Spokane7
58°
March 13, 2011 in Opinion
Editorial: Overpaying fire districts doesn’t serve taxpayers
When a significant West Plains annexation agreement was reached a year and a half ago, Spokane Mayor Mary Verner hailed it as a sign of improved intergovernmental cooperation. Indeed, the major local entities involved – Spokane, Airway Heights and Spokane County – appeared to strike a deal with less than the usual acrimony that happens when tax bases are juggled.
So, at the end of this year, 10 square miles that includes Spokane International Airport will become part of Spokane, the city’s largest annexation in a century. Spokane also will gain some commercially developing property along U.S. Highway 2, and Airway Heights will expand by half a square mile. Spokane County, on the other hand, will lose both area and revenue, but it’s all consistent with the state’s Growth Management Act, which expects incorporated cities to absorb adjacent land that’s needed for the next 20 years’ development.
But redrawing municipal boundaries implies shifting responsibilities for local government services such as streets, utilities and public safety. Finding a way to match tax collections to the services they pay for remains difficult.
Fire protection is a particular challenge, complicated by the number of scattered fire districts that tend to lose some mixture of service responsibility and property taxes whenever annexation happens. Plus, the airport has its own, specialized fire department.
To win the fire districts’ acquiescence, the city of Spokane has operated in recent years under a dubious appeasement policy, in which they agree to maintain an affected district’s previous revenue level even as its fire-protection responsibility shrinks. It’s a good deal for the fire districts but a costly one for the city – especially when an ailing economy makes it hard to avoid service and personnel cuts.
Last week, the city revealed that its first West Plains fire station will involve a double-wide mobile home. Of the $3.5 million in annual property taxes the city expects to gain from the annexation, about one-third of it will be needed for fire protection. And Spokane will be paying Fire District 10 mitigation fees that start at some $500,000 a year and go up.
The 16-acre Greenfield Estates annexation adjacent to Hillyard in late 2009 requires the city to pay Fire District 9 $20,000 a year because of a deal signed in the 1990s.
This baffling policy cries for review.
It remains to be seen whether a regional fire protection district – now under study at the city’s prompting – is a viable answer. But as municipal realignments continue, as they will, property tax receipts must be logically matched to service responsibilities. Unending payoffs don’t belong in the picture.
To respond to this editorial online, go to www.spokesman.com and click on Opinion under the Topics menu.
Trudy Rubin: Egyptians say no to Islamists 
Dazzeetrader11 on March 13 at 12:33 a.m.
Verner and her unions strike again? Verner needs to dish out some rewards so she’ll be re-elected. It’s the same old thing isn’t it? Let’s use the taxpayers’ money and keep them in the dark by proposing all the “good” that’ll come of it!!!
Well…no . The public unions should be reduced and defrocked no matter how many times they run into a building.
Verner should be defrocked because she has a problem with the shell game she constantly runs on the taxpayers.
What is it exactly that she’s done in her 3 yrs 2 months on the job? Huge and unnecessary debt for the taxpayers.
newguy on March 13 at 8:19 a.m.
Daisy,
I can see you are biased to unions and will do anything to give them a bad name, regardless of the facts. As a “union guy” I can tell you the fire unions have not been in favor of the agreement. We have argued that there needs to be someway to modify it. It was horrible mismanagement of the city when it was signed (but that was 20 yrs ago). We have pushed for regionalization to help mitigate these type of agreements. So stop hating the unions for things we have no control of. Things we completely disagree on. Things we have fought to change or fix. This specific agreement is not the best thing for the public, but it is the result of some deals politicians of 20 yrs ago locked the city into, and the fire district has no intention of letting the city out of it.
hawken on March 13 at 8:40 a.m.
I am opposed to “public employee unions.” Not, private sector unions, “public employee unions.”
They are sucking the life out of our states, cities and small town governments.
Bloated, public employee union benefits, are not and have not for a very long time, been sustainable.
Tell me what is so unreasonable about what Wisconsin has done?
First get the facts as published by the L.A. times here:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/mar/11/union-rights-in-wisconsin/
Then, please, give me an answer to my question, if you can.
Not one unionist Democrat has answered by question, now two days later.
Smokie on March 13 at 9:47 a.m.
From Today’s Letters:
West Plains Fire Service
In the article on March 9, “Fire administrators say consolidation is complicated by Labor…” “Economically it makes sense, but politically it may not.” The fire fighters are not complicating the issue; in fact Labor groups have developed multiple plans and solutions for consolidation. It makes economic sense for all agencies and especially the affected citizens. It appears some Politicians and administrators have a fear of doing what is right for the community. Are the citizen’s best interests being considered? Does each agency by itself have enough staff to provide a safe work environment to protect the citizens? Are the citizens getting what they are paying for? Duplication of services and multiple responses by various agencies is not the best way to provide service, it makes sense to merge and consolidate services. Those in control say “they are in favor of regionalization” but their actions say differently. Mergers and consolidation of services has the potential to save the taxpayer money and provide a better level of service. Labor is not the problem. It is the administrators and politicians that stand to lose their position or role. Regionalization works and it is in the best interest of the citizens.
Mark Vietzke
President Spokane Firefighters IAFF Local 29
Tim Lively
President SIA Firefighters IAFF Local 1789
Smokie on March 13 at 9:58 a.m.
Oh Hawken, there you go again!
Actually, the unions agreed to all of the governor’s demands when it came to wages and benefits (your complaint). They just wanted the right to continue in some sort of operational existence. And about 80% of the people in Wisconsin agree. Bye bye GOP!!!
Hawken, It is so heartening to read that now you are a supporter of unions in the private workplace! Over the years I am sure you have supported candidates and policies to destroy the few remaining private unions left in our nation. So it is a heart-warming moment that you now support the anemic, powerless force which you helped destroy.
Wait I could be wrong… Yes, I am sure you weren’t calling union workers “socialists” back then. I bet you were out there with the Kaiser workers on the picket line…. You are laughable.
Now then, what amazes me about this editorial is the mention of a regionalization panel at the end. I thought that the S-R said that this panel was meeting to discuss the potential of a municipal fire district! I know I have told the paper not to believe everything it prints, but really!
hawken on March 13 at 12:02 p.m.
Smokie,,,, nice try. I stated my position on unions above.
I also notice that neither you nor any other unionist liberal has an answer to my reasonable, question above.
Now two days after the L.A. Times article was published by the SR.
You all just keep throwing our “Red Herrings” to avoid the question and change the subject.
Dazzeetrader11 on March 13 at 12:24 p.m.
Smokie..the salaries and benefit of the the Bobby Williams crew is shameful. Unsustainable and it also does apply to the rank and file as well. I had a social dinner with the chief over the holidays. He knows it’s about the money..of course he knows! Hard to miss it when the salaries and OT (OT alone increases base by a full 1/3 to1/2th and for what???..it’s just a perk) were made known.
We have jobs for you, just not union jobs. Lots of cities don’t even have a union for firefighters. The guys/women work for the city.
Unions guarantee higher salies, benfits and pensions. Thatsl all they’re there for. Public employees with eyes on the gold. The people themselves are great people but once the union hat goes on, their sole purpose is to gouge the public.
The public is very tired of it.
Smokie on March 13 at 1:23 p.m.
Daisy, what is a “salie”? Is that one of your medications? “Thatsl” for now.
Hawken, your laziness in not being able to formulate your own question deserves a fitting answer. Only, I will spend twice as much time as you in answering your lamest of questions:
http://afgeunionblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/why-what-wisconsin-governor-scott-walker-is-doing-is-wrong/
And from that Leftist Journal - Daily Finance -
“It remains unclear why Walker is making the demands he is. Reducing state workers’ ability to collectively bargain won’t do anything to aid the state’s budget woes, which are pretty mild compared to the red ink some other states are bleeding.”
Blah, blah, blah - as if anything will ever puncture your idiotic ideology.
Sorry, I have to do some nonunion work around my union-labor-purchased 900 sq foot palace, so I can’t poke you with the logic stick for a while. Also, it is way too easy!
hawken on March 13 at 1:48 p.m.
Smokie:
This is my own question, original with me:
My personal question, not based upon what someone else has previously asked:
“Tell me what is so unreasonable about what Wisconsin has done?”
Tell me what your “personal” answer is to the question, please.
Smokie on March 13 at 2:39 p.m.
OK. I know this is going to be a gargantuan waste of my time, but here we go -
Hawken, first, in your words, what has Wisconsin “done”? Define what you mean by “reasonable.” I would ask that you then juxtapose the two in a cogent fashion.
I know you don’t have a job and have plenty of time to put into this. This activity could raise some inspector’s suspicion if you are on a disability, so hopefully this won’t require much heavy lifting.
I have a job, and will only be able to respond with limited time. My apologies. It may take me a while to get back. Thank you.
Dazzeetrader11 on March 13 at 3:10 p.m.
Salaries. OT. Attack much Smokie? I would too if my inflated, sit on my rear end, gouge the public salaries were in danger. And they are! They should be! Touched a nerve with the crazy salaries and OT did it? It should.
Look, if firemen love the idea of running into buildings, that’s their choice. Fine by me. BUT if they conjure up some skewed form of compensation that the public can’t or don’t want to give them, you should get another job. Simple solution.
Even the Spokesman has it figured out. You best get braced. You’re simply unsustainable. ….and growing!…until recently.
What might ever make you think the money should just escalate? Sorry bud. Parasites kill hosts. TIme’s up. Get a job you can live with…..with a salary that appeals to you. No added value and no added work= unions. Why would there be added money? Answer is?…..there shouldn’t be.
hawken on March 13 at 4:42 p.m.
After three days, it is clear that Smokie and other unionist liberals have no answer to my question above.
It further demonstrates that liberals can’t deal with the facts. They are totally dependent upon smoke and mirrors to sell their propaganda.
Those who buy, should consider what P.T. Barnum said:
“There’s a Sucker Born Every Minute”.
johnclarke on March 13 at 6:45 p.m.
Q. Who is exempted?
A. Public safety employees – defined as municipal or county law enforcement officers and firefighters and state traffic officers and motor vehicle inspectors – retain their current collective bargaining rights.
There is your answer, right wing “christian” . Why are some unions ok, and others have to be broken to balance the state budget ? (hint: it’s about votes)
I assume due to your staunch anti union stance you have never belonged to one, and your spouse will be refusing to pay union dues?
Dazzeetrader11 on March 13 at 7:17 p.m.
Clarkie…you haven’t heard? Co Commissioners will be reducing 23 of the 26 public service employees. Like especially the collective bargaining. Ozzie’s trying to figure out what to do. Votes? not here. These guys do what must be done.
Verner can’t face the music. She’ll sacrifice the financial well being of the city to get re-elected. PLUS, she’s incompetent. Tough sledding for Spokane as long as she sits in her throne.
Verner won’t go against the unions at all. She needs them/. Sure.she’ll say whatever needs to be said to get her votes, but in the end she’ll hurt the City by helping unions. She has to! Nobody else would support the unholy union. Unions too know she’s the only thing standing between them and what the public should do. and what a worthy opponent WILL do.
Whining unions. Nothing new to offer. Same old hand out trying to squeeze more money out of the public when the public cannot afford it.
johnclarke on March 13 at 7:39 p.m.
Q. Who is exempted?
A. Public safety employees – defined as municipal or county law enforcement officers and firefighters and state traffic officers and motor vehicle inspectors – retain their current collective bargaining rights.
I was answering the question Daisy, not requesting a rambling and difficult to understand post. Thanks anyway.
johnclarke on March 13 at 8:09 p.m.
Oh, and I think it’s cute when you call me Clarkie and all that Daisy, but when certain groups are being targeted and other not - even you must see it’s for political purposes.
Dazzeetrader11 on March 13 at 9:42 p.m.
And Clarkie…how do you know they’re exempted? Not a challenge but I heard otherwise when I was there 2 weeks ago. You pretty sure?
Or maybe I’m correct and YOU don’ tknow it yet. Could be I suppose. This was from the city or the county?
DickAdams on March 13 at 10:49 p.m.
smokie, seems to me, your logic is moronic.
Manito_Mary on March 14 at 5:51 a.m.
I think the comments to this story have gotten off track. Follow the money that was over paid to these districts and find out by whom.
There needs to be some accountability brought to city hall. I would speculate that this isn’t an isolated issue and somebody needs to be fired.
Could it be Gavin, Bobby or Mary?
johnclarke on March 14 at 7:20 a.m.
No Daisy, I’m making it up.
eagleproducer on March 14 at 7:54 a.m.
People need to understand that the tone and tenor of this current round of union bashing used to be designated far right wing in the U.S.
Now it’s mainstream. Did anyone want the John Birch Society calling the shots, because that’s what you’ve got!
The rest of the world has been going the other way, folks. They aren’t retreating into despotism. And the ones that are developed like us, are absolutely whooping our tails in everything except for the production of idiotic citizens.
Jobs. You better start pulling them out of your arses between now and 2012 or your latest attempt to ruin what’s left of the U.S. will be short-lived.
eagleproducer on March 14 at 8:31 a.m.
Hawken lied: “Then, please, give me an answer to my question, if you can.
Not one unionist Democrat has answered by question, now two days later.”
Do I really need to provide the links to prove you knowingly posted another falsehood? Really? Okay, here goes!
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/mar/13/public-workers-meet-reality/
Some quotes from two “answers” to Hawken’s “question.”
James Wavada wrote: “First, allowing workers in a bargaining unit decide whether or not to pay dues, as the Wisconsin law mandates, is about as logical as letting taxpayers decide whether or not to pay taxes. Walker wants dues payers fund contract negotiations and share the resulting pay and benefits with deadbeats who decided not to pay their share. That’s a great business model, isn’t it? So the union negotiates a pay increase and job protections.
Second, forcing the union to spend time and money on re-certifying every year with a union-wide election. This is an expensive and time-consuming process. It’s also quite unnecessary. Once again, a democratically elected majority of members at a national convention decided many years back that the most equitable solution is to allow for de-certification elections in contracts. De-certification can be called once every contract cycle (we are on two-year contracts), if the members wishing to decertify can get card requests from a simple majority of members in any bargaining unit. Again, a democratic, worker-driven process. Walker and his friends now require that process to be funded every year with or without a request of a majority of union members, a great way to waste union resources.
Lastly, the Wisconsin legislation limits negotiating rights to salaries only, and then only up to cost of living. Unions would not be allowed to negotiate working conditions (like when overtime can be required, or who should be entitled to it first), seniority rights to prevent age discrimination in times of financial stress, or pension funding. It appears the union would not be empowered to file grievances on behalf of employees. I would have a big problem with that. As a shop steward, I have seen time and again, unfair or unequal treatment of employees by managers who don’t understand the contract or are simply trying to punish workers they don’t like or reward off-duty buddies with promotions and favorable assignments. It happens, and should not be tolerated in the workplace.”
I wrote: “Hawken: The law is a bad idea because it allows freeloaders to benefit from union gains. As well, the union is still required to represent non-members if they request legal representation, etc. If people don’t want to work in a union shop, find another job, but don’t freeload off what others provide. What’s wrong with that?
But you’d know all about freeloading seeing how your union card carrying wife provides you and your family with wealth and health insurance. That feedbag of hypocrisy hanging from your neck must by now be the weight of a millstone.”
You replied: “spoketucky
The Wisconsin changes didn’t outlaw “hysteria,” directly. I think you still retain that right, as per your post above.
As for “freeloaders,” the Teacher’s Unions allow for a “non-payee” status, where teachers can redirect their “dues” to a charity, selected by the union. They still had to pay. Like it or not.
No doubt, now that the law has changed, you will probably see an exodus from the union, by the teacher’s themselves.”
Hmmm, so no one answered your question but you answered the answers that were provided. Try reality dude, it is a lot of fun!
Dazzeetrader11 on March 14 at 10:43 a.m.
Mary’s right.those three.and the source of all of it is……….VERNER! She and her cozy relationships need to be explored. Who will fo it though when the police and fire are in her pocket and vice versa. Think the AG has the time? Soon we’ll see.
eagleproducer on March 14 at 12:15 p.m.
My imitation of Hawken after being exposed again as a liar:
Crickets.
Smokie on March 15 at 12:33 p.m.
And the crickets continue.
I had asked Hawken to define and then clarify. Nothing. He is either too lazy or too dishonest to do so. This is something that I find pretty common in today’s “conservatives.” Fire a shot and then move on. As soon as you prove them wrong, they change the subject.
If one could wave a magic wand and raise the collective IQ of our country by two points, me thinks that would be the end of the “conservative” movement.
Daisy, you sound like someone who despises our troops as much as you do firefighters, in examining your criteria. Maybe you are just jealous. You could take the test. However, reading your prose I think you would have a hard time passing a standardized test of any fashion.