Vote no on 4A

WindPeak wrote: You prey on people by reciting the fires that have occurred and yes more will occur but guess what other rural mountainous districts manage w/o all the glitz. You damage your community and the people in it who are barely making ends meet now by asking them to give more. Go to Vail or Aspen and peddle your spill where the money is.

The other rural mountainous districts around here manage by helping each other out - it's called mutual aid and they do it every day. So a decrease in the ability of one department to provide the same level of service that it has been providing if the voters choose not to fund this mill levy means that ALL area fire departments will feel the effects. Not exactly a good argument for voting against this measure, whether you live in-district or not.

WindPeak wrote: Ahhh my niece told me I would meet up with a few who were less than admirable, not quite the words she used but you get the idea. Looks like I hit a few nerves. Were you here in 1948 when ECFD was born? I bet not. And you didn't and still don't have to be a firefighter to contribute to ECFD over all the decades.

Is it too much to ask that an old lady be spared having to give up her home because ECFD wants state of the art equipment and a blank check to do whatever they want? I gave in the true spirit of volunteering. I didn't get a nickel for any of it and gave money and time willingly because this is my community. I don't go to Starbucks or out to eat dinner. The few pennies a month you keep talking about will take food out of my mouth. And I am not the only one on fixed income or trying to make ends meet.

Vote NO on 4A and make your fire department accountable, again.

And this fire department hasn't had a change in the mill levy rate since at least 1972. Yes, property values have gone up, but so has the price of equipment, building maintenance, fuel, and, significantly, the number of structures they are required to protect, etc - all the things that fire departments have to pay for because they don't have the option to refuse to go out on a call once they've hit their budget expenditures for the year. And when property values go down, like they have in the past 4 years and aren't expected to rise all that much in the coming years, and reimbursements for their ambulance service decrease, what other options do they have? You started out saying they were paying exorbitant pensions and benefits:

Don't buy it SC. Change the way volunteers and others are given outrageous pensions for 10 years of volunteering and you have bookoo bucks to cover all the things they need.

and when that was debunked as being an insignificant portion of their budget, you moved on to other arguments also not based on factual evidence. They don't have lavish buildings. They have used and/or older equipment.

They are not asking for "state of the art extravagant equipment" and a blank check. They are asking for funds to replace 3 well-past their useful lifetime pieces of expensive equipment, and gear for their volunteers, to replace 1 out of 2.5 positions cut, and maintenance on their facilities that's well past due - after they've made drastic cuts, sold off extra vehicles, eliminated jobs, held staff pay at 2012 levels, and done everything they can to streamline their budget as much as possible. They've done as much as they can, just as we would for our own households during tough times, and are now asking for the very people they serve to help support them - and if you choose not to, you are going to be paying a whole lot more in insurance rates - and have a decrease in the level of service. Do you really think you can afford that? What's preferable for those on tight budgets, paying $60 more per year to your local firefighters or $236 per year more to your insurance company?

The mill levy has to be spent as it says. Think it's going to be spent frivolously? Or fraudulently like with past leaders at ECFPD? I get that, it WAS an issue. Not now. The Chief is an honorable man - don't believe me, go in and talk to him. Ask anyone in the community about him. He volunteers for the Conifer Rotary, he organized a relay team for the Relay for Life last year, he taught kids how to ski for free last season. They had their largest volunteering recruiting class ever last year and almost all of those firefighters, along with the veterans, (56 of the 59) signed a statement that was read at the February 2013 BOD meeting in support of their Chief and Board of Directors. It starts at minute 18:59: [youtube:g3yb0eqj][/youtube:g3yb0eqj]

WindPeak wrote: People have to be nuts to give the f.d. an open ticket to not only buy the specified two fire tankers and one fire engine “and for the ongoing operation and maintenance of fire protection services”. You are giving them a free ticket to do anything they want. That means conferences in other states, dental plans, ANYTHING they chose so long as they can justify the ongoing operation and maintenance of fire protection services. You are potentially committing yourself to lavish buildings, like Evergreen, bigger pensions and benefits and others items with this sloppy open ended language. And they will come back and tell you that they have a group or someone who is very responsible and will only do what is necessary. Yep they can tell you anything but you just gave them a blank check.

And where is your proof that they've gone to "conferences in other states", are planning on building lavish buildings like in Evergreen, plan on instituting bigger pensions and benefits, or done ANYTHING they chose? Have you watched any of the ECFPD BOD meeting videos or seen for yourself how they operate?

The Chief presented the 2013 budget to the public - have you watched it?
@14:56 Suspend Normal Business, Conduct Public Hearing on 2013 Budget - Chief McLaughlin to present
@52:00 Close Special 2013 Budget Discussion Hearing, Re-open regular board meeting
Here's the 21 page budget, posted back in December: http://mymountaintown.com/forums/the-ca ... get%20cuts
[youtube:g3yb0eqj][/youtube:g3yb0eqj]

WindPeak wrote: And if that isn’t enough, the last clause “all without limiting in any year the amount of other revenues that may be collected, retained and spent by the district”. That means you are telling them it is ok to come ask for another increase at any time during the duration. Are you nuts?

So if they ask for another revenue increase, then don't vote for it, simple as that - they aren't forcing this upon you, they are asking the voters to approve it, as they should.

FYI, by "other revenues", they mean the additional money they collect when they go outside of district and work other fires, like departments from many other states come here and help us during a bad fire, like LNFF. Every time they do that, they get paid per ff and piece of equipment for each day it is on duty elsewhere and no money comes from us in-district for those ff's or equipment costs. Them volunteering their time, sometimes weeks, away from their homes, families, and jobs, has brought in hundreds of thousands of dollars and kept the department operating.

Grady wrote: Keep in mind that while property values have dropped, they are now on the rise. Assessments are slow to follow true property values, but they will follow, naturally increasing the FD coffers.

Projected tax revenue just given to the dept by Jeffco and Park Co says an additional 4% decline. And that assessment is what they get for the next 2 years because property tax revenue lags 2 years behind actual values. So this statement is currently not what the counties are seeing, and while it's hoped that we are at the bottom of this recession, no one knows for sure and the department won't see any rise in revenue as a result for at least another 3 years regardless - they have one engine and 2 tankers that are already past their useful lifespan and won't be accredited by ISO. How would you recommend that they pay for those?