locally controlled revenue that cannot be taken away by the state or other agencies.
Assessment ballots issued last summer were not counted as that balloting process was cancelled due to incomplete data, and no assessment was enacted. The new ballot process replaces the process initiated last summer and reflects updated fire protection data for many parcels in the East County area. The updated data reduces the proposed assessments for most East County properties when compared to the assessment considered last summer. Property owners wishing to participate in the balloting process must fill out and return their new ballots this spring, even if they already cast a ballot last summer.
“To ensure complete accuracy in developing the new assessment, the District recently updated a variety of its data sources, including those providing information on fire hydrant locations in newly developed areas,” Henderson said. “This data is important for a potential assessment because proximity to fire hydrants is one of many criteria used by engineers to determine the special benefit created for a specific property as a result of improved fire service, which determines the appropriate level of the assessment for each property.”
If the benefit assessment is authorized by a majority of property owners and enacted by the District’s Board of Directors, the assessment will fund the cost of keeping five stations open for five years, rather than the three stations that can be funded by current and projected District revenues. This would allow Station 54 in Brentwood to reopen. The station was closed temporarily September 1, 2014.
District revenues, which are heavily dependent on property taxes, decreased 40 percent due to the recession and housing crisis. Significant budget cuts, including salary freezes and increased payroll contributions for pensions, were made.
If the fire suppression assessment is rejected by property owners or the Board of Directors, the District will likely make the Brentwood station closure permanent and be required to close an additional station. Operational changes to call responses and protocols will need to be implemented if the District returns to the three-station model.
14 comments
Thanks ECT for posting on this important issue. One correction; although the ballots will be tabulated at the April 27th Board special Meeting and public input taken, for legal reasons the final vote will be taken at the regular Board Meeting on May 4th.
@ECT
Last chance? What are you advocating on the Districts behalf now? I would support this if I lived in the District, but report down the middle please.
Director Smith, the people who you claim are uniformed probably do not take you seriously either. Stupid comment out of your mouth and shows arrogance when you should be doing the opposite to try and sell those living in this District to support this.
Johansen is correct that the Taxpayers Association or Republican Party did not provide options or solutions therefore should not complain or advocate against it. They have a responsibility to ensure public safety not reduce it.
@Jim, what we put out in the article was what happened. The headline is the headline and is the last chance before the District goes to a 3-station service model if the public rejects this deal.
I actually support Mr. Smiths comments. The District has been bamboozled by folks with no skin in the game making stuff up to kill the previous tax measure and those lies have haunted the District ever since. Is it smart politics? Probably not. But he is right.
@JimSimmons42-
Among the uninformed comments I can no longer take seriously:
1. That the Board of Supervisors have any authority to change property tax allocations.
2. That Chief Henderson and his Administrative Assistant are somehow a “bloated” staff instead of one hell of a bargain for the taxpayers.
3. That starving the District of funds will have any effect on Brentwood city policy, Oakley city policy, Contra Costa County policy, the State of California, the pay and pensions policy of any other fire district, welfare, Section 8, environmental regulations, or anything other than the protection of people and property in far East County.
4. That the Fire Board can unilaterally reduce pensions.
5. That we could possibly find a sufficient number of qualified Volunteers with local jobs that they could afford to leave multiple times per day plus many hours of training each year.
6. That people can expect governmental services without paying for them.
We still get these comments continually, and do our best to explain the facts to anyone who will listen. The people who keep making these comments ignore our explanations or are mindlessly repeating their personal feelings in the absence of any investigation. The Taxpayers Association and Republican leaders have at least shown up.
No new taxes. Keep pounding the Board of Supervisors to do the right thing and merge or reallocate funding. Keep calling Mary Piepho to bring this issue forward at the Board of supervisors. It’s her District and she has said next to nothing.
Don’t know if I have ever read so much bad, incorrect, and patently false information coming from elected officials at one sitting. This fire district is INDEPENDANT and has no connection to the county or any funding within the county. They were granted their INDEPENDANT status years ago, yet the local elected officials can’t quite seem to come to grips that this has everything to do with separation from the county and its funding. It’s simple people. Therefore you might want to ask those politicians and directors that spoke why they somehow think the county should fund a district which is not a county district! It would be illegal and they know it. They are trying so desperately to blame everyone but themselves for their own piss poor leadership. Face it folks, this board is the worst of the worst.
Once again it’s bad information all over again and the very same reason the voters will not support this. I feel bad for the firefighters and citizens that have had to make due with less. It’s not their fault and as a result we wil all suffer. I place the blame squarely on the directors and leaders that cannot be honest with the public. It’s a disgrace and yet a painful reality.
@Dan B–I fail to see how your comment relates to any quoted comments from an actual Director. We know and have consistently stated that we can not expect any additional funding from the County. That is precisely why we are putting forth the Benefit Assessment.
I believe he was referring to Tom Baldocch who was elected as a Knigthsen School Board Trustee.
ECT, you are most likely right. That is why I said what I said about that issue in my own comments at the Board meeting.
I am sick and tired of these directors saying this is not a solution but a band aid. I am sick of them saying we need more time. They have sat on their buts with this pie in the sky mentality of just more money. These fools should have been working on a solution that SOLVES the problem, not gives it a band aid.
Johansen even says its not an end all will solve everything but is buying more time. Well hogwash. I will not support that and neither should anyone else. The public should demand a fix, not a band aid. Shame on this board.
Tom Baldocch, way to go confusing the hell out of the public. The Board of Supervisors gave the area what they wanted which was local control. You sir, are confused. Being elected, you should know better on how tax funding works.
@Voting-
Your being tired doesn’t make the situation any less true. There is a lot we can and expect to do as a Board and Staff once a minimal service model is adequately funded. As for a full solution NOW, try selling the cost of THAT to the Voters. We all hear the “no new taxes” mantra all the time. Consideration of further changes is waiting in the wings for a resolution of the immediate problem.
I am 22 years old and a first time home owner. My generation just keeps getting taxed with no end in sight. I worked my butt off to buy a house at 22. I do not believe one word this fire district says. That trust was broken when they lied on Measure S. If you need more money, then reorganize. My generation deserves better!
@Jose-
How do you think the District lied?
This whole thing is another scam. What a waste. Steve don’t play stupid. The district got this pot of extra tax cash last year according to this website. I bet it gets another large sum over what it predicts on paper. Stop the scare crap. The threats are now just plain stupid. Anyone that succumbs to the government threatening them for vote or else is setting the stage for multiple threats down the road. It even says here that this is not a cure. Geesh, anyone who votes for this mind as well flush their money down the toilet. They will keep coming back for more along with more threats. All there has been is lies.
Comments are closed.