Fire merger moves on to county supervisors
By: GIG CONAUGHTON - Staff Writer
State agency passes funding question forward | ∞
SAN DIEGO -- The long-debated idea of merging rural San Diego County fire agencies together was kept alive Monday when a state agency voted to pass off to county supervisors the $13.7 million-a-year question of how to fund it.
Members of the Local Agency Formation Commission voted 6-1 to approve and forward to supervisors a revamped plan that would merge seven East County fire agencies -- as well as suggestions that either the county, or voters, pay for the merger. The merger plan would stock 28 backcountry fire stations with three-person crews at all times to cover 1.4 million acres, stretching east from Fallbrook, Valley Center and Ramona, but excluding those districts.
In May, several rural North County agencies asked to be left out because of the lack of funding, but could potentially be included in subsequent mergers.
Without the vote, the merger discussion would have died, despite two years of study by the formation commission, and conceptual approval by voters in 2004.
Proponents have said for years that merging rural agencies would improve fire and emergency medical services by unifying command, communication and training, and give merged agencies more financial clout to buy equipment.
They also said that improving backcountry agencies was not just a rural issue, because recent catastrophes like the 2003 and 2007 firestorms have started in rural areas, and burned out of control into the county's urban core. Although the formation commission officially started studying the merger idea in 2005, fire officials, politicians and communities have debated it for decades.
The next question in the fire merger saga is whether supervisors will like the proposed funding options when they consider them sometime early next year.
Two supervisors who also serve as formation commission board members had differing views.
"I don't believe that my colleagues ... are going to go along with this," Horn said. "I think it's too expensive. I just don't think this is the solution."
But Supervisor Dianne Jacob, who has championed the merger issue for several years, said she thought supervisors would -- and should -- be open to paying for some of the merger cost.
The formation commission estimates that the merged agencies would need $25.5 million a year, but that the cost would be offset by the $4.24 million the targeted agencies now spend, and $8.5 million a year the county now spends on fire protection. Officials also said the total costs were lowered by using a combination of one paid and two volunteer firefighters to staff fire stations.
Jacob said that the county has a responsibility to provide fire service in the backcountry areas, because it used to provide it until abandoning it as too expensive in the 1970s.
However, even Jacob stopped short of saying the county should pay the entire merger amount.
Instead, she said the merger's costs were still unknown -- particularly after a group of East County fire chiefs came forward at Monday's hearing and said they could provide three-person coverage at 14 fire stations.
Jacob said the county could consider a range of options, including the East County chiefs' plan, the formation commission's merger, and other ideas.
As for funding, Jacob said she had not given up on a "longshot" state bill, Senate Bill 806, which would allow San Diego County to shift a portion of its property taxes from schools to the merger.
She also said county supervisors could ask the state for money.
"It's the state's responsibility for wildland fire protection," she said.
Formation Commission board member Betty Rexford, a city councilwoman in Poway, said she was happy to pass the funding questions on to the county. But, she said, she would never approve asking city residents to approve a new tax or fee because they were already paying for fire service out of taxes.
Jacob said she would be comfortable asking voters to approve a fee, but only as a last resort.
"If it's a last resort, and the people know that we have done everything possible in trying to get federal and state money ... I believe that the people are going to step up and say, 'Yes.' "
More than 80 percent of county voters said they liked the idea of merging rural agencies in November 2004 on Proposition C. But that advisory ballot measure did not ask them to put up any money.
Horn, meanwhile, said he was not against spending more money on fire protection, but that he preferred to spend it on equipment. He said a merger wouldn't help the area defend itself against firestorms such as the ones in October because no amount of firefighters or equipment could stand in front of a wildfire being pushed by 40 mph to 60 mph winds.
But formation commission member Andy Menshek, who is also a fire chief with East County's San Miguel Consolidated Fire Protection District, said a merger was badly needed.
He said "something changed" in 2000, and that the region was suffering through more and more large fires that were killing people and destroying homes.
"We're the only large county in the state ... that doesn't have an organized fire protection in the backcountry. I find it abysmal that we cannot move forward after 20 to 30 years of work ... and cannot find funding. It's embarrassing."
-- Contact staff writer Gig Conaughton at (760) 739-6696 or gconaughton@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Escondeeter wrote on Dec 4, 2007 7:56 AM:Just for the record, neither the 2003 Cedar Fire nor the 2007 Witch fire started in an area served by the small volunteer departments. The Cedar fire was in the big-budget U.S. Forest Service territory, and the Witch fire was in the area protected by the big-budget CalFire operation. So, it's more than a little disingenuous to claim that the proposed merger would have had any significant impact on the course or outcome of either of those fires.
Encinitas wrote on Dec 4, 2007 7:57 AM:We already pay taxes here for fire protection. What about those who live in the rural, unincorporated areas? Are they paying for fire protection (above and beyond state taxes)? It's clear that we need better fire protection in the eastern parts of the county, but shouldn't those who live there pay for it? I agree with Jacob that it's the state's responsibility to pay for wildland protection in the eastern aprt of the county; I disagree that funding for schools should be shifted to fire protection.
MakesSense wrote on Dec 4, 2007 8:07 AM:The Board of Supervisors should listen to the Chiefs proposal. Letting the individual departments do the staffing, then rebating the cost to them, is a far better use of the County's limited financial resources than trying to create a Civil-Service-heavy, overly bureaucratic, County department. The real question will be whether the Supervisors want to provide the best quality service they can afford, or whether they want to pander to the unions.
What? wrote on Dec 4, 2007 9:29 AM:When ever something bad happens the government says we need to consolidate agencies or create new ones. All that does is create more bureaucracy. Look how well the Homeland security department has worked out. No Diane I will not step up and pay more taxes.
To Makes Sense wrote on Dec 4, 2007 9:46 AM:The Supervisors will not want to pander to unions, they're all Republicans. Their goal will be to spend as little as possible on fire protection.
ToEncinitas wrote on Dec 4, 2007 10:02 AM:The residents in unincorporated areas that are within the small fire districts pay for their service through their property taxes. Because of the small size of the property tax base in those districts, the departments operate on very tight budgets. Almost all the proposed forms of consolidation will involve some form of subsidy from the more inhabited areas of the county.
This is how it will work wrote on Dec 4, 2007 10:02 AM:The money currently funding these departments will be scoped up by the county. Then they will have to raise taxes to get the added $13 million to pay the overhead. Just a big shell game. When the next big fire occurs it will be the same and again they will come to the taxpayers for more money. This merger should be discouraged as it gets taxpayers further away from where their money is spent. Leave it alone, the cooperation worked just fine.
It's simple. wrote on Dec 4, 2007 5:50 PM:Put it on the ballot. It will be defeated just like all the rest. No real Conservative wants to pay to save another person's house. It's a no brainer. Waste of time. Let it all burn.
No money. wrote on Dec 4, 2007 6:01 PM:Fight your own fires.
SD Medic wrote on Dec 4, 2007 6:07 PM:Bothfires were started in Calfire and US forest service areas. Cal Fire are the biggest liars out there. The phony excuses that spotters need ot be in aircraft. how rediculous. Here is the truth to this. For CalFire it is all just about money. The more they let burn the more budget they get come budget time. This is the way it was in 03. When people wake up they will notice this problem too. Then the media will be all over it. It is just amazing. There was all sorts of talk after the 03 fires and no improvements were made. it was just propaganda. That is what will happen here. Everyone will come together for about 6-7 months and talk about how we should do this and we should do that. Look at San Diego Fire. They said after the 03 fires, we need more fire stations and equipment. Still to this day that problem has only been solved about 10 percent. So after 7 months when everything dies down nothing will have changed much just like in 2003. part of the problem is that there are greedy people in San Diego who dont want ot pay more taxes. Every time a ballot measure comes up it gets shot down. Untill the greedy people of San diego realize they need to pay more taxes, this will keep happening overand over again. Then people wonder why they lose their houses and stuff. it all comes down to this. pay more taxed for to fund the fire departments or Lose your houses just Like the Former SD Fire Chief Bowman said afetr the 2003 fires. Enough Said
Encinitas wrote on Dec 4, 2007 6:59 PM:To 10:02 AM; thanks for the info. I wasn't clear on how these smaller departments were funded. To Escondeter and SD Medic; thanks for your insights. I knew that the Cedar fire was the result of CDF (now CalFire) problems; I wasn't aware that there were similar issues with the Witch Fire. It would seem that some of the problems are with CalFire and it's staffing in this part of California during Santa Ana season. Do they elevate the staff levels during October? Do they work with other state agencies (in Arizona, for example) so that both LA and SD can be adequately manned? As for higher taxes, folks in the SD area have been burned (no pun intended) by corrupt and bulky local government agencies. The city of San Diego pension fiasco and the insufficient funding of north county freeways by SANDAG come to mind. Speaking for my family, I wouldn't agree to pay higher taxes for a county-wide fire organization dominated by the city of San Diego (as SANDAG is).
Look to the North wrote on Dec 4, 2007 9:15 PM:Orange County consolidated all their Fire Departments for every City under one County Fire Department. The savings to the Cities has been enormous! Communication between the various units works GREAT! And, when one Engine Company rolls on a large fire, leaving a lack of coverage for that station, the county coordination office simply has another Engine Company roll to the vacant station to provide ready coverage. Coordination has been Wonderful, and response times County wide are well within state and federal standards. So, merging the rural companies/stations under the county is a great first step.
Remember Prop 172? wrote on Dec 4, 2007 10:24 PM:Does anyone remember Prop 172? The County already receives 1/2 cent sales tax which was supposed to go to fund fire agencies. San Diego County is the largest county receiving virtually all the 172 money (billions over the last 12 years) without its own fire department. Blaming CalFire?? I don't think so, look to our supervisors who won't spend the sales tax money for a fire department to protect residents and property.
Look to the North wrote on Dec 5, 2007 7:57 PM:Prop 172 is a good part of why Orange County and its many cities chose to consolidate. They used teh 172 monies wisely and updated many of their communications stations, as well as improving the overall county Emergency Services provided by County Fire. San Diego County has been "TALKING" about consilidation for over 20 years, but for some reason they continue to only TALK while the citizens get burned! our Firefighters, whom we hope we never need, are truly lifesavers when they are needed. But, when politicians and government leaders refuse to provide them with the tools needed to do their jobs, it is not the firefighter who gets hurt (yes, I know they occasionally do) it is the citizenry and taxpayer who ultilmately ends up dead because of the foolish choices of politicans and elected leaders! Time to replace the fools and get some real leaders in office, as opposed to those namby pamby pin heads who simply stick their little pinky in the air to see which way the wind is blowing today!!!
Flyron wrote on Dec 13, 2007 5:00 PM:Prop. 172 is a half-cent sales tax that state voters approved to fund public safety in 1992. Fire officials say that they gathered a majority of the ballot signatures, and part of required money is supposed to go to local fire protection. But very little of that money goes to fire protection because the County of San Diego doesn't have a fire department. Instead, the county has historically used the unincorporated area's Prop 172 money to help fund the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, corrections and the district attorney's office. Last year, it generated $2.6 billion. San Diego County's share was $233 million. While the typical resident may not know about the tax, local governments are keenly aware of every dime it brings in. And some cities, especially those crying poor, want more of the county's portion. The ballot measure was sold as a broad funding source for law enforcement and fire departments. But that's not how it played out. In San Diego County, the bulk of the money – 94 percent – goes to the Sheriff's Department, the District Attorney's Office and the Probation Department. Fourteen cities share the remaining 6 percent.
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement