readers' opinions

The Proposed Regional Fire Authority – Olympia and Tumwater’s Best Idea

Posted

When our lives and property are on the line, your firefighters answer the call every time, no questions asked, treating everyone equitably, professionally, and with compassion.

But we are at a critical time in the history of our fire departments. Our firefighters are busier than ever. Firefighters are working long hours affecting their morale and mental health, and they need new equipment. More firefighters are needed to ensure time critical, labor intensive, and highly technical work is delivered. Creating a Regional Fire Authority (RFA) merging Olympia and Tumwater’s fire departments will help address these needs.

Why do we need a Regional Fire Authority?

  • Fire and medical response are our most critical services, saving lives and property
  • Call volume is driving response times to unacceptable levels
  • Firefighters are struggling to keep up with the demand
  • Equipment needs to be replaced
  • Fire and medical response costs are rising fast, competing with other City services

We need to take action now before the system is broken!

Call volumes are increasing dramatically

Since 2012, Olympia’s population has increased 21% to 56,370 and Tumwater’s population has increased 51% to 26,360. The fire department call volumes have correspondingly increased for Olympia from 8,200 to over 15,500 calls a year in this same time period. Tumwater’s call volume has similarly increased from 2,700 over 6,000 calls for service a year. Most importantly, as shown in Figure 1, both departments are experiencing more multiple calls at once, straining our firefighters and medics even more. The increase in calls for service leads to longer response times.

During this time, the minimum staffing on duty has increased by only 3 firefighters in Olympia and 2 firefighters in Tumwater. Our staffing has not kept up with the demand!

 What’s being proposed?

On April 25th the voters of Olympia and Tumwater will decide if we should merge our fire departments into a Regional Fire Authority. Fire authorities are not new. Over a dozen have been created in Washington State since being authorized by the legislature.

The Olympia and Tumwater Councils have both agreed it makes sense to combine our fire departments. Emergencies don’t follow city boundaries.

The Olympia Tumwater Fire Authority would be governed by an independent board of Commissioners, accountable to the voters. The Commissioners would initially consist of 6 Councilmembers, 3 each from the Olympia and Tumwater Councils. It would gradually transition to a 7 member Board, made up of 1 Councilmember from each City and 5 democratically elected Commissioners that live in the two cities.

It will save us money in the long run

Olympia and Tumwater are right next to each other with a long common boundary. Merging our Departments will provide opportunities to share resources, making fire and medical services even more responsive and efficient, and saving taxpayers’ money in the long run.

And the best part about this proposal - most of the funding will come from existing property taxes and will not increase. A new “fire benefit charge” based on the two biggest factors that affect fire risk – building size and use (residential vs. commercial) will help cover the cost of setting up the RFA, purchase new equipment, modernize our facilities, and add new services to improve fire and medical response. A typical 3-bedroom home owner would pay about $21/month, smaller homes less; an apartment renter about $5/month. Mobile homes, which typically house our most vulnerable seniors and families, and low income apartments, would not be charged this fee. It’s a progressive and fair way to fund fire and medical response.

The equivalent tax rate of the benefit charge is LESS than the property tax rate the voters approved for parks in both Olympia and Tumwater. Shouldn’t fire and medical response be a comparable funding priority for our communities?

What will you get for your money?

More staff delivering services more efficiently.

Our firefighters are dedicated professionals who work tirelessly to ensure the safety of our community. However, with the high call volume, their resources are being stretched thin, and response times are increasing. To ensure our firefighters can continue to provide timely service to community, the fire authority will provide sustainable funding for:

  • 18 firefighters, staffing 2 basic life support units.
  • A CARES team consisting of healthcare professionals to respond to non-emergency medical and mental health calls.

The goal of these services is respond to calls with the appropriate level of care, using fire department resources more efficiently. Olympia is starting the process of creating these services, borrowing $4 million to get these services started. The RFA will finish the process of creating these services and have funding to sustain them.

Removing the City boundary means the nearest firefighters can respond to calls, increasing efficiency and reducing response times.

Continued Emergency Response

Our firefighters love helping people – it’s what they do. They would continue to respond to community emergencies, coordinating with the cities to provide these services.

Taking Care of our Firefighters

Like many agencies, our fire departments have difficulty filling vacancies and diversifying our workforce. PTSD is also a growing issue with all firefighters and medics due the traumatic situations they encounter on a daily basis. Dedicated staff will facilitate filling of vacancies, reducing the strain of overtime on veteran firefighters and coordinate mental health support, helping those who dedicate their lives to helping us.

Increased transparency and accountability

Currently, fire department costs are buried in city budgets. The RFA’s expenditures will be in plain sight. Through elections, the voters - not politicians, get to decide the level of service we want and how much we are willing to pay for fire and medical services.

New equipment, vehicles and better facility maintenance

Currently, our cities rely on uncertain funding to replace and upgrade our firefighters’ safety equipment. Facility maintenance is often delayed due to lack of funding. And critical response vehicles are getting worn out.

The RFA will have funds dedicated to purchase new vehicles and equipment, dedicated facility maintenance staff, and funds to modernize our facilities including accommodating women firefighters and medics, and energy upgrades to address climate change.

It’s about the future

Proposition 1 is a forward-looking measure that will provide our fire departments with the financing and resources to meet the needs of our cities as we grow and evolve.

A vote YES on Proposition 1 will ensure our communities have highly rated fire and medical response now and in the foreseeable future!

For more information UNITED FOR YOUR SAFETY (voteyesfireems.com)

What are other community leaders saying?

"I became a firefighter in Olympia in 1988. We had five response vehicles and about 3,000 calls to service a year. Today, we have the same number of vehicles but over 16,000 calls every year. We are overworked and understaffed, and it's affecting the moral and mental health of the people we count on to protect our communities.”

~ Mike Simmons, retired Olympia firefighter

“Fire and medical response are our most critical services, saving lives and property. It is important these services have sustainable funding for the wellbeing of our communities. As Chair of the RFA Planning Committee, I know we worked hard to make sure the RFA would be funded in a way that is progressive and fair. Let’s prepare our communities for the future by supporting Proposition 1.” 

~ Leatta Dahlhoff,  Tumwater City Councilmember

“As your elected Sheriff, public safety is my top priority. An important pillar of public safety involves developing future infrastructure to ensure our children and their children are positioned to succeed. After meeting with members of the RFA initiative, it is clear that regionalizing our fire department will provide sustainability for generations to come.”

~ Derek Sanders, Thurston County Sheriff

“When Lacey was considering an annexation into Fire District 3, I did extensive research on Regional Fire Authorities, Annexations and City-owned departments, including talking to Piece County’s RFA.  RFA’s make sense in that they save money, spread responses to the appropriate station saving time, and maintain continuity of a community’s fire safety.” 

~ Cynthia Pratt, former Lacey city councilmember

“Since my time as Fire Chief in Olympia, we’ve seen regionalized services work over and over, including Intercity Transit, the LOTT wastewater treatment plant, and the 911 system. In every case, the quality of service is improved, and it costs the taxpayers less in the long run. The same goes for the Regional Fire Authority, and that’s why I am behind it one hundred percent.” 

~ Larry Dibble, retired chief,  Olympia Fire Department

Cheryl Selby is mayor of Olympia. Pete Kmet served as mayor of Tumwater from  2009-21. 

The opinions above are, of course, those of the writer and not of The JOLT. Got something you want to get off your chest? Post your comment below, or write it up and send it to us. We'll likely run it the same day we get it. 

Comments

11 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • PCBigLife

    First off, nobody is questioning whether we value our firefighters. We are extremely grateful for the work they do. That not the issue. The real questions are what are the problems and what needs doing? This RFA is definitely not the way to go.

    Let’s get some things straight. 1) The RFA does not pay for any new firefighters, fire engines, or fire stations for the first seven years. 2) It does not provide 18 new firefighters. That is a program Olympia is already pursuing called Basic Life Safety (BLS) which is provide a more reliable EMS and ambulance service replacing the existing private sector business. This program is designed to be self-funding through insurance, copays, and other government funding. All the RFA does is repay a loan from Olympia to get the program up and running if the RFA passes. 3) The difficulty hiring firefighters is not a function of the government structure. It has to do with the pandemic, same as all other industries. In fact, Olympia was advertising for a firefighter with the low end of the salary at $82,000, and that’s for someone with a high school education. 3) It is expensive. The new fee raises $10.5M in the first year. And even though it’s on the property tax bill the fee can be raised without a vote to over $25M a year. The 1% limit does not apply because it’s called a fee, not a tax. 4) It is also regressive, charges apartments more per square foot than single family homes, penalizing renters and hurting affordable housing.

    Part of what the RFA will buy is $2M worth of redundant administrative (overhead) positions. For that money we could hire 12 new firefighters or buy two new fire engines every year!

    There are real budget issues that our cities face. But this is not the way to address them. It won’t help our firefighters with call volume; it’s wasteful, inefficient, won’t improve response times, is less transparent, and puts our good fire departments at risk. I encourage you to vote no, and tell our city governments to give us a proposal that will actually help our fire departments.

    Wednesday, March 22, 2023 Report this

  • Callie

    I would prefer if more fire-fighters were going to be hired. Olympia is adding 18 who will focus on individuals in distress. This is good. My understanding is that the RFA does not plan new people or equipment in the 7 year plan. That can't be right.

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • PCBigLife

    Callie, Your correct, it shouldn't be right. But it is. The BLS and CARES are good programs, but not a function of the RFA. They are in Olympia's work plan. The RFA will absorb them, and repay a loan, also from Olympia, but that's it. There is no money in the RFA to actually pay for these positions. That's one big reason, but not the only reason, why the RFA is such a poor idea.

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • Larry Dzieza

    There are so many inaccuracies and statements that need correcting I will need to do it in installments. Let's begin with the most talked about and well-documented "not accurate" statement:

    "the fire authority will provide sustainable funding for:

    * 18 firefighters, staffing 2 basic life support units.

    * A CARES team consisting of healthcare professionals to respond to non-emergency medical and mental health calls."

    If you go to https://www.saveourfd.org/basic-life-support you can see the documentation that demonstrate the fact that the 18 firefighters and CARES in the RFA budget is a continuation of what Olympia is already going to do (Kudos to the Olympia City Council for a great idea) AND the money in the RFA budget plan comes from federal and other reimbursements, not from the property tax or the Fire Benefit Charge.

    If the proponents try to argue that the federal funding is going away, then they need to tell the public how MORE the Fire Benefit Charge will go up to pay for it.

    The SaveOurFD folks try to get the facts before the voters and let them evaluate the claims with their own eyes and critical thinking skills. Here is the source documentation from the RFA Financial plan that shows the funding for BLS/CARES as a separate revenue source that is not from the property tax nor the fire benefit charge under the line "Other Revenues". Below it is the detail of "Other Revenues" and at the bottom on line 44 you will see the "BLS Transport/CARES revenue-Oly". On line 45 an empty line awaiting a decision by Tumwater to get on board with their version of the programs. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HOsfkCORV4s2H3GqVG4_EbStubxE9uBz/view?usp=sharing

    That’s right, Tumwater isn't even part of the 18 firefighters and CARES program funding in the RFA budget. Here is a brief snippet that proves my point (Transport means the Basic Life Support program with the 18 FTEs):

    Transcript from June 13, 2022 RFA Meeting

    "Transport and CARES - Olympia continues to work on implementation of that based on their FCS study. Tumwater has launched a parallel study by FCS to look at what would it take either for Tumwater to provide that service on our own or if you expanded this to the RFA, what would that look like?

    We're probably a couple of months away from that. Pragmatically, I'd say just one of the challenges that has made the financial work complicated is doing trying to implement transport and cares while also putting together an RFA. And when we think about that bringing Tumwater into that and what that means, frankly it almost becomes insurmountable. And so this approach is one that I think allows us to proceed, allows Olympia to work through the implementation of transport and CARES and then if that's something that expands or could expand, that's a thing that RFA could do into the future."

    You may also want to keep in mind that "sustainable funding" is an RFA code phrase for the newly elected RFA Board of Commissioners to be able to raise the Fire Benefit Charge up to $40 million more than the $10.5 million currently proposed without a vote of the people.

    Stay tuned.

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • jimlazar

    Big new fees.

    No new service.

    Less transparency. Less voter control.

    Vote NO.

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • Southsoundguy

    No RFA.

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • JW

    I would like more constructive alternatives than simply vote no. Vote no and do nothing means the snowballing problems continue to accelerate until a viable solution is secured.

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • Larry Dzieza

    Second Installment of fact checking the not so "Best Idea"

    "It’s a progressive and fair way to fund fire and medical response."

    For sake of politeness, let us just call this false claim an ill-informed statement. The Fire Benefit Charge proposed by the RFA supports a structural change in our government revenue system that is by any measure extremely regressive and a contributor to income inequality. It is more regressive than most alternatives.

    But you may ask, is a property tax less regressive than a Fire Benefit Charge? Let’s have the City of Olympia itself answer that for you from a recent meeting of the Olympia Finance Committee looking at funding alternatives for climate work.

    “At the meeting, Braff provided information on different revenue options, including property tax, a sales tax, a private utility tax, and a municipal utility tax.

    According to Braff, the city has the authority to implement property tax, which would require voter approval to approve a levy lid lift.

    Braff noted that this option creates consistent and predictable funding sources imposed for a specified duration. It would increase costs to property owners.

    "One of the benefits is that they are likely less progressive than other types of approaches. Higher values, not always, correlate with higher abilities to pay," Braff said.”

    You can read this entire article on climate funding on the JOLT at https://www.thejoltnews.com/stories/olympias-finance-committee-looks-at-revenue-options-to-fund-climate-work,9780?

    The RFA's Fire Benefit Charge is not a progressive way of funding basic services. It is not fair. It contributes to greater income inequality and if more revenues are needed we have a more progressive and stable way of raising the funding. Just like the city officials themselves all recognize.

    The city has a huge amount of capacity to raise the property tax, especially since the recent jump in assessed valuations. That is done through a “levy lid lift” that is a permanent increase in property taxes and only requires a 50% vote of the people, not the 60% required by the Fire Benefit Charge. Again, you don't have to believe me, listen to Councilmember Cooper here: https://youtu.be/5xAvHHOdbfs

    Further, less money would be needed to be raised if it was not in the RFA because you save millions in avoiding duplicative administrative staff and inflated salaries to match the bigger departments.

    I would personally support an increase for additional funding through a levy lid lift, should the facts show that our great, second only to Seattle, Fire Department is underfunded.

    Fire and emergency services are important to me, my family and friends, and that is why we need to SAVE OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT by VOTING NO ON PROP 1.

    Learn more about the real facts by going to SaveOurFD.org

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • BobJacobs

    The more I learn about this "Fire Authority" proposal, the more I think about a great old saying --"if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

    We have two well-functioning fire departments, highly integrated operationally with each other and with nearby departments.

    The cities can raise additional funding if needed for fire protection more easily than an Authority could.

    Staying with our existing departments avoids the upheaval of reorganization.

    In my opinion, the best course of action now is to vote this proposal down and let the cities get back to doing what they've done well for over 100 years.

    Bob Jacobs

    former mayor

    Olympia

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • KimDobson

    Thank you Larry for your clear informed and researched response to Ms Selby and Mr Kmet s propaganda from the Yes campaign .Vote no on the RFA ! Lift the levy lid and fully fund the EMT emergency response teams hire more firefighters .We do not need more $200.000 per admin employees duplicating existing admins jobs in Oly and Tumwater ,

    Yours. Kim Dobson

    Thursday, March 23, 2023 Report this

  • WilliamPorter

    Laughing my head off at everybody on this comment thread - what part of 16,000 service calls and only 5 vehicles is so difficult to grasp? Vote yes or vote no - keep sharing lies and garbled Fox News talking points - but for god's sake don't try to explain your hilarious opinions! It's apparent that you're just ignorant of basic administrative budgetary practices

    Thursday, March 30, 2023 Report this