East Contra Costa Fire Board floats 2014 Parcel Tax

2014-parcel-tax-eastr-county-fireThe East Contra Costa Fire Protection District held a board meeting to discuss a 2014 parcel tax options on Jan 6, 2013. They discussed various options for the Jan 6, 2014 board meeting. Five options for parcel tax included $102-5 years at 3%, $108-5 years, $104-7 year at 3%, $114-7 years, and $98-5 year at 3%. The committee will present these options to their Jan 6th board meeting. As a note, the district favors annual rise of 3% for the parcel tax.

A 2014 parcel tax is driven by committee reviews of costs for maintaining a five station staffing model that covers Oakley, Brentwood, Discovery Bay, and unincorporated areas of East Contra Costa County. There are 48 employees including two administrative with a total of 50 employees.

The Contra Costa Taxpayers Association is reviewing these options for East County’s 2014 parcel tax. However, it’s important to note that the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District will run deficits even if the 2014 parcel tax is passed because salaries and pensions will double within 7 years or less from the current 2012-13 personnel costs.

2014 Parcel Tax

The Finance Committee favored the $98 at 3% escalator. A few board members disagreed on the parcel tax escalator, and amount.

Board member Ronald Johansen blamed Prop 13 for the district’s woes not its pension costs. He wanted to include a slide in the community meetings about Prop 13. Board member Joel Bryant (Brentwood City Council) wanted a slide on Prop 13.

Board member Cheryl Morgan said, “Let’s not turn it into Prop 13 discussion.”

They decided against it.

The Finance Committee urged the board to focus on future revenue sources because the parcel tax is not enough such as fees or community facilities district. There was no mention to cut salaries which is under their jurisdiction.

The Finance Committee under Joel Young mentioned how we need to go to the community for a three or five model station. The Board came out strongly against the 3 station model. One board member said, “We can’t have a three model fire station.”

Discussion included finding a consultant for outreach for a 2014 parcel tax. The Board will wait for the outreach meetings to decide for the final 2014 parcel tax dimensions.

East Contra Costa Fire Protection Community Outreach Meetings

 Oakley- The East Contra Costa Fire Protection Fire District proposed several dates for their community outreach meetings.

Citizens will have an opportunity to voice their concerns to the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District regarding the parcel tax.

The following dates are:

January 9,   2014         Bethel Island   7 PM    BIMID Hall 3085 Stone Rd.

January 15, 2014         Clayton            7 PM    CCC Farm Bureau 5554 Clayton Rd.

January 16, 2014         Oakley             7 PM    City Hall  3231 Main St.

January 22, 2014         Byron               7 PM    Excelsior Middle School 14301 Byron Hwy.

January 23, 2014         Brentwood      7 PM    Senior Center 180 Griffin Ln.

January 29, 2014         Discovery Bay 7 PM    Discovery Bay Elementary 1700 Willow Lake Rd.

January 30, 2014         Knightsen        7 PM    Knightsen Farm Center 3020 2nd St.

Print Friendly

Comments

  1. Kris Hunt says

    Traci, drop your attack and show your numbers that solve the district’s problems. It is a math problem, pure and simple. I was at the Retirement Board meeting where the rep from ConFire tried to push ECCFPD into another rating group because of their pension.

    The District has to have a long term solution that makes the District financially viable. The public balked last time because of the parcel tax 1) cost, 2) pensions, and 3) even at that cost level it was not going to solve the problem.

    I , and the rest of the world, await your financial analysis.

    • Traci says

      I have no intention of dropping my attack. I so desperately want believe in groups with missions like the CCTA but I judge people and groups by what they do not what they say. I do not have a numerical solution and my point simply put is…NEITHER YOU NOT THE CCTA DO EITHER. The glaring difference is I don’t pretend to. What evidence is there that their motivation is “accountable cost-effective, and efficient government.”? After reading the list of table donors it is plain to see why. Oil and private equity… not exactly your average homeowner. I have yet to see any proposal set forth CCTA beyond the anecdotal ever! To your example, the parcel tax failed. What was the CCTA’s solution? Where was their counterpoint? Contra Costa Times spent many print columns citing the CCTA and not one article ever offered an alternative. “No” is not a solution. What adjective would you place on an organization preoccupied with cost with no understanding of service provided? How intelligent is conversational perspective that focuses on one side of a multifaceted issue? What do you call someone that blames the credit card for the debt they have?
      So the Contra Costa Times flatly stating that the CCTA is reviewing anything is without merit.

      I and the rest of the world, await the CCTA’s financial analysis, and again “No” is not analysis. We’ll revisit this conversation when their “findings” are in.
      For the sake of transparency Mrs. Hunt… do you even live here anymore?

    • says

      Sounds like you just distrust everyone that simply doesn’t agree with you. The solution you are looking for Traci, is already right in front of your nose, but there must be a big bunch of sour grapes blocking your view. Voters defeated the East County Fire Tax measure and demanded more accountability in District spending and ways to more efficiently deliver services. Sounds like a multi-faceted solution to me.

    • Kris Hunt says

      Traci (no last name?), I do not represent CoCoTAX. but I do care for CCC and not just because I have relatives who live there..But I am an analyst by training. Are you suggesting that nobody is allowed to comment on an issue unless they live in a portion of the world? Or is this simply part of your general campaign of hate? .

      I guess there is no point in dealing with a rather hate filled person who is unwilling to step up with her (or is it his?) solution.

      Fire services are vital to the welfare of any society. But we all recognize they need to be sustainable. Pretending otherwise is foolish.

  2. Traci says

    Oh my, so much veiled slander. You roundly call into question my character, my intelligence, and my point of view. Done well enough to avoid any web site censorship violation and still insulting. Bravo. Denigrate the messenger and defeat the message… is that the approach?
    It is my belief that an organization that weighs in on public policy whos’ capital donors are international oil companies, a wealth management company headed by a retired congressman and an international CPA firm does NOT have the local homeowners in mind. If one felt so served by this organization it is by coincidence.
    Furthermore any news media that offers said organization validity through innuendo as impartial above others by quoting them only serves to cripple the possibility of an informed electorate.
    What should be thought of any individual or community that believes that their interests are served by an association funded by publicly traded international firms reviewing an East Contra Costa parcel tax. Who genuinely thinks that Chevron’s priority is the cost of East Contra Costa government?

    • says

      Veiled slander? You jest. I was pretty plain. Never said CoCoTax was impartial. Neither are you. No media is. Good luck with your hatred.

  3. Traci says

    Why is it worthy of print that the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association is reviewing anything? Their opinion has as much merit as any other partisan special interest group. QUICKLY before they figure out their mistake go to their website and take a look at their “sponsorship” roster for their annual meeting…
    http://www.cocotax.org/
    This is their list mind you…
    Cheveron, Tesoro, PG&E, Shell Refining Co., Eisner Amper CPA’s, Baker Brose & Mitsutome Wealth Mgmt, Philips66, and Shell Refining Co.
    By all means let’s wait hear what our “local” oil and financial corporate interests have to say about civic needs. Disinformation sterilized and packaged for media delivery.
    I can’t decide which is worse the ethical foundation of the CCTA or the ethical foundation any media that would offer their opinion as legitimate.

    • says

      Thank you for your jeremiad, Traci. My only suggestion is you might want to check in with the First Amendment. In addition to many companies that employ tens of thousands here in the Bay Area, the CoCoTax does in fact also represent homeowners who would otherwise be crushed by expansive government taxation and endless bond and tax measures. Ethics not withstanding, your comment says a lot about yours, that you would defame an organization and encourage its censorship based solely on its assembly of free citizens.