I am back and better than ever! Which is apparently frightening for some in the office. I’m happy to report that my back surgery went well with just some discomfort at the surgical site. It kinda feels like someone cut through my muscles and ground on some bone from L3-L5. That said, the pain that I had been in for nearly 2 years is gone.
Between having the RA under control for now, and the back surgery I feel like a fog has lifted. It is amazing the impact that lack of sleep and pain can have on a person’s mind and body. I know Dave discussed some of that last week when he filled in for me writing The Review.
Because I am only a little over a week post-surgery, my mobility is somewhat limited. However, I have been in the office this week catching up on bothering people and other stuff. It’s a bit uncomfortable to drive, so I basically drive to the office and home. If you’ve seen me in the office, you may have noticed that I am not in my normal office attire. That said, I think the Snoopy T-shirt and compression sock fashion will catch on in no time
I know I am not the only one who has been struggling with pain whether it’s a back issue or otherwise. As far as back surgeries go, I am currently one of three of our folks who recently had work done and we have the potential for at least one additional. This profession, and our lack of willingness to listen to our bodies, can definitely take a toll. But I personally think it’s well worth the aches and pains when I look back at all the people I have been able to help throughout my 29 years in emergency services.
We will have several staff out of the office this next week for accreditation training. Once we complete the training we’ll regroup and establish an appropriate time frame for us to file with the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) as an agency seeking accreditation. Chief Parra will serve as our accreditation manager for this process. Our intent is to rotate the accreditation manager position between battalion chiefs in the future. Just one more reason for you to consider promoting
As a result of some of our social media posts regarding Proposition 310, as well as some of the information out in our communities, we’ve received a number of questions/comments specific to our area. To that end, staff has created a two-page fact sheet along with a one-page bullet point sheet to assist in providing answers to the frequently asked questions/comments. There is nothing in our documents or on our website that is meant to suggest how a person should vote. Folks are asking about how agencies like ours are funded, so we are providing the information. The documents are attached to this week’s email for your review.
Please remember, when we are in uniform, we cannot under any circumstances encourage someone to vote for or against a ballot initiative. We can provide factual information only. This is also why we direct folks to our website and not the Proposition 310 or the PFFA website for further information. Our website does include information under our Frequently Asked Questions section regarding how Fire Districts are funded, the impact of Prop 117, and how the growth we see in the area does not necessarily equate to significant funding increases.
Chief Tharp and I were talking with Susanne about this topic Tuesday this week. He pointed out that it can take up to 1400 new homes to generate the revenue of one significant commercial property. Depending on the value of a new home, the taxes generated annually may be enough to fuel one of our engines a couple of times or cover toilet paper for a couple of months. To that end, the number of new residential rooftops does not equate to a financial windfall for our agency. In fact, we are required to provide services to all those new homes, and businesses, for two years before receiving any monies from property taxes.
Additionally, Fire Districts do not have “home rule”, so we have no way to ensure development pays for development, e.g. we cannot assess impact fees. When significant residential or even commercial development drives our call volume to the point of requiring an expansion of services, we must figure out how to fund the new personnel, equipment, and station. No impact fees mean we must increase property taxes and seek permission for general obligation bonds to cover our costs.
As I have mentioned before, our data indicates that we are down one 24-hour engine. Under our current funding structure, it will take four years of incremental tax increases to be able to hire the personnel we need to staff the engine. This does not include the purchase of the engine or construction of a station. In today’s market, we are looking at a minimum of $6 – $8 million for the construction of just a basic fire station. The engines we purchased for around $500,000 just a few years ago are now pushing $850,000 to $900,000.
With all that said, how far behind will we be four years from now when we can finally put the engine in service that we need today? Will the community approve the general obligation bonds needed to build the station/stations to house the engine and personnel? As I mentioned, because development is not required to pay for development, the financial responsibility for hiring personnel, purchase of equipment, and building of infrastructure falls 100% on the shoulders of our residents as part of their property tax bill.
It is interesting to me the perception folks have of their property tax bill related to the fire district versus the reality of what it takes to run our day-to-day operations. Coming from Missouri, I can tell you I paid more for less. And I know many of the folks moving here from out of state also paid a far greater amount for fire protection than they pay here.
This does not mean that we want property taxes to increase dramatically. Rather, having a diversified revenue portfolio is basic business 101. However, that is not how fire districts are funded in Arizona. A diversified portfolio would help control property tax rates moving forward and allow us to meet the increased demand for services.
The question for our voters is simple: How do you want to fund emergency services in our community? Should property owners shoulder the entire burden for everyone who utilizes our services or should everyone who uses the service pay a share? Should development pay for development, or should taxpayers shoulder the entire burden for infrastructure needs created by development? The development question is not part of Proposition 310, but I do believe it is a valid question.
Until next week, keep up the great work you all do!
CAFMA has now introduced The CAFMA Connect Podcast! Get to know the personnel and stay connected to your local fire service agency. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast on their youtube channel at www.youtube.com/channel/UCshgJvK9iKOILA-Z3TEDvVQ.
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/3k2m0az Google Podcasts: bit.ly/38fRB6n Spotify: spoti.fi/32DIN6J
Promote your event with the Ultimate Holiday Guide! Contact Elicia Morigeau at 928-642-3552 or ads@signalsaz.com.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Our Hometown DMCA Notices Newspaper web site content management software and services