Home East County ECCFPD Board Votes to Postpone Benefit Assessment, Will Reissue Ballots

ECCFPD Board Votes to Postpone Benefit Assessment, Will Reissue Ballots

by ECT

ECCFPD Benefit Assesment Sept

In a unanimous vote, the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District decided to cancel the current Benefit Assessment process and reissue ballots in the future.

The decision came after it was discovered that 10,000 ballots were sent to parcel owners with incorrect data due to a data error provided by the Costa County Global Information System and fire hydrant mapping provided by Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.

Due to bad data, it resulted in nearly 10,000 ballots (25%) being sent out with Benefit Assessment values lower than anticipated—some as low as $37 instead of $103. The result, it increased the Benefit Assessment values in 32,000 ballots.

Chief Hugh Henderson explained they began to research the problem and find out if this was an isolated or widespread issue. Through research, they found the assessed properties came in lower than estimate due to data sources being wrong.

“The missing data has led to artificially reducing benefit calculations across the parcels. The research also related that the problem was not isolated to one parcel or one neighborhood,” explained Henderson.

According to Henderson, the data that was incorrectly placed on fire hydrants and roadways.

The fire hydrant mapping data was obtained from Contra Costa County Fire and is also used in their computer systems and related to that data missing was 3,000 parcels across the district. The data used by the road mapping was obtained from Contra Costa County Global Information System (GIS), which is missing significant data on over 7,000 parcels.

“Some of the parcels were impacted by both data bases,” said Henderson. “Between both data sources, it’s been determined that benefit points per parcels estimate up to 10,000 parcels have been wrongly distributed points resulting in benefits on those parcels being wrong on their ballots. Furthermore, the inaccuracy of the data of 10,000 parcels also effects the calculations of the other 32,000 parcels across the District.”

Henderson explained that by correcting the data on the 10,000 parcels, it should reduce the amount of assessment on the other 32,000 parcels.

“The recommendation tonight is to stop the current balloting process for the Benefit Assessment, update the data bases in the engineers report, reprint and send out ballots to the entire district as part of the new proposed ballot process,” said Henderson. “We estimate this process will take roughly 6-8 weeks.”

The chief shared that by stopping the current process and fixing inaccuracies, it will allow the District to comply with all the requirements of Proposition 218 and provide maximum transparency on the Benefit Assessment Process.

According to Henderson, the largest area impacted by the error was the Southeast area of Brentwood, however, there were pocketed areas throughout the District.

Gil Guerrero, vice president of Local 1230 and fire captain of ECCFPD, said he didn’t even know where to start with this.

“I really tried to understand it, but I cannot get my arms around it. After all we gone through, all you went through, this should not have happened. This should have been double checked, triple checked. This was so critical. I don’t know where to start. The data that was old was not even considered, we just took it for granted that it was accurate information,” said Guerrero. “Personally, as a Captain of this District and being in this District for 18 years, I am so embarrassed I do not even know where to start. I’d like to apologize for the people who endorsed this campaign because of the relationships we have and now they look kind of funny in this as well—when I say funny, I mean embarrassed. Their name and faces are on our mailers.”

Guerrero further pointed out that the District needed credibility and leadership in this process and they did not get it.

“The chief said he is pretty confident that the next round of data will be accurate. We cannot do that,” said Guerrero. “Where is the engineer, where is Tim tonight, I think everyone needs some answers. How do we plan on getting the message out? What is this going to cost us? It’s $20 million dollars that we are likely going to lose. It was a $20 million mistake on top of that it’s the time of all the meetings. How do we plan on correcting it. Those are the questions we have for you.”

Vince Wells, President of Local 1230, requested some clarity on the timeline of 6-8 weeks.

“We obviously want this to pass and concerned about what this looks like, but at the same time we are firefighters, we are truthful, honest and we want to make sure that when we go out to the public that they are secure in what they are voting for,” said Wells. “The other concern is what is going to be the impact on timeline of station closures? Are you going to address that at a future meeting?”

Diane Burgis, Oakley City Councilwoman, spoke as a resident who endorsed this saying that we are all human and people make mistakes but questions have to be asked in the name of transparency.

“Since this is a meeting that was supposed to bring transparency so people know what we are doing I do want to ask that question. I want to ask that when we are collecting data, are we explaining what we are collecting it for?

Burgis wanted to know if they are explaining to the County or CONFIRE why we are pulling data or are they just pulling it off a computer that they have not updated the information. She  also wanted to know about the ballots received if they will open them to know where the District stands—would they legally be able to open them up to see if it even makes sense to go forward.

“I would also like to know what is the cost of this redo? Another tough question is how will you know when you have it right with the right information. Again, I’d like to know what that timeline is. What does 6-8 weeks mean?” said Burgis.

Bob Mankin of Discovery Bay called this error a “disaster” saying the District is now in crisis mode.

“I would caution you to take a step back for a few days and think long and hard about what you’re going to do in terms of taking action to rectify,” said Mankin. “I do not think rush to respond is in your best interest.

He argued that in 6-8 weeks, it puts the District in the middle of the holiday season saying the data was sitting on someone’s desk not being entered is a problem.

“I think in terms the opposition, they are looking for any opening to come at you and so far they have been fabricating nonsense, now you are giving them an opening. If one data point out of 10,000 is not entered properly or a possibility or you have incomplete data, you are done. You really have a problem,” said Mankin. “Please do not rush in.”

Ronald Johansen, board vice president, urged District staff to find out who was responsible whether it be a single person, a group of people, or agency.

“I believe as a board we have to stand for what is right and the right thing to do is to stop this process and maintain the integrity this Board has always had and that is to ensure the truth comes out and we explain to the public that we are human and mistakes were made and this board will own those mistakes and will accept those mistakes and move on from them and still fight to find solutions,” said Johansen.

Johansen said that this error does not mean the end of the world but that they can overcome it with solutions.

“I can’t wait to go out and tell 34,000 parcel owners that they are going to save money on the ballot process that we had just submitted to them. To me that is a positive spin on this,” said Johansen. “My desire tonight is to stop the process, but I am concerned about timelines but I am optimistic that we can meet those timelines.”

Director Steve Smith thanked the staff for the extra hours over Labor Day weekend for a district wide review, but is disappointed the process has to stop.

“I am disappointed by this turn of events and I understand the general sense of frustration the public has expressed. I have to bare in mind that the Engineer Report broke new ground in level of level of analysis attempted and that any pioneering effort runs the risk of encountering the unexpected,” said Smith. “Once again, we must deal with a situation, a problem not of our own making. That said the only right decision in my mind is to stop this process.”

Smith all stated he expects to hear from the naysayers.

“I quite expect the usual naysayers to trumpet their views that government can’t do anything right which means to perfectly execute and complete a course of their own ideology. But I will rely on the basic fairness majority of residents who recognize we have been doing our best,” said Smith.

Board President Joel Bryant was not pleased.

“I appreciate the terminology of upset and disappointed, but frankly I am ticked off. I am angry, embarrassed, furious this situation happened it shouldn’t have happened. I live my life with the personal expectation of excellence and I expect other people to do the job they are supposed to be doing when they are supposed to do it,” said Bryant. “Obviously I do not know we could have done differently up to this point to discover that this information was not accurate. If this was indeed a county issue, then someone needs to be held accountable at the county.”

Bryant explained that this situation is similar to the space shuttle Discovery which exploded because it was a problem they overlooked that they hoped no one would notice that cost the lives of astronauts.

“If they had done what this District has done when we found the problem, we immediately addressed it,” said Bryant. “Is it a mistake, its more than a mistake. It’s potentially putting the lives our residents and families in danger. This is inexcusable.”

Bryant argued that the District can play the blame game later; however, they need to triage the issue, fix it and continue to fight for the district by saying throwing in the towel is not an option.

“Any dollar that is spent is better than losing a life because that dollar isn’t spent,” said Bryant. “Whatever amount of money spent is justified by the saving of one person. So we can’t just throw in the towel because mistakes were made. It’s been said that stuff happens. When stuff happens and what you do with it is what determines the future.”

Bryant further explained that when you rely on someone else to do their job, it puts you at a disadvantage saying that through the process whoever was responsible for getting the data dropped the ball and tis cost the district dearly.

“If there was any question that this Board and District are being transparent, this should answer it. It would have been very easy to continue this process and hope nothing happened until it was further down the road and back paddle and make excuses, but we are not doing that. We found a problem and it’s a problem that makes me sick,” said Bryant.

Bryant further stated that there are things that need to be found out with fault being at the end of the list. Cost is important, but it’s not the most important thing right now, but rather getting accurate and up-to-date data is at the top of the list while the timeline is a priority. He also called station closures are important.

“It’s not just right to continue to surprise people and blindside people,” said Bryant. “I am angry about this and it shouldn’t have happened.”

Official Press Release

East Contra Costa Fire Protection District to Reissue Ballots for Fire Suppression Benefit Assessment

OAKLEY—The East Contra Costa Fire Protection District will reissue ballots to all property owners to reflect updated fire data received from outside agencies.

“It is important that all property owners be assessed the correct amount, so we will be taking a close look at all of the data to ensure complete accuracy,” said Fire Chief Hugh Henderson. “A timeline for reballoting will be determined at an upcoming Board meeting. Our goal is to conclude this process, including the balloting, by the end of the year. We expect the recalculation will result in lower assessment amounts for a majority of property owners in the district.”
The data to be updated includes fire hydrant locations in newly developed areas. Proximity to fire hydrants is one of many criteria weighed by an engineer’s report detailing the special benefit received by property owners under a five-station fire protection model.

If the benefit assessment is approved by a majority of property owners, it will fund the cost of keeping five stations open for five years. This would include hiring and training additional personnel, allowing Station 54 in Brentwood to reopen, and would likely result in reducing fire emergency response times for most residences and businesses in East County. Station 54 was closed temporarily September 1.
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. With federal funding set to expire in November, the Board of Directors voted unanimously on August 4 to propose the assessment to property owners. Ballots were mailed August 22. These ballots will not be counted and property owners are asked to discard ballots not yet returned.

If the fire suppression assessment is rejected by property owners, 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.

ABOUT THE EAST CONTRA COSTA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT: The East Contra Costa Fire Protection District spans 249 square miles and our firefighter/EMTs serve more than 100,000 residents in the Cities of Brentwood and Oakley, the Town of Discovery Bay, the communities of Byron, Bethel Island and Knightsen, the Marsh Creek/Morgan Territory area, and all other areas within unincorporated Contra Costa County to the east of Antioch and to the southeast of Clayton.

Editors Note:

Absent from the meeting was two representatives, Oakley Mayor Randy Pope who was recently appointed after volunteering. Also absent was director Greg Cooper who was going to teleconference in, but according to Henderson became unavailable.

You may also like

31 comments

Bobby Lott Sep 3, 2014 - 7:55 am

Just 1 more example of why I will never give this district a dime more than they already get. Joel Bryant should be removed from this Board comparing this error to NASA. Is he kidding?

Robert Saw Sep 3, 2014 - 7:59 am

I see a fire board taking no responsibility for failing to double and triple check data before sending to voters. Instead the blame is on another fire district and the county. Fire the Chief and Board and start over. Joel Bryant can talk about an error costing lives, but their own failure to check their work is going to cost peoples lives. Sorry, but I can no longer support a district that operates like this.

Heather Sep 3, 2014 - 8:00 am

This makes me so sick to my stomach. The only people who suffer now are those who need help and their firefighters will now have longer response times.

Joe Reality Sep 3, 2014 - 8:01 am

Is this fire board just making up the rules as they go? Vote no on the fire tax. Merge with confire and provide real solutions.

David V. Sep 3, 2014 - 8:13 am

I am glad the board was honest and upfront with the mistakes made by the engineers and the faulty data provided by the county. Transparency is very important and I am thankful that they are being transparent with this large issue. Other agencies may have tended to cover up the error and proceed. It shows me that the board is being honest and up front. Mistakes do happen and from what I see it wasn’t the boards fault. Looks like someone at the county level is not keeping the data up to date. I am glad they are backtracking, fixing the data and re-sending the ballots later. It still has my yes vote on my multiple parcels.

Calvin Sep 3, 2014 - 8:18 am

Pretty pathetic you are comparing a ballot screw up to NASA.

CaptainKlutz Sep 3, 2014 - 8:29 am

I had decided to abstain from the original vote…so it didn’t take 2 yes votes to override me. Now, I’m leaning to “no”.

Shouldn’t someone on the board take responsibility and resign?

Julio Sep 3, 2014 - 9:56 am

This is typical in the State of California and across the nation that there are so many PEOPLE NOT DOING their JOBS. Particularly bothers me as it is rampant in Antioch, Oakley and Brentwood. It is just stupid stupid stupid . In dire straits and need of fire services and you do this. My God.

CaptainKlutz Sep 3, 2014 - 10:17 am

The more I think about it, Joel Bryant should take responsibility and resign. He’s the President so the buck stops there…that and the sheer unmitigated stupidity of comparing this kind of screw-up to the Discovery. Amazing.

For why Sep 3, 2014 - 10:55 am

The comments reported in this article regarding compiling with Prop 218 are troubling.

East County Independence Sep 3, 2014 - 12:23 pm

It would be irresponsible if you do not go after the Engineer for this blunder. Contra Costa County’s GIS is riddled with errors, and any competent Engineer should have known this. The Engineer obviously cut corners by using this data instead of validated information.
Let us all hope that ECCFD does not also use CoCo County’s data for locating fire hydrants!
This is yet another reason why East county needs to become an independent county. It is not like there is anything useful coming out of Martinez anyway!

Better off. Sep 3, 2014 - 1:25 pm

Klutz,saw,Lott
Sounds like everyone just wants to sit around and blame. The article reads that all party’s involved have apologized. The union, the fire board, everyone except the county the consulting firm and the Fire Chief. All the nay Sayers were going to vote no anyways. What is important now is the same mistake is not repeated and that we move foward with a valid process that is fair and accurate to all property owners. I’m impressed that the board had the courage to stop the process even though they got mud on their face. If people can’t realize that this process is transparent and their is much value in that then they would never be happy anyway. Some people just want to point fingers and look for any reason to not do the right thing.

Buy a Clue Sep 3, 2014 - 3:25 pm

The Board’s decision to stop the process was dictated to them by the fact that it was now an invalid polling. Recognizing a decision that is dictated to you doesn’t require a large amount of courage.

The Engineer simply writes formulas. It’s not within their scope of work to survey hydrant locations or roadways. They are reliant upon the District to provide accurate data to input for the formula. Other than a fail safe code loop to identify parcel assessments that would have fallen outside of a programmed range, there is nothing here to fault the Engineer for.

This is a fire District. A District responsible for the validity of the data within it’s oversight. To pin it on the County or ConFire is the equivalent of you copying your test answers off your neighbor in class, getting a “D-” grade, then blaming your neighbor. That’s what the Board just did.

It would be more impressive if someone on the Board just stood up and owned it without any finger pointing.

JimSimmons 42 Sep 3, 2014 - 3:07 pm

@Better Off,

Yes, the party’s can apologize but if you are impressed by this Board then I would encourage you to have higher standards. You can’t screw up this bad and go back to the public. I wish a three station model on no one, but this will be a tough sell.

Just Curious In East County Sep 3, 2014 - 4:35 pm

Here is a question for everyone…..what would happen if the district dissolved? Does the state (not that I like the idea of the State of California running the show) have an obligation to continue fire/medical for the community while a new district is formed? I’m thinking like Stockton and Vallejo going bankrupt. State controller comes in and runs the district, all of the former agreements go away and new rules, regulations, pay structures, union contracts all get redone. I truly don’t know the answer, and I know it sounds like the NUCLEAR option, but if its so broken that it can’t be fixed, the question everyone should be asking is “how do we start over” Just saying.

Buy a Clue Sep 3, 2014 - 5:50 pm

In other words, the status quo of fire fighters making less than average household incomes is too much in your mind and your goal is to pay them less?

According to US Census figures, the average household income of Brentwood is $85k. A fire fighter, making up half that household income, starts at $41k. Based on the f’d up thought process in America for compensating females, his wife would statistically average less. Putting our professional fire fighters in a situation where they cannot even afford homes in the District they serve.

I think yours is a lame lead in toward further insulting the employees of the District and a cowardly attempt at union busting.

The fire department has a steady enough revenue stream and a low enough long term debt load that no Judge would entertain a bankruptcy. It’s doesn’t meet basic criteria of insolvency for a Chapter 9.

Comparisons to the complex problems of Vallejo and Stockton are just silly.

Just Curious In East County Sep 3, 2014 - 6:10 pm

Just so I am clear….I said “I truly don’t know the answer” that is why I posed the question. Seems a bit of a leap that I would suggest that I was “union busting”. I did not suggest that your responses were “silly”. I would expect the same respect.

Better off. Sep 3, 2014 - 5:12 pm

Jim,
I’m impressed that they admitted there was a mistake. I would have thought that paying a consulting firm who are supposed to be experts that there would be a level of trust that the job was done correctly. The board are not experts in polling,engineering. For you to assume any board would be is foolish. Remember they volunteer for this position. Are you suggesting we spend vast sums of money on personnel who are experts on these topics. Trust me Jim I set my goals very high. But who before this board has done a better job. Who has stepped up to help this district. The county and cities have been dodging bullets for many years. And you are like many who sit back and bitch. Step up Jim and do something . At least the board and the few people that show up are trying. The point is we can’t change yesterday, but let’s improve and do the right thing for the future of this dept. The citizens and the employees deserve that.

Chuck Sep 3, 2014 - 6:06 pm

Just,
The county would take over and the district would be taken in to Con Fire. Don’t let any meatball tell you different.The good part is the firefighters would get equal pay with Con Fire. The union will not let go of the district to Cal Fire. Making a merge with Con Fire the only real solution for both the firefighters and the public.

Buy a Clue Sep 3, 2014 - 7:10 pm

Johnny(Chuck), nice of you to chime in.

So please explain to people who understand basic math how a fire district that has over a $10 Million dollar budget deficit facing them next year(ConFire) is going to save ECCFPD by absorbing it.

The only thing holding ConFire up at the moment is their SAFER grant, which will eventually go away.

You see, you like to play this little game of headlines without any supporting facts.

Here’s the Fitch report to lay it out in plain English:

http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/28715

The fact is a merge with ConFire does this:

1. Transfers governance to central county interests and reduces our control over our destiny.
2. Does not improve the revenue shortfall one iota
3. Does not reopen a single fire station.

ConFire is being faced with closing more of their own. Any suggestion they could absorb ECCFPD and reopen stations is a mathematical pipe dream.

On the positive side it does simplify auto-aid calls. That’s about the only upside to be had with a merge.

Oh, and I almost left out. It does set the table for your and your mentality deranged email buddies to continue your unhealthy obsession with trying to pin this on Supervisor Piepho.

So while you play your childish games on that front, the rest of us more worried about the safety of our families and our community will suffer.

But once again I suspect you will RUN from the facts or just pretend they were not posted, only to come around and parrot the same stupid merge nonsense in a day or two.

You have no solutions to offer here. You’re the dog who’s been chasing the car for 2 years. Well now you caught it, dumbass. So what are you going to do with your 3 station end result that you fought so long and hard for?

That was easy Sep 3, 2014 - 8:06 pm

Made my decision easy I am voting no!!

Concerned Voter Sep 3, 2014 - 8:40 pm

Name calling aside, there are many valid points being made by different people here.

I expect/hope ConFire will succeed in taking on EMS transport and provide a new service model with less redundancy/waste and more revenue for the fire district. East County is watching with interest, and don’t be surprised if this leads to the consolidation that has been discussed for years.

Steve Coaker Sep 4, 2014 - 9:13 am

It’s even more insidious than this. Have you noticed this is not a private ballot, that your name and address must be submitted with the ballot? This means ECCFPD will know if you voted against the assessment, with the database ability to ‘accidentally’ delay or deny emergency response.
It’s a sorry tactic, since people hold firefighters in high regard (myself included). ECCFPD leadership continues to use incendiary tactics to get more money; a more reasonable approach to voters would have succeeded long ago.

jb Sep 4, 2014 - 9:48 am

At some point in time there will be within most counties movement toward modern first responder entities that replace antiquated multi agency fiefdoms. Right now the change in service demand, the need and technology for this kind of movement exists but is being held up by those desperate to hang on to power and influence …and yes that includes the unions. In my opinion in ccc this is all made worse by a pack of sr. elected officials that are not make it happen folks who are afraid of doing anything to loose the support of organized labor as they recognize if they don’t get reelected they are not employable at the same high wage/luxury comp rate.

If anyone without a special interest takes a step back and looks at the mess in ccc then looks to more progressive trends ….they will see how ripe ccc is for change and that this time period has been and very much still is the right time to begin the effort to create a model entity that meets today’s needs at a lower cost-higher service ratio with better response times offering a broader array of services to the public. Some places will be able to get away with old methods for a while longer but for those that have hit the wall (read the fire depts in cccc) the time to move forward is now.

And by lower cost-higher service ratio I mean less redundancy, more cross training, more in-house services (eventually ambulance/ALS), way better/more efficient command & control, broader career paths…and very importantly multiple wage tiers with less at the top-bottom and more in the middle.

For what ever reason(s) dangerous jobs do not pay that well, this is fact. There are very critical to every day life jobs in ccc that are more dangerous than the jobs related to this discussion and they pay even less with little or no pension. Nobody is outraged by that fact that these hard workers who take bigger statical daily risks than FD employees often can not afford to live in the exact neighborhoods mentioned. The eastern aspect of ccc is diverse and it is not logical to say that every county employee who works in this area should be able to afford to live at any address in this area they so choose.

For those who can not defend the status quo by extolling its virtues I suggest you stick with your tried and true methods of deflection by name calling, personal insults related to stature and appearance or by pointing a finger at diminished mental capacity. By doing so…by focusing on the messenger rather than the message you make a loud and very clear statement about the status quo.

cheers

Buy a Clue Sep 4, 2014 - 10:34 am

Ahh, Jeff, we soooo missed this copy and paste fantasy post of yours. Where you been hiding these weeks while the plane went down?

It needs to be noted once again, that not once since you have floated this hairball pie-in-the sky social experiment have you:

– Penciled out even cocktail napkin, chicken scratch quality financial analysis

– Ditto for any addressing of the legality of funds you intend to divert to this

– Like your buddies John and Don, you can’t seem to verbalize where this redundancy exists today. Probably because you are simply parroting a line of crap you heard somewhere else and you are unable to critically analyze on your own. Right now it’s an engine+ambulance response. Not once have you explained how AMR is supposed to take on new tasks, which they themselves have stated they are not equipped to do.

– No explanation or supporting evidence of why you insist private sector solutions are by default more cost effective. When it has been proven time and again not to be true.

– You have yet to identify even one municipality or special district within the entire country who is deploying this game plan of yours. Yet you continue to insist it’s right around the corner for everybody.

– By “CCC” one would presume you mean Contra Costa County. I think you’ll have a hard time getting the folks in San Ramon Valley to buy into your drivel. So good luck with that! Not all fire districts within “CCC” are sucking wind.

Did you bother to read the Fitch report linked earlier? Pay particular attention to Addendum H where all the naysayers like yourself weighed in with a barrage of very tired talking points and rhetoric. One by one they were shot down by a third party professional agency with no horse in the race.

But just like your buddies, you choose to ignore those facts and go back to trying to create your own reality.

Your commentary on pay vs. danger levels is classic race to the bottom mentality. It is people like you who are on the front lines to destroy the middle class in America and create a full-on Aristocracy, where you fully intend to be in the upper echelon raining down your condescending tone and treatment on the serfs.

The granularity of affordability based on current pay structure was explained in sufficient detail that most objective folks can comprehend. The average home price in Brentwood at this time according to Zillow is $447k. This being one of the more affordable areas in all of CoCo County. Meaning fire fighter households are unlikely to qualify for even below average housing if trying to get into the market today. There was never any suggestion of being able to buy anything anywhere. That’s your classic hyperbole in action once again because you are incapable of having an honest discussion.

You think that’s just fine for the people who serve you with critical protection to live below average standards of living. I don’t. Putting it in simple English I carry a greater respect for those around me. You, OTOH, would appear to be fine with being King living above a mass of poverty. Wise people don’t wish to be rich men in poor countries.

IMO, public employee unions are the last man standing between people who conduct business like you completely plundering what’s left of the middle class. Do I need to link to a graph showing the co-linear decline of unions with the decline of the middle class or will you admit you’re just avoiding the fact?

There are lots of names for people like you, none of which I invented or even have to use here. They are obvious.

You want to ever be taken seriously, Jeff, step up your game. You’ve been pimping this pile for 2 years. There is no excuse for not having brought forward at least some rudimentary analysis of funding and legality, both of which are in serious question.

People who promote massive social reinventions that put the public’s safety in real jeopardy while they have no skin in the game deserve every bit of ridicule they get, IMO.

You just attacked all manner of public and union officials, who daily exercise far more logic and fact based decision making than you ever will. Then close with saying you shouldn’t be called out for your unsubstantiated and unsupported nonsense.

Can you ever get through a post without blatant hypocrisy? Serious question.

Dawn Sep 4, 2014 - 5:59 pm

Stop focusing on the mistake, instead focus that stations are closing and people are losing their safety net. No one ever figured to ask if the data was accurate? Unreal!

Chuck Sep 4, 2014 - 7:02 pm

Clueless,
First of all you need to stop with your obsession and fetishes with Johnny and Supervisor Piepho. It doesn’t do anything for you but show your insecurity issues.
Secondly, to answer your gibberish about a merge with Con Fire. It is very simple.

EAST COUNTY RESIDENTS PAY THE SAME TAXES AS THE REST OF THE COUNTY ALREADY.

We should get the same service and the firefighters should get the same pay doing the same job. You and your union bosses will probably blame it on Prop 13, but that would be disingenuous. The tax pie was cut out by the county. The county and your Supervisor who you fetish about need to fix the problem. This is why we pay them so much money. Don’t you remember how they gave themselves a 60% raise? It is because they are responsible for this problem. The county level is where the problem originated in 1978. The local County Supervisor extended the problem in 2009.

This assessment is in direct violation of the Prop 218 law voted in. Should this assessment be challenged, hundreds of thousands of dollars will again be wasted. Just like the last go around and the current ballot debacle.

We all pay the same taxes in this county. The county needs to make things right at the county level. Not only for the residents of east county but also for the under paid firefighters who do the exact same job as Con Fire firefighters.

Buy a Clue Sep 5, 2014 - 8:18 am

Johnny, johnny, johnny.

So much ignorance and so little willingness on your part to act any different.

The County did not enact the revenue formulas of AB8, which was the follow-on to Prop 13 and sets the amounts. That is a STATE level piece of legislation.

Strike One.

It was the Grand Jury who made the recommendation to raise the compensation to Supervisors to bring them inline with other equivalent County Supervisors in the State. We really know you’re running out of material when you’re digging up 8 year old crap.

Strike Two.

No, Johnny, you don’t pay the same taxes as everyone else in the County. Your absolute tax expenditure is based on your property’s value. For you to claim you pay the same as someone in Walnut Creek, Orinda or Moraga is particularly nutty. But you’re the right guy for that job, apparently.

Strike Three. You’re out.

One would have to be mentally handicapped to believe that the cost to deliver fire services for two Districts only miles apart would be as widely different as the revenue flows are for ECCFPD vs. ConFire.

Once again basic math is your downfall.

We are well aware that your OPINION is that it is illegal according to Prop 218. Multiple people with actual licenses to practice actual law don’t agree with you. Simple as that.

jb Sep 4, 2014 - 8:13 pm

lets be clear on some stuff…….

I did not invent the concept of multi function first responder agencies. But yes it is a concept I have been talking up for some time as it is my opinion that this method of providing a leveraged array of often related services will become a powerful trend. I see it being a trend that will benefit the employees just as it will the general public. A rolled up entity will for sure have fewer employees but those who remain and come in as new will have stable long term careers with plenty of opportunity.

As for a budgetary starting point ….how could it be anything but the sum of all the players existing funding sources? On top of that I would envision seeking more from the county discretionary funds. Yes, some cuts would be required such has 50% of each supervisors budget and combining various health related county agencies with (as an example) Solano County (this concept already exists in CA and other states to save $$ and eliminate proximate redundancy). If more $$ are reasonably still needed then the voters could be asked but I would say this would be the dead last alternative and likely not necessary.

Not at all in my writing of today does it say anything about AMR as a county provider. In fact it suggests the possibility of taking this service inside the new entity. I am the first to say that private business typically runs more efficiently than a gov operation but over the last 3 years I have seen smart FD’s operate their ambulance service just like private enterprise. It is no secret where the money is in the ambulance business and with the right planning nothing prevents the FD ambulances in Truckee and other places from seeking the gravy runs. Truckee even goes outside their primary jurisdiction to seek additional insurance reimbursed revenue.

My last words on this topic for now are just like my initial remarks …… now is the time to establish a solution to this mess that looks beyond the status quo and focuses on enhanced public safety at the expense of the pervasive fiefdom mentality.

Buy a Clue Sep 5, 2014 - 8:08 am

What you mean, Jeff, is you do not dispute a single one of my points.

You don’t understand revenue flows within the County or what’s legal and what is not for how the money can be spent.

You don’t care that AMR has a legally binding contract to provide transport services.

It is complete and udder bullshit to claim private enterprise operates more efficiently than government across the board. Private sector provided health care is the biggest and most stifling cost driver crippling America today.

In your own words, your grand plan will result in more layoffs, which means reduced service. The problems facing ECCFPD(did you forget that was the issue?) are not going to be resolved by laying more people off. Merging with a neighboring fire department that is down 40 head at the moment and then laying more of them off is also not going to fix the fire department(s). You talk like one of the fools who think fire suppression can be handled by anyone who raises their hand and knows which is the business end of a garden hose. Classic example of de-evolution and someone disconnecting from the 21st century.

Discretionary funds do not fund fire departments at the County level. It’s not a mandated service. How many times have you been told that?

Cities and their charters and whether they mandate fire suppression are a completely different animal. Spend more time studying the basics of government instead of trying to lecture the people who live it and know it better than you ever could hope to. You just look silly.

Key members of the union here live in Solano. You’ll struggle long and hard to pass off your headline BS that offers no details and no insight. You just claim it’s a cost saver because you said so.

You don’t understand the basic differences between government and private enterprise. Government is about providing services and promoting the general welfare. It’s not a profit enterprise that preys on the citizenry with wage slavery and cost cutting that shows no regard for service levels or the welfare of the labor force and the people they serve. In other words. government was never designed to be a self-centered “I’ve got mine, so screw you getting yours” entity like you appear to run your shop.

Saying you’ll “make money” with an ambulance service is ridiculous. In one breath you claim private enterprise can do it so much more efficiently. So why is the ambulance provider in Santa Clara County on the verge of bankruptcy? Not enough customers in the 1.5 M aging souls in SC County, you think?

This issue if about preserving fire stations and fire personnel. Not some hairball, idiotic and poorly cited idea to raid budgets of other unrelated departments just because you, like your buddies Don and John, still have a chip on your shoulder for the Supervisor. You never got over that whole water ski thing, did you?

Jeff, there are quite obvious reasons when no one at any level of government here ever took you seriously. You just have to open your eyes to see it.

TransparencyAndTruth Sep 24, 2014 - 6:25 pm

Todays CCTimes reported that ECCFPD got a huge windfall of 1.4 million in tax revenue. There should be something from ECT on this. It also says part of the money will be used to buy down the pensions and medical benefits that are behind in payment. I hope this is not an example of this new benefit charge we are getting. Why was this information held back? I’m trusting ECCFPD less every time I see this kind of information exposed.

Comments are closed.