To rectify County Fire budget, supervisors eye parcel tax - FP-5

[Wrightwood]

All of Wrightwood is within the SRA.
CAL FIRE is responsible for prevention and suppression of the land in the SRA.
SBCFD is responsible for structure protection.

Empty lots are CAL FIRE's financial responsibility


What is the State Responsibility Area (SRA)?

The State Responsibility Area (SRA) is the area in the state where the State of California has the primary financial responsibility for the prevention and suppression of wildland fires. The SRA forms one large area over 31 million acres to which the State Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) provides a basic level of wildland fire prevention and protection services. http://www.fire.ca.gov/firepreventionfee/sra_faqs#basiclaw

[KW]

So if we are talking about structure protection and medical aid, then the tax should not apply. Or should be much less than on an improved parcel.

But I guess we know that all of our taxes go to many programs that we never use. Our taxes have always paid for the programs and services of non tax payers.

I do have a question, maybe someone can clarify? One of those links I posted had a comment about .64 cents from every fire dollar goes to pay the pensions. Someone else had previously posted here that we should consider the pensions a non issue. Will some of this additional tax go to pay pensions?

[tcaarabians]

KW - I think it was my post you may be referring to regarding pensions being a "non-issue." By that I meant I have zero problem with paying fire/ambulance personnel a pension. I wasn't stating that those costs don't contribute to the overall cost of the District.  Salary/pension/health benefits etc. all contribute to the overall fire budget. I don't recall the percentage. Such costs are usually the major cost of most budgets whether you're a private business or a public service.

Most counties/districts have mutual aid agreements. We saw that here during Blue Cut two years ago. If a fire is big enough - other agencies send personnel to help. There are CA rescue personnel in NC/SC now to aid with Florence victims. I think this is a very good thing. I do not know whether it's CalFire or SBDFire that would respond to your vacant lot.

There is a vacant parcel immediately adjacent to my property. It is a mess. Thankfully, I can't see it unless I walk over there to my property line. It is a fire hazard that could impact my property. So, yes I think that vacant parcels should be covered as well.  My two calls to SBD fire and a CalFire posting have resulted in zero action on that lot. I understand your rationale for a sliding scale on how this new tax should be levied. I don't disagree with you at all on that. But, this tricky action by the County is not taking that into consideration.

I was not going to protest the tax. The omission of the protest form has me back on the fence about that.  Tomorrow, during business hours I'm going to call 211 again.. just for sport. I am then going to call the Fire Marshall AGAIN about that lot next to me.  btw.. SBDFire did not tell me that I should call CalFire about that lot. Cheryl o7o

[lwt42]

I do have a question, maybe someone can clarify? One of those links I posted had a comment about .64 cents from every fire dollar goes to pay the pensions. Someone else had previously posted here that we should consider the pensions a non issue. Will some of this additional tax go to pay pensions?

If it's .64 cents (half a cent of every dollar) that might make sense.  If it's 64 cents on payroll, maybe.

I can't see nearly two-thirds of the fire budget going to pay pensions.

Several here have commented that salaries and pensions are out of control and that may be true.

The problem is that is all subject to union contracts and/or commitments that really can't be changed.  You can't go to a retired firefighter and say "well, we're going to unilaterally reduce your pensions by 30%" or somesuch.

You can try to renegotiate pensions going forward, and in 20 or 30 years when the new firefighters are retiring (and the older firefighters pass on and stop drawing pensions) it'll make a difference.

Doesn't solve the problem now.

Reducing actual firefighters will impact service levels.

I think the Board of Supervisors has an obligation to maintain the level of service, and I think they could make funding the Fire Protection District a priority.

I have to weigh the impact of an under-funded fire service against some politicians realizing that this is an easy cash grab that will free up $26.9 million in the County budget.

[lwt42]

So if we are talking about structure protection and medical aid, then the tax should not apply. Or should be much less than on an improved parcel.

I have a couple of vacant lots next to me.

If there is a fire on one of those lots, and San Bernardino fire comes and puts it out, they're protecting my home.

So, while it's true that it may be ultimately up to CalFire to pay, I want SB Fire here to put the fire out.  They can (and probably do) haggle later.

[lwt42]

Here is where I am right now, personally.

Deeply offended by our County Supervisors for shirking their responsibility to the residents and visitors who may need EMS or Search and rescue.  I hate that.

I'm bothered that an expanded FP-5 releases them for their moral obligation.

I very much want the services that are at-risk.  I don't have a big problem with paying for services county-wide.  I may be paying for services that will be used by a resident of L.A. County, and that's fine because I could need help when I'm in L.A.

I am undecided at this time.

I don't believe that the SBCFPD is trying to "game" the law to make protests unreasonably difficult.

[tcaarabians]

I did read the Fire budget. And, I went through the per-hour-costs for various ranks of firefighters and ambulance, etc. personnel. I didn't think they were overpaid at all. I was shocked at what they were paid and thought it was low for what they do.  A big part of their revenue is fees. That includes all fees (inspections, permits, etc.) and ambulance services. I know, from my own experience, that they could improve collections for ambulance services. That was a target in previous budgets. So, they are taking steps there to improve collections.

If the 64 cents of every dollar includes payroll, pension, health, sick leave, vacation (both the latter are factors in calculating payroll costs) - it would make sense to me. It is a staff-intensive service.

SBD County is supposedly the largest county in the country. Distance in the hinterlands is a big issue. I'd rather they staff for the 'what-ifs' than not enough.  Cheryl o7o

[Wrightwood]

In San Bernardino County Search and Rescue is the responsibility of the Sheriff's Department

[lwt42]

In San Bernardino County Search and Rescue is the responsibility of the Sheriff's Department

I see "Swift Water Rescue" and "Urban Search and Rescue" listed on SBCFire.org, and I think I saw "Search and Rescue" listed in the Fire budget.

I seem to remember the Fire Department staffing paramedics on Sheriffs' helicopters.

Not sure where the line is drawn, only that the Fire Department seems to have some role.

[lwt42]

If the 64 cents of every dollar includes payroll, pension, health, sick leave, vacation (both the latter are factors in calculating payroll costs) - it would make sense to me. It is a staff-intensive service.

To me, this feels like one of those numbers that started out as one statistic, and through reporting errors and over-zealous editing became a different number entirely.

This is why I try to fact-check things in general, and especially when the number seems out of reason.

It could be correct.

The other part of this, as I understand it, the SBCFPD pays into the County retirement system, they don't pay retirement directly, which means they don't pay the benefit out of the fire budget, so it's not exactly a Fire District liability.

[thehallmarks]

[thehallmarks]

FP-5 Information Request

I would imagine we are not the only individuals who hold their properties in a trust so this email--and their reply, if timely?--may be of interest to other folks on the forum.

I would welcome any information others may have on the subject that can be verified and insure my/our protest form is submitted properly.

My wife and I hold all our properties in our family trust and both she and I are the trustees.

What specifically do we have to do to sign the protest form?

As trustees, are we considered--for the purpose of the protest--as owners or agents.

If as a trustee, I/we considered an owner, will one protest form be sufficient or must both trustees file separately?

If as a trustee, I/we are considered agents, must we file information from the trust to verify that we are indeed trustees?

Also, if 1/we are considered agents, are we both required to file individual protest forms?

Are we as trustees allowed to sign as owner of the properties or do we both have to sign a protest form individually?

As you are aware, time is of the essence!

Thank you for your assistance!

Hank Hallmark
760-249-3069
thehallmarks@verizon.net

[thehallmarks]

FP-5 Expansion

Here is the initial response!

It's a mea culpa directing me back to the original information which is--IMHO--wholly inadequate!

On 9/16/2018 3:48 PM, Tracy, Steven wrote:

Dear Mr. Hallmark,

Thank you for interest in the FP-5 Expansion process.  We encourage you to visit our website at www.sbcfire.org and navigate to the FP-5 Expansion tab.  Most, if not all your questions can be answered on the site.  If for some reason, the information and  or explanations  to the frequently asked questions on the site do not satisfy your concerns than please feel free to write us back. 

 Respectfully,

 Public Information Office

My response:

I have researched the information on the website without any success!

My purpose in sending my email was the protest form does not offer any explanation for properties held in trust an I feel it is only proper for a definitive explanation to be provided for clarity.

If the information I am requesting IS on your referenced website and I have overlooked it please refer me to it's location.

Thanks for your prompt response.

Hank Hallmark

[thehallmarks]

FP-5 Expansion

Here is the initial response!

It's a mea culpa directing me back to the original information which is--IMHO--wholly inadequate!

On 9/16/2018 3:48 PM, Tracy, Steven wrote:

Dear Mr. Hallmark,

Thank you for interest in the FP-5 Expansion process.  We encourage you to visit our website at www.sbcfire.org and navigate to the FP-5 Expansion tab.  Most, if not all your questions can be answered on the site.  If for some reason, the information and  or explanations  to the frequently asked questions on the site do not satisfy your concerns than please feel free to write us back. 

 Respectfully,

 Public Information Office

My response:

I have researched the information on the website without any success!

My purpose in sending my email was the protest form does not offer any explanation for properties held in trust an I feel it is only proper for a definitive explanation to be provided for clarity.

If the information I am requesting IS on your referenced website and I have overlooked it please refer me to it's location.

Thanks for your prompt response.

Hank Hallmark

[Nolena]

If you want to protest this, please follow the link below.
If 25% of property owners protest this, we will get to vote on it.
Please print and distribute protest forms to those impacted, but who may not be computer literate.

https://sbcfire.org/Portals/58/Documents/FP-5/ServiceZoneFP-5Expansion_ProtestForm.pdf?utm_source=SBCFireWebsite&utm_medium=Button&utm_campaign=FP5

This would be a good cause for the Wrightwood Property Owners Association. Maybe the WWPOA could send out print outs of this item to property owners via USPS.

[Nolena]

All of Wrightwood is within the SRA.
CAL FIRE is responsible for prevention and suppression of fire on the land in the SRA.
SBCFD is responsible for structure protection.

Empty lots are CAL FIRE's financial responsibility


What is the State Responsibility Area (SRA)?

The State Responsibility Area (SRA) is the area in the state where the State of California has the primary financial responsibility for the prevention and suppression of wildland fires. The SRA forms one large area over 31 million acres to which the State Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) provides a basic level of wildland fire prevention and protection services. http://www.fire.ca.gov/firepreventionfee/sra_faqs#basiclaw

This is important.
Does the County want money for fire protection on land that is not even in County Fire jurisdiction?
We already pay for that through the state.

[lwt42]

This is important.
Does the County want money for fire protection on land that is not even in County Fire jurisdiction?
We already pay for that through the state.

It is important.  It's also incorrect.

Currently the San Bernardino County Fire department covers 19,278 square miles.  Part of our property taxes go to pay for that.

CalFire and the US Forest Service also cover much of those areas, through other taxes.

Out of that 19,278 square miles, there are a dozen or so small special tax districts that assess a special tax.

The change is to make one of those special tax districts (FP-5) cover the whole 19,278 square miles, raising another $26.9 million dollars.

The total area that is covered by San Bernardino County Fire does not change.

[Wrightwood]

lwt42 you've taken Nolena's quote out of context. She quoted my statement that Empty lots are CAL FIRE's financial responsibility and she is correct.

This issue has been discussed many times at Fire Safe Council meeting over the years with Chiefs from both agencies in attendance.

CAL FIRE is responsible for prevention and suppression of fire on the land in the SRA.
SBCFD is responsible for structure protection.

Chief Hartwig was asked at the Wrightwood meeting if the FP-5 passes what fire protection will it provide for vacant parcels in the SRA. He answered that maybe someone would get hurt on that vacant land and need medical attention.

[tcaarabians]

I wonder why it was SB Fire that came out here for my complaint about the vacant lot next to me? They didn't refer me to CalFire.

Meanwhile, I did call 211 again today. After six minutes on hold, the young woman that answered had no idea about a protest form and told me to call the County or go to the library. I pointed out that the letter said to call 211. She checked and gave me the # for the Clerk of the Board. Called that number.  After another period on hold that young woman told me the Fire District was handling the mailing. She was very nice and said she'd call around to see who to direct me to rather than me doing it. I appreciated that. It took her seven tries. She did connect with a Fire Capt. and said he would call me back. That was only around 20 minutes ago.. so I'll be patient.

However, I repeat.. this is no way to run an airline.. much less an election.   Cheryl o7o
 

[lwt42]

lwt42 you've taken Nolena's quote out of context. She quoted my statement that Empty lots are CAL FIRE's financial responsibility and she is correct.

This issue has been discussed many times at Fire Safe Council meeting over the years with Chiefs from both agencies in attendance.

CAL FIRE is responsible for prevention and suppression of fire on the land in the SRA.
SBCFD is responsible for structure protection.

Chief Hartwig was asked at the Wrightwood meeting if the FP-5 passes what fire protection will it provide for vacant parcels in the SRA. He answered that maybe someone would get hurt on that vacant land and need medical attention.

I agree with your comments, but that wasn't the point I was making.

If you own a parcel in the current San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (and Wrightwood is in the district), part of your general levy property taxes go to SBCFPD now.  I may be a couple of percentage points off, but I think the Chief said 24% of the 1% general levy.

That's true for developed and undeveloped parcels. 

If this goes through, the same parcels will have an additional special levy.