Vote no on 4A

10 Oct 2013 01:00 #221 by GO UNION
Replied by GO UNION on topic Vote no on 4A
That DP rage was probably a big tall story from a tall guy lighting a short fuse on a short guy!
I'd bet a fresh dollar bill on that, i'd bet more but i just bought a garden hose and a donkey!
Can never be too safe!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 06:05 #222 by deltamrey
Replied by deltamrey on topic Vote no on 4A
The collectives (unions, radical socialists, etc) destroyed the Midwest (FYI Cakes and Hillary's nests) and reading this thread IMHO the failed culture is here in our bosom. THE PEOPLE (voters) here are not completely stupid and will make choices they will have to live with in the future (mommyhood, pardon).....I trust the voters......good or bad (ask Detroit) what will be will be.

Those petty little people that actually feel here they can influence business are fools and very underexposed......for most such a threat drives business upwards......if threatened , and if the tire slashers have businesses we will certainly boycott without collective BS........the tire slashers are cowards (as were The National Sodalists Workers Party) and will hide to prevent exposure.

IF the current management associated with ECFD want support.....IMHO dump the union and create an environment of trust, transparency and integrity.......voters really respond to leadership based on such a foundation. Try it ....it works. Welcome to the power of the net.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 06:31 #223 by deltamrey
Replied by deltamrey on topic Vote no on 4A
POST NOTE......unions exist to fight another force.....otherwise, the workers can "own" the "business"......addressing 4A.....the taxpayers are the enemy of the union.......otherwise why have a union ??....SIMPLE.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 09:23 #224 by ScienceChic
Replied by ScienceChic on topic Vote no on 4A

WindPeak wrote: Prove to me that you will provide stallions when ECFD has been in shambles for years. It isn't what it used to be. Look how many volunteer firefighters quit because of all the squabbles and union attempts. McLaughlin wants the money to make it a union f.d. He was hired for that purpose. And how does that make it better? You had the best many decades ago when it was really volunteer.

How come Intercanyon Fire District can live w/o a bunch of paid administrators and does a quite remarkable job for their community.

Obviously you can't function with what you have so you want to waste more money to continue to be pitiful. NO, it is time for new management and McLaughlin isn't it. Does your paid mouthpiece McLaughlin even live up here?

Stop preying on people with your talk of house on fire or medical emergency. ECFD has been responding for decades and making do long before you showed up. We have done just fine for decades and will continue w/o wasting taxpayers money. How long you been here?

Vote NO on 4A.

And I say to everyone, base your decision to vote on what this department has actually done - their actions - not what previous administrations have done or what you fear this one will do.

• This department has let go/cut 2.5 PAID positions of 12 total and recruited the largest rookie VOLUNTEER class in its history.

• Both the board and the Chief have stated that it is not their goal to make this an all-paid department and the mill levy is to replace only one of those 2.5 cut paid positions. They've also stated that they'd like to increase their number of volunteers, for which they need more turnout gear, also requested for in the mill.

• The current group of both paid and volunteer firefighters are 100% behind this current Board of Directors and their Chief, as evidenced by the letter 56 of them signed that they requested be read during the February 2013 BOD meeting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNgqc-yV-H0 The internal squabbles are nonexistent, the Chief and BOD have cleaned up this department and are running it as financially tightly as possible and morale is high.

• Maybe all volunteer worked the best years ago when there were fewer residents and fewer structures and fewer visitors, but times change and it doesn't work today. I was curious as to when the department started having paid staff so I asked - the district has had paid firefighter/paramedics dating back to 1998. They were hired at the urging of the volunteers due to the difficulties volunteers had providing transports with the increasing call volumes. The volunteers have full-time jobs themselves, they can't afford to take 2-3 hours for an ambulance run to the hospital down the hill. They can pop over to assist with a call for a short time, and often do, but full-time, paid staff are required to fill that increasing need. The number of ambulance runs has only increased, and will only do so as more visitors and residents come.

Not only are medical calls increasing, but so are wildfire and structure calls - ECFPD responds to over 1100 total calls/year (medical and fire). The number of people and adequate equipment are required to respond to these. As Travis Griffin said during the Community Meeting, it's critical for an initial attack on a wildland fire that the responding local departments have adequate equipment. There's no denying that this department has outdated equipment - 3 pieces are 24-25 years old - it's time to replace it. There comes a time that it's cost-prohibitive to replace water pumps, parts, and engines and pay the mechanic overtime to keep them maintained, because older vehicles require more care. It was brought up during the Public Affairs Meeting that they have been spending a lot on overtime for the mechanic.

• They've reduced the number of vehicles that they had in their fleet, trimming the fat and keeping the essentials, and are proposing to replace the ones needing to go with trucks that are less expensive AND better suited to our mountain roads and conditions, yet perform the necessary functions that engines and tankers provide. The newer equipment is more efficient and effective for our unique regional needs.

And yes, the Chief lives within 6 minutes of Station 1 (assuming that he drives like I do - a bat outta hell). :biggrin: And he's heavily involved in this community - he's a member of the Conifer Rotary, he's volunteered to help organize the Mountain Area Relay for Life, he's an active member of the Conifer Chamber attending every meeting and many events, among other things. He cares about this community. You won't find a finer, more upstanding person to lead this department and lead it well he has - I've witnessed that during the BOD meetings and in my interactions with the firefighters. But don't take my word for it - go ask them at the Open House this Saturday at Station 1.

*Edit to add: and the "union" isn't really a union - it doesn't have bargaining rights, it doesn't have voting rights, and the Chief explained all that in the Public Affairs meeting.

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 09:50 #225 by FNP
Replied by FNP on topic Vote no on 4A

WindPeak wrote:


Fire fighter capabilities will not necessarily be improved by taking more money from the taxpayers. You make it sound like you are totally inept w/o it. Learn to work with what you have.

Other fixes on the horizon have to do with the Colorado Wildfire Task Force Recommendations and the fee they want to charge people living in the mountains. As of now it is recommending that the fee go to the fire districts.

Vote NO on 4A.[/quote]

Working with what we have brought us the last two disastrous fire seasons. I want better and you offer no options to improve our capability.

Read the Wildfire Task Force report. Your statement is incorrect.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 10:02 #226 by FNP
Replied by FNP on topic Vote no on 4A

WindPeak wrote:
How come Intercanyon Fire District can live w/o a bunch of paid administrators and does a quite remarkable job for their community.


Because the people in the Intercanyon district pay almost 4 times as much per capita as the people in the Elk Creek district for their fire and EMS services.

Because Intercanyon receives mutual aid from other fire protection districts including Elk Creek.

What does this have to do with improving our own district's capability?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 10:14 #227 by Venturer
Replied by Venturer on topic Vote no on 4A
Thanks for your looooong post. You don't get it. It doesn't matter what the Chief or anyone says it matters what the the language in the ballot says. It doesn't say it is limiting the equipment or only replacing 2 positions. You have no guarantees based on the language. Until you can show me where it says it in the ballot question you can argue ad nauseum about what stallions you need to fight better, pretty inept then in my opinion. A blank check is what you are giving them. I have a bridge to sell you if you are that naive.
Vote NO on 4A

Science Chic wrote:

WindPeak wrote: Prove to me that you will provide stallions when ECFD has been in shambles for years. It isn't what it used to be. Look how many volunteer firefighters quit because of all the squabbles and union attempts. McLaughlin wants the money to make it a union f.d. He was hired for that purpose. And how does that make it better? You had the best many decades ago when it was really volunteer.

How come Intercanyon Fire District can live w/o a bunch of paid administrators and does a quite remarkable job for their community.

Obviously you can't function with what you have so you want to waste more money to continue to be pitiful. NO, it is time for new management and McLaughlin isn't it. Does your paid mouthpiece McLaughlin even live up here?

Stop preying on people with your talk of house on fire or medical emergency. ECFD has been responding for decades and making do long before you showed up. We have done just fine for decades and will continue w/o wasting taxpayers money. How long you been here?

Vote NO on 4A.

And I say to everyone, base your decision to vote on what this department has actually done - their actions - not what previous administrations have done or what you fear this one will do.

• This department has let go/cut 2.5 PAID positions of 12 total and recruited the largest rookie VOLUNTEER class in its history.

• Both the board and the Chief have stated that it is not their goal to make this an all-paid department and the mill levy is to replace only one of those 2.5 cut paid positions. They've also stated that they'd like to increase their number of volunteers, for which they need more turnout gear, also requested for in the mill.

• The current group of both paid and volunteer firefighters are 100% behind this current Board of Directors and their Chief, as evidenced by the letter 56 of them signed that they requested be read during the February 2013 BOD meeting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNgqc-yV-H0 The internal squabbles are nonexistent, the Chief and BOD have cleaned up this department and are running it as financially tightly as possible and morale is high.

• Maybe all volunteer worked the best years ago when there were fewer residents and fewer structures and fewer visitors, but times change and it doesn't work today. I was curious as to when the department started having paid staff so I asked - the district has had paid firefighter/paramedics dating back to 1998. They were hired at the urging of the volunteers due to the difficulties volunteers had providing transports with the increasing call volumes. The volunteers have full-time jobs themselves, they can't afford to take 2-3 hours for an ambulance run to the hospital down the hill. They can pop over to assist with a call for a short time, and often do, but full-time, paid staff are required to fill that increasing need. The number of ambulance runs has only increased, and will only do so as more visitors and residents come.

Not only are medical calls increasing, but so are wildfire and structure calls - ECFPD responds to over 1100 total calls/year (medical and fire). The number of people and adequate equipment are required to respond to these. As Travis Griffin said during the Community Meeting, it's critical for an initial attack on a wildland fire that the responding local departments have adequate equipment. There's no denying that this department has outdated equipment - 3 pieces are 24-25 years old - it's time to replace it. There comes a time that it's cost-prohibitive to replace water pumps, parts, and engines and pay the mechanic overtime to keep them maintained, because older vehicles require more care. It was brought up during the Public Affairs Meeting that they have been spending a lot on overtime for the mechanic.

• They've reduced the number of vehicles that they had in their fleet, trimming the fat and keeping the essentials, and are proposing to replace the ones needing to go with trucks that are less expensive AND better suited to our mountain roads and conditions, yet perform the necessary functions that engines and tankers provide. The newer equipment is more efficient and effective for our unique regional needs.

And yes, the Chief lives within 6 minutes of Station 1 (assuming that he drives like I do - a bat outta hell). :biggrin: And he's heavily involved in this community - he's a member of the Conifer Rotary, he's volunteered to help organize the Mountain Area Relay for Life, he's an active member of the Conifer Chamber attending every meeting and many events, among other things. He cares about this community. You won't find a finer, more upstanding person to lead this department and lead it well he has - I've witnessed that during the BOD meetings and in my interactions with the firefighters. But don't take my word for it - go ask them at the Open House this Saturday at Station 1.

*Edit to add: and the "union" isn't really a union - it doesn't have bargaining rights, it doesn't have voting rights, and the Chief explained all that in the Public Affairs meeting.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 10:19 #228 by Venturer
Replied by Venturer on topic Vote no on 4A

FNP wrote:

WindPeak wrote:
How come Intercanyon Fire District can live w/o a bunch of paid administrators and does a quite remarkable job for their community.


Because the people in the Intercanyon district pay almost 4 times as much per capita as the people in the Elk Creek district for their fire and EMS services.

Because Intercanyon receives mutual aid from other fire protection districts including Elk Creek.

What does this have to do with improving our own district's capability?


Did you forget that they are better trained and don't fight with each other, not trying to get Unions in there like this District is trying to do with their blank check they want taxpayers to authorize. Dump the paid administration and use volunteers like InterCanyon and build a better fire department. Try using IC as an example of professional volunteer f.f.

And Elk Creek doesn't receive mutual aid from other fire protection districts?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 10:32 #229 by Venturer
Replied by Venturer on topic Vote no on 4A
Sorry FNP you can't blame the equipment for the last two disastrous fire seasons. Errors were made by McLaughlin in the Lower North Fork Fire, his assuming command when it wasn't even his district. More evaluation needs to be done of the f.f. process w/i the District. That doesn't mean throwing more money at it will improve it.

And from the Wildfire Task Force Final Report. Fees are coming which will benefit the fire districts.
http://www.dora.state.co.us/taskforce/D ... NDICES.pdf
Given the guiding principle that homeowners in the WUI should share in the risk of living in
wildfire-prone areas and should therefore shoulder much of the associated costs, the Task
Force recommends a fee be assessed on those who live in the WUI. The wildfire risk rating
could be used to identify homeowners who would be charged. Properties with higher risk
scores could be assessed a higher flat fee than those with lower risk scores. The funds would
be collected at the state level and distributed to local governments to help offset the costs of
mitigation in the WUI.
Fee-based programs are not untested. California recently enacted legislation that requires rural
residents to pay an annual $150 fire-fighting fee. The funds are used for prevention and
protection services. Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington also have fee requirements in
place. Some assessments date back decades to years when private timber companies first
taxed themselves to pay for fire protection.

Several methods for assessing the property fee exist, including:

• Funds could be raised through a graduated mill levy assessment on properties in the
WUI. The mill levy would vary based on the severity of the hazard rating. A variation of
this theme is to apply the mill levy state-wide, but properties scoring a 0 risk level would
have no additional assessment. This would require local TABOR elections for the mill
levy increase.

• Funds could also be raised through a flat fee on any property in the WUI.

• As part of the process, homeowners might qualify for a rebate or reduction of the fee if
they perform proper mitigation on their property and reduce their risk score.


FNP wrote:
Working with what we have brought us the last two disastrous fire seasons. I want better and you offer no options to improve our capability.

Read the Wildfire Task Force report. Your statement is incorrect.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2013 11:14 #230 by Grady
Replied by Grady on topic Vote no on 4A
Note to SC. I missed your post where you stated up front that you were supporting Friends of Elk of Elk Creek. I apologize for that. As I told you in a PM I would never not, support one of your paid advertisers based on who or what you support. I hope you are not saying that I would attempt to harm the business of any of your advertisers.

As far as the 4A issue is concerned, I will not support the tax increase. Property values will come back. I don't think it's any great secret that the board has been planning on submitting a mill levy increase for quite some time, long before Chief McLaughlin was hired. With property levels down, revenue down, and last year's fires, the board apparently felt the time was right to bring up a tax increase.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.357 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+