Click above image for a list of fire meeting dates.
The East Contra Costa Fire Protection District, which covers Brentwood, Oakley, Discovery Bay, Byron, Knightsen, Bethel Island and a total of 250 square miles of far East County, is expected to ask district residents to approve a $197-per-year parcel tax next June to relieve an annual $2 million revenue shortfall and bring staffing levels up to industry standards. The shortfall, which last year resulted in the closure of two stations – one in Byron and one in Discovery Bay – was brought on by plummeting property values and a tax-sharing formula put in place in 1978, when the district was staffed primarily by volunteers. The growth of the area has required that the district become a full-time provider, yet funding remains at volunteer department levels.
If new funding is not found, the district will exhaust the reserves currently being used to help pay for operations by next July, and severe cutbacks will result. If the tax fails, officials predict that three more of the district’s remaining six stations will close, and staffing would be slashed from 48 personnel to 24.
In an effort to inform voters of the details of the situation and answer questions or concerns, a series of meetings have been scheduled in each of the communities served by the district. The first meeting will be held next Monday at Discovery Bay Elementary School, 1700 Willow Lake Rd., starting at 6:30 p.m.
See accompanying graphic for details on upcoming meetings. Groups that cannot attend the meetings but would like to hear the district’s plans first-hand are encouraged to make arrangements for additional sessions by contacting Fire Chief Hugh Henderson at 925-240-2131.
75 word limits is fine. That’s a nice excuse unless the proposal refers to a larger document that may reveal possible loopholes for special interest.
Also, I'm not demanding anything. I'm asking these questions for not only myself but for others that have concern over their hard earned dollar. If it were a demand coming from a taxpayer, then it should be addressed. The taxpayers are the last word here. You should not ever forget that.
The public has gone through several promises of a better District over the last 20 years. The results were not anticipated to be less service and a new tax this expensive.
In order to sell this new tax all the cards must be on the table for everyone to inspect. Hiding anything as has been done in the past will greatly affect the outcome. The major development that has occurred in East County over the last fifteen years along with lack of direction from the Supervisor has created this problem. People want to feel assured that the District will not come back in ten years for more bail out money.
People want to be feel comfortable knowing that everyone including future development will sacrifice like both the Firefighters and the resident taxpayers have.
If not, it's time for the County or the State to step in and start over again. Threats of doom and death are a pretty sad way to extract money from people who are already taxed out. That tactic should not be used. If the District cards are on the table, if there is an open book where each dollar comes from and goes, this measure will have a much better chance to pass. If people conclude that this new tax does not benefit everyone equally it will fail. Honesty and transparency will be the key to success.
Before this parley becomes out of control as it has in the past, this will end my comments on this article.I hope everything works out in the end. Catch you on the next article.
Happy Holidays !
First, as stated previously, the people who can address your questions don't read blogs and internet message board forums. Asking these questions here will not get you answers. I don't know if this is just an attention thing or you really don't understand the process.
Second, the innuendo about growth. The growth approved in East County the last 15 years has been in the cities. If you have issue with that, you need to take it up with them. The last major unincorporated project in East County over which the Supervisors had final say or approval was Discovery Bay West which was approved over 15 years ago.
Third, if you think the County or the State can simply step in here to fix this because you expect them to, then again you don't understand process very well. The tax rate area formulas which dictate how much money goes to fire are state level. BoS has no control. To alter the division of the property tax dollar means another government service will have to give theirs up to redirect it to fire. So do you want to sacrifice schools, police services or medical to take some of their money away? Absent that a parcel tax enhancement is our only option. Your belief it could be made up via extra fees on development doesn't pass muster because the math doesn't work.
Repeating this "special interest" stuff serves no purpose other than to cloud the discussion in the eleventh hour. Action needs to taken by early March for the June ballot. You have insisted many times you will not vote for the measure unless you have your questions answered, apparently online even. So your best option at this point is probably to just vote "NO" and move on to another issue if you can't see the value of keeping 6 stations open versus the 3 we will be left with otherwise.
Just a suggestion to spare you some grief.
What about the possible different rates for multi unit, ag, developer, commercial, and industrial. Why is that information not available?
There must be some verbiage that was used as a prototype for this.
My concern is twofold. On one hand there are several substandard parcels in East County. Some parcel as small as 400 square feet.
On the other hand there are approved divided standard lots in the hundreds ready for new housing soon. Will these large developments that are unfinished be subject immediately to the full tax?
I believe the approved undeveloped standard buildable lots that have a parcel number be taxed along with the developed so the District can be ready as the homes are built and not after.
I also believe that a lot deemed by the county as unbuildable (such as the few substandard vacant lots in East County) have discounted or waived tax fees.
Finally, I believe all multi unit/multi story buildings should have a premium added to them as they require more services.
Addressing that verbiage now with the public in the proposed tax is paramount to anyone trying to make a prudent decision to vote for or against the measure.
You're suggesting some things which are beyond the authority of the District to dictate or impose upon taxpayers.
Your questions might be better directed to the Assessors office. If they can't answer, they can probably direct you to who can.
Why does Con Fire get more money per engine from Health Services for Paramedics than we would get if this tax passes?
( I was told 75K from Walker, Mr. Mankin quoted 37K in a previous article comment, and the Chief has told me now its 30K )
Why are we having these public meetings before the actual propositon is even written ?
( I am told the verbage for who pays what and how will be decided in February 2012 )
This is not a "per engine" allotment as much it is based on available funds through Measure H money. There is a $10/residential parcel tax on your prop tax bill that goes to a fund which is then distributed out to participating districts. Taking an arbitrary number out of the air, if we as a collective district contribute $300 annually to the fund, we could potentially recoup that much to be divided between 6 or 8 engines(stations) based on our current service model.
I cannot envision nor can I find any county documents to suggest we could recoup more money than we collectively contribute to that program which is called CSA EM-1. To do so would be taking money from other contributing districts and there are several legal implications there.
From a July 2011 document I see that ConFire received $1.193M in funding, but when you divided that between the 28 engines in their district(going from memory) it doesn't come out to anywhere near the 75k figure you raised.
ECCFPD currently receives some monetary support through CSA EM-1 and a benefit value assigned to the 3 QRVs that are in our district. If the QRVs go away, per the document we would be entitled to receive additional monies, though it does not get into specifics on the mechanics of that deal.
Any resulting disparity in the math that shows how much goes to each engine within neighboring districts has more to do with population densities than anything else. ConFire has higher densities and effectively higher contributions to the fund. ECCFPD being lower density doesn't contribute as much and as such return of dollars would be less per engine.