At the June 2nd East Contra Costa Fire Protection District Board Meeting, the District will look to approve its 2014-15 preliminary operating budget which includes a reduction in fire service to East County beginning in December 2014.
Staff and the Finance Committee are recommending an Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2014-15 in the amount of $12,322,428. The Finance Committee will recommend to the full board that by December 1, 2014 that the District will begin operating with two less stations and be forced to cover 249-square miles with just three stations and 30-firefighters.
The proposed FY 2014-15 Operating Budget as recommended would follow this staffing model:
- 48 full-time operational personnel through November 30, 2014
- 30 full-time operational personnel December 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015
- 5 stations staffed by a minimum of three personnel through November 30, 2014
- 3 stations staffed by a minimum of three personnel December 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015
- 2 administrative positions
The current five-station model is in place due to a $7.8 million SAFER Grant which allowed the District to open two-stations after Measure S was rejected by voters—it will expire November 18.
The District makes 96% of its revenue from Property Taxes. With the housing crash, the Districts revenue declined more than 24% from five-years ago. Staff is estimating that the District will gain 5% (or $430,000) in additional property tax revenue in 2013-14.
If You Go:
June 2, 2014
6:30 pm
3231 Main Street, Oakley
Editors Note:
With the FEMA Grant, the District was able to temporarily reopen the Downtown Brentwood Station and the Knightsen Station. These two stations are the two likely to be closed for a second time.
Also, one thing to keep in mind is the District has already lost a number of firefighters with more than 20 applying for a lateral position with Contra Costa County Fire Protection District per our May 8th post. As of May 8, the District had 43 firefighters, should the District drop below 36 firefighters, they would be forced to close a station prior to the estimated Dec. 1 date.
30 comments
When you say the fire district will be down to 3 stations and 30 firefighters to cover 249 square miles, that sounds like a lot of firefighters! Then I figured out you meant 30 firefighters left in “employment”, not necessarily on duty. If my math is correct, 3 stations equals 9 firefighters on duty to cover all of east county. Nine is more relevant than thirty when discussing the seriousness of the situation. (No wonder they haven’t been able to pass a local tax). Have they figured in vacation, and sick leave coverage in that Budget? What about if a firefighter or two gets Injured? How will they cover all of those vacancies? Do they have a projected overtime budget?
@ECV
Per the Board Staff Report, 3 stations staffed by a minimum of three personnel December 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015
3 stations by x 3 firefighters = 9 firefighters on duty for 249-square miles each day. Keep in mind, they need 15-firefighters min for a structure response.
Thanks! That puts it into a much better perspective.
We appreciate all your info and updates on east county topics. Keep it up!
The reason the tax initiative failed is the citizens feel fire protection has gotten too costly due the lavish pay, benefits and retirement that have been granted. Correct that, provide a plan and budget that addresses these concerns in a serious manner and you will be able to live within the current budget.
Agree 100%. The “revenue” (aka tax of 12.3 million per year) is the “income”. That’s what you got ECCFPD LIVE WITHIN IT. Lat time we were down to 3 stations the world did not come to an end and it wont again.
I’m not going to engage in a retirement benefit or wage discussion but what I can tell you is this. When East Contra Costa closed 2 stations last time the Contra Costa County Fire Department had to send help everyday to Brentwood and Oakley. On some occasions even Bethal Island and Discovery Bay. That is not something they have to do and it could stop. The citizens of the entire county deserve excellent service and pay taxes for it, the County doesn’t divide the money fairly and political action of the past has hurt both departments. If a solution isn’t worked out that is actually reasonable (not volunteers or min wage firefighters) the citizens are going to suffer, that’s reality! The governance of the County needs support emergency services and the citizens need too. I don’t want to pay more but I would for the piece of mind and security of my family. Remember East County Fire doesn’t have paramedics either, when an ambulance takes 10 to 20 minutes to get to your emergency and the fire department can’t deliver life saving medication you probably will be upset. When a fire engine shows up and has to wait longer for more help because the law says they can’t go inside a burning building without 2 firefighters outside to rescue them you will be upset. All it will take is one building fire or a grass fire to wipe out the entire response capabity of the department, help may be coming from as far away as Pittsburg and Concord. People will say it’s because the firefighters are greedy pension mongers and they are wrong. Firefighters deserve to be paid to be professionals just like anyone else and they have pensions, not as lucrative as they once were (pension reform last year)The problem is and continues to be poor oversight and leadership from local government. It will be all of our falts for not fighting for our firefighters and the fire department we should have!
I appreciate your well though out discussion points. My concerns remain Pay and Benefits as I bid on work in very expensive neighborhoods occupied by firefighters and Sr. Executives from moderate to large local employers. So I feel the job of firefighter has a value and I feel we currently pay too much for fire protection. I have reviewed the pay reports available on line from the CC times. I have followed Dan Borenstein’s column in the times. These two sources combined by my own experience leads me to believe we are paying too much for fire protection and until it is addressed in a real way, I cannot in good conscious support giving more money to East county fire. I like the idea that the City Council of Henderson Nevada came up with when they figured out that it would have been cheaper to pay to replace every home that burned then it would be to approve the requested budget from their fire protection chief. Just something to think about.
The sky is falling again. Houses are selling at record prices since the recession. The fire district will get more than thought. Enough money to keep five stations open. Their motive is to pass a new tax. It sounds like Piepho’s comment about making the public feel it may come true. I hope no one dies over it. Can’t wait for a merge to stop this tax for ransom stuff.
Chuck, good to see you can still pull ’em straight out of your butt.
The District will receive approx $9.4M in revenue absent the safer grant. Since you insist that is sufficient to operate 5 stations, please provide a comparable example of a professional District that operates 3 man engines with 5 stations for that revenue anywhere else in the US.
Make sure it’s in a comparable cost of living situation so what we don’t engage in the classic naysayer scam of comparing apples to oranges.
While you’re at it, please explain how combining two underfunded Districts(both are SAFER grant supported, both have large deficits) and somehow coming up with a properly funded one. Specifically, explain where the supposed cost savings will come from. You’re going to need to realize about $17M in savings to prevent future station closures in a combined scenario.
All a merge does is lock in what ECCFPD can afford with current revenue. ConFire doesn’t have extra resources to give or fill holes. You will eliminate autoaid and mutual aid issues between the neighboring Districts. but any thought that a merge would increase service to ECCFPD is a pipe dream.
When will pay, overtime, benefit and retirement concessions be part of the discussion? That seems to be the big white elephant in the room that everyone is ignoring. It is the single biggest driver if costs.
White Elephant?
Concessions have been made for years. Well documented if you bothered to follow the topic. How in the world can you say it’s being ignored when the tools at CoCoTax made it their focal point in the last ballot measure?
Do you even know what the average salary is for ECCFPD? Or is this a classic kneejerk talking point that you heard someone mention?
This is a government service. Like most service jobs, public or private, labor costs are always the biggest expense. Not a surprise and not really a novel concept.
Ok “Buy a Clue” I thought this was a forum where adults were discussing the issues pertaining to the East Count Fire department. A simple straight forward answer will suffice. I was trull looking for information that maybe you had. Leave the sarcasm out of this discussion if you want to gain support for more fire protection dollars. Adios Ass hole. I am off to continue my fight to move back to a volunteer fire Department.
JtF,
There is no law that keeps a firefighter from saving a life inside or outside a structure. That is a union made up policy. Good or bad you speak with false tongue. Except for one statement ;
The citizens of the entire county deserve excellent service and pay taxes for it.
Read your words. The sky must have fallen and hit you on the head. I can’t wait for the merge. Merge Now !
Chuuuuuuuck!
I thought you knew how the old saying went. The one about keeping your mouth shut so as not to remove all doubt.
2 in, 2 out is a union thing, huh?
http://www.iaff.org/hs/pdf/2in2out.pdf
Juuuuuust missed the runway, Captain. Better luck next time??
Now, Chuck, you seem to be struggling with this internet thing. This is supposed to be a dialog. Give and take, if you will. So when you come in here ranting, taking personal shots and then not answering the most basic of questions posed to you, well then you look like a full-on t-shirt wearing troll.
I asked you for an example of another fire department in the US making 5 stations go on the revenue this District brings in. Now unless your goal is to crater what shred of credibility you have left by ignoring a salient question that is squarely on topic, you might want to step up, Bud.
Or don’t.
You government services operation experts seem to have a TON of imaginary expertise. Goes well with the truckload of projection you engage in while attempting to criticize others.
Just humor me with one thing, Chuckie. Do you walk into grocery stores for like a gallon of milk. But when you’re only willing to pay $2 for that milk that costs $4, do you then brow beat the checkout clerk and insist you should be allowed to take it home anyway?
So WTH are you doing applying that tactic to fire? It’s been clearly stated in numerous reports that the District is underfunded by as much as 50% of what it needs to provide adequate services to East County. That is the opinion of professional 3rd party analysts. So in what warped universe does the unqualified opinion of some anonymous jagoff like you and clueless rerun Mike here negate the professional’s take?
Like my alias says, ’bout time you buy a clue.
Chuck- there is no merger in the works. Where on Earth are you getting that one? Just making it all up as you go along?
Let’s take it from the top.
Chuck-
The 2 in 2 out policy (law) is not made up nor is it a union policy. It was developed, and implemented by FED OSHA.
The homes in East Co. are not selling at “record prices”. Quite the contrary. We are not even close to the levels reached during the pre housing melt down. Consult a realtor and/or the CC Tax Assessor next time before spouting off.
Mike-
Overtime is a known cost savings and a necessity in the fire department where constant staffing is required. If you are not familiar with this concept, I suggest you look it up.
Benefits, (pay) and Retirement concessions have already been completed and implemented. (Look that one up too).
Did you just start paying attention to this issue? Your lack of research and prior participation in the discussion is currently the noisiest elephant in the room. This forum is for discussion, but when you show up a day late and a dollar short (asking questions that have been asked and answered numerous times) you come across as an internet troll. If you are truly seeking information, then act like it. Do at least a little bit of research prior to showing up and making ridiculous statements and calling others @ssholes. You are only making yourself look stupid. Act like a child and you will get treated as such, that’s how blogs work.
Amongst the reasons the tax failed was not due to “lavish” pay, benefits or retirement. 50 thousand a year for a firefighter in bay area is not “lavish”. Now deduct retirement contributions of 25 percent and another 20 percent in taxes and show me how one would live comfortably or buy a home on take home pay of 30 grand a year. I’m guessing you didn’t think that all the way through did you?
The tax failure(s) can mostly be attributed to voter confusion of the real funding issue. This was driven by a few individuals who demonstrate willful ignorance and participate in spreading bad (false) information. The issue was further exacerbated by a certain undereducated and closed minded reporter at the paper spreading personal “opinion” over reporting due to his personal jealousy and rabid obsession with public safety workers. Sorry, it that is who you were getting your information from. How does it feel to be duped by a guy who has no background in finance, pensions or anything beyond working for a dying institution as a hack? Why would you rely on information from someone that has no education or experience to back up what he opines about? If you think he has a shred of credibility or relevancy then you won’t find any sympathy here. There is a reason that the local and state decision makers ignore him. Figure it out.
I did just join the discussion, or didn’t you realize you haven’t heard from me before. You really should pay better attention. It seems everyone but you is misguided, and ill informed. Your elitist doctrine is not conducive to a meaningful discussion. I was hoping to use this blog to supplement the information I already have. Clearly, I have stopped at the wrong place for meaningful dialog. As far as asshole, I just call them as I see them.
Clue,
Thanks for the link it was just as expected. Notice the link is part of a union IAFF link?
Not surprising. Keeping your mouth shut surely does apply thanks for providing the example. Saving a life and saving a structure are very different. f saving a life is at stake you would probably sit out front and wait for the tag team method. That’s the difference between you and a real firefighter. Here is a part of what you supplied as an example you say is against the law. Your spin is really revealing your lobbying effort for the union.
” If initial attack personnel find a known lifehazard
situation where immediate action could prevent the loss of life, deviation from the
two-in/two-out standard may be permitted, as an exception to the fire department’s
organizational plan ”
Federal OSHA has no direct enforcement authority over state
and local governments
If you are going to criticize someone, At least be credible. You seem to be the story teller here.
Chuck,
The state of California(CAL-OSHA) has adopted the regulations pertaining to IDLH atmospheres. You probably need to do some research as it does appear you are uninformed. It will also make your arguments hold water instead of making up your own information, “That is a union made up policy”. By the way…terrible grammar.
It’s an IAFF document that talks about the FEDERAL OSHA rule, Chuck. Did you really believe that the state of California would have more lax safety rules than the Feds??
Now you’re back peddling. We were talking about 2 in, 2 out. Period. In what screwed up world are we supposed to reset the rules, accept a lower standard of response, deliberately allow more property loss, all in the name of some logic defunct ideology?
Let’s cut to the chase here. You and the clowns who troll with the CoCoTax/Howard Jarvis mentality fully expect public employees in general and professional fire fighters in particular to be compensated at or about the same rate as the person handing you your burgers through the drive up window.
When you boil away all the BS that goes on in this blog, that’s really where the rubber meets the road. Oh you do try to hide it, but I think most objective readers can see through your game.
I have asked you twice now, and here’s your third.
Where is another professional department in the United States of America delivering a 5 station, 3 person model for the $9.7M that this District will receive in revenue this year.
For the bonus question you will also ignore, how are you expecting to combine the two neighboring Districts and come out with any service model which would improve the horrible situation that we are facing with a stand alone District.
There are opinions, which is all you offer Chuck, and there are facts. You should try engaging in less of the former and more of the latter if you ever expect to escape your troll rating here.
So we are clear here, Chuckie. What I lobby for on this topic is the safety of my family and my community. I, unlike you, do not not have some warped pension envy thing going on. Nor do I feel that saving less than 30 cents a day in some messed up ideology statement at the ballot box is an intelligent move. I do not know, nor do I care, how or why you were raised or have been conditioned to spend an inordinate amount of time and energy on a blog trying to DENY people a reasonable income for providing a vital service. Perhaps in your mind establishing a psychological pecking order is really that important.
How about instead of just whining, you show up and contribute? That requires a bit more than typing the word “merge” in a post.
” What I lobby for on this topic is the safety of my family and my community.” I had to laugh at that. We can all see through that lie. You are a lobby for the union, who’s only concern is to raise taxes so they can over staff every station with no accountability. The only option you see is raise taxes or close stations. I have managed several different businesses. When my budget would be cut, I would have to lay off some people and move responsibilities around while at the same time delivering the same quality of service to my customers. I couldn’t close a couple of stores. Instead of paying another $20k for another poll, why not pay a McDonald’s manager to come in for a day or two and show the agency how to manage a budget while keeping the same quality of service.
Joe, Chuck already has the top troll award in the blog. You’re gonna have to try harder than that to knock him off the podium.
I stated the truth. Not my concern whether you believe it or not. Loudmouth blog banter is cheap and plentiful. If you showed up at meetings or otherwise participated in the community to solve the issue, you would have more credibility.
Screaming online that it is someone else who needs to take a bullet while you sacrifice nothing won’t cut it. The condescending tone and implied entitlement mentality that is behind that is fairly transparent.
Your business explanation has a few holes in it. Such as laying off people and delivering equivalent service. Plus if you were simply managing them, closing locations was a decision above your pay grade to start with.
When it takes 5 engines and 15 guys to fight a structure fire, instead of running your mouth, just explain how you’re going to do it with only 9 guys. You must be an expert in fire science and suppression since you insist it’s easy.
McDonald’s pays at or close to minimum wage. The result is they have a workforce that relies on food stamps and other welfare that you and I pay for to get by. It’s basically a corporate welfare scam because management doesn’t value their employees. Privatize the profits, socialize the losses.
If that is your role model, you gots some issues, Bud.
Now I see the truth in today’s paper. The stations will close because the district has to pay more money for pensions that have fallen behind. It sounds like that Dan guy has been right all along. We will lose services to pay for pensions. Being a union man myself it really is unfair that my union promises me a pension but the pension amount is based on the return of the minimum investments. Some years were high and others low. At the end they are calculated annually on contribution payment AND investment return. In this case, we are holding the bag no matter what happens. There in lies the root problem. If the district can’t afford the pension payment they cut services and pose a risk to life and death over making those payments. That is what the article is summing up and it’s wrong. The fire pension needs overhaul in a bigger way than they are doing. Pensions and raises should not be the cause for risking the public’s safety.
Chuck, quick question if that “other” paper is accurate…. just how many ECCFPD pensions is the District paying right now that is making them go broke?
If that other paper is inaccurate I would hope you would make them correct it. I don’t know how many ECCFPD pensions there are. I just know the paper said the stations will close because of the higher pension payments. That’s good enough for me unless shown otherwise.
So you freely admit you’re a Borenstein drone who doesn’t question whatever he puts in his opinion pieces.
All we need to know right there.
No back peddling. read my comment again. You and your twin added spin to it.
The comments made above Dave V came by cut and paste from his IAFF link.
You can right a story all you want while you wait for a tag team and let grandma die, but there is no rule or law that keeps you from saving her. 1,2,3,4, or 15 firefighters inside or outside, the real firefighter would save her.
Wow Chuck..You can’t even get your facts right in the comments, let alone knowing anything about how government works. I did not post the IAFF link, Clue did. Everything in that link was correct when it comes to IDLH regulations in California.
The other problem I have is your use of the english language. i.e “You can right a story” I believe the correct verbage is “write”
Here is some more homework for you
29 CFR § 1910.132-.140: Personal Protective and Respiratory Equipment (includes 2 In-2 Out
As for the article,
Again, research on your own, don’t rely on the news media, they really aren’t that reliable these days. I would say 99% of new media have turned into Op-Ed articles.
Look back at the actual minutes and videos of the board meetings,
The stations will close because of a flaw in the funding formulas. It has nothing to do with pensions, salaries or anything that can be controlled locally. Pensions are constitutionally protected so there is not much the board can do about those. There was a pension reform that was enacted last year, however the effects of that will take a while to catch up and would not help in this situation.
Ok I have stopped commenting on this blog. But I can’t sit still for this. Pension are “Constitutionally” mandated? What constitution are you referring to? Firefighter pensions are out of control. It has nothing to do with “Pension Envy” it has to do with common sense. I have build a business that will pay a very lucrative pension when I retire. I built it. I invested my money. I put my money at risk. I worked my ass off without “Overtime” payments that “Save the tax payer money” (Please!) without a tax-payer provided firehouse, equipment, turnouts, etc… When firefighters invest in firehouses, fire trucks and equipment then and only then can they command Sr executive level pensions. Until then, they earn and live in a manner equivalent to their contribution. Close the fire houses, close them all. We will go back to a volunteer fire department that serves the community more then it serves themselves. Man does it feel good to get that off my chest. Let the mind numbing, union funded rhetoric start!
Mike, the reason why people like you and Chuck don’t come across as credible on this issue is you approach it in a totally biased and one sided manner.
Whether it’s a government agency or a private sector business, it’s both revenue and expenditures in the equation.
Neither of you can seem to grasp the revenue shortfall issue, which has been here since the beginning. This is a full-time professional department attempting to operate on volunteer funding levels. That does not work. Never will.
There is nothing “Senior Executive Level” about salaries which average $50k/yr and are required to contribute over 25% of that to pensions. I don’t know where you’re getting your information about ECCFPD compensation, but clearly you are off the mark. You suggest you don’t understand why overtime is a money saver, so your time might be better spent on learning the basics instead of going off on a union rant.
We are not going back to a volunteer department. Worked fine in a rural 20th century. It does not work in this large, suburban, transit challenged bedroom community in the 21st century. For logistical, training and liability reasons. You claiming to be an entrepreneur should understand these factors.
Your willingness to live with a 19th century style government infrastructure doesn’t mean the rest of us have any interest in going there.
Comments are closed.