A group of Edmonds residents opposed to an April 22 ballot measure proposing that the City of Edmonds annex into the South Snohomish County Regional Fire Authority have formed Edmonds Can Do Better (ECDB), and the group has launched a website, edmondscandobetter.org
The group is led by Edmonds residents Jim Ogonowski, Theresa Hutchison, Kevin Fagerstrom, Roger Pence and Theresa Hollis, along with former Edmonds City Councilmember Diane Buckshnis. According to a news release, the organization’s mission is “to provide an ‘informed’ voice to help educate residents of the potential financial impacts and Edmonds’ loss of control” should Edmonds voters approve the annexation.
“To be clear, we appreciate our first responders immensely,” the news release said. “ECDB’s major concern is with the city losing control of its fire/EMS services and having no say in optimizing those services to meet Edmonds’ unique requirements. A no vote allows council and citizens time to look at alternative solutions to minimize the tax impact and to keep our tax dollars locally to benefit our community.”
It’s good that the people now have a voice to counter the PR firm hired by the City. Why the City didn’t use the money spent on PR to pay a competent negotiator to deal with the RFA.
So, where does Edmonds come up with huge cash outlay to start over with a new Fire Department. Years ago, the handwriting was there. That was the reason they disbanded the idea of our own department originally.
Joe, with all due respect that isn’t the right question. The question is, where does Edmonds come up with the huge cash outlay to cover the sudden increase of $8M dollars now for fire and ems service that’s going from $12M/yr. to $21M/yr. like overnight? In 2009 the then Mayor and Council knew they had to ask for a fire/ems tax levy which would be politically unpopular so they engaged the local bean counters and came up with a more palatable contracting scheme with Fire Dist 1 (that morphed into SCF and then became RFA) and was supposed to last for 20 years, but it didn’t when RFA unilaterally pulled the plug on it early and demanded a re-do with more cash from Edmonds. We know the cash comes from us taxpayers, but the real question is how much cash is really needed and why? Maybe you and the city want to let the RFA engage in what amounts to legal blackmail but, personally, I choose to protest with a NO vote on this contrived special election that is just another waste of money we don’t have right now.
Another issue no one seems to be addressing is homeowners insurance. The company’s use a rating system to figure your premiums based on the rating of the fire service. Currently we enjoy a 3 rating. 1 being the best. If we start over, our rating will go down significantly as they need 5 years of data to formulate the new rating.
As for cash outlay, a new ladder truck costs in excess of 2 million dollars and takes three years for delivery. What do we use in the meantime. And since a “ new” Edmonds fire department will only have two stations, our response times will increase dramatically. I’m just saying, more is being ignored than discussed.
Joe
You are sadly mistaken. There would be no huge cash outplay. Edmonds is already making a large payment for fire services. The taxpayers already have paid for the fire equipment and medical supplies. This is the same proposition of the Fire district claiming the fire stations are free.
Edmonds contracted with South County Fire because it was supposedly going to be a cost saving. A 50 percent cost increase is not justifiable under any circumstances.
Vote No Regional Fire Annexation.
You are wrong. We own no fire equipment. We would need to purchase it from RFA. Not sure how anyone thinks funding a new fire department is going to be less costly? Please explain.
Other cities have no problem running a fire/ems operation for 43,000 residents at around $290/resident per year – which translates to the current $12.5 million RFA contract price. Placentia. CA (Orange County) has 52,000 residents and they run their fire/ems operation for $10 million a year – only $192 per resident. Edmonds’ 2024 contract cost per 911 call was $1,973 based on 6,334 calls. If annexation goes through, the RFA will price fire and medical 911 calls at $3,315 per call! Vancouver, WA contracts with AMR for paramedic services at less than $1,300 per response. 85% of all 911 calls are for medical emergencies. Why has the RFA not adjusted their staffing and station assignments to reflect that demand? They have chosen to cross-train firefighters to be paramedics/EMT techs so they can earn more, roll more fire trucks, and accumulate more ‘on-task’ time – which helps them reach their 30% on-task time limit. That leads to more overtime and inefficiencies. Dedicated paramedics don’t have the 30% unit hour utilization (UHU) limit – so they can work more hours on the job. The RFA promotes their ‘economies of scale’, but the only scale they understand is higher salaries, and more top heavy management. Edmonds has an opportunity to save $8M/yr. That can buy a lot of equipment and make a great return on investment.
But we have a built in right with the original agreement to buy back our old equipment from SCF at the going market rate. I didn’t much agree with our Mayor and Council ever giving up our own fire service but was asleep at the switch and didn’t actively protest. Anyway, I didn’t agree with these guys but they are not dumb people and they built some safe guards into the original deal and buy back of equipment rights were part of it. As far as I can tell the only people who have done any sort of real study on the startup cost and running of EFD again are a couple members of the annexation opposition group. What’s missing is an honest study and believable number on what a re-start vs. annexation would cost. It wasn’t done and won’t be done unless annexation is voted down at this time. With the bad shape our city finances are in a good Mayor and City Council would be chomping at the bit to do this study and if we could come in even 1M under RFA we would happily say bye-bye to them. Ours would rather just throw away 1/4 M on an unnecessary and biased special election because us Edmonds property owner Dudes are awash is spare change apparently.
I presumed that joining the regional fire district was the lowest cost option to maintaining fire protection service. However I like to keep an open mind and eagerly went to the group’s website to see what lower cost option they advocated. Spoiler alert: they have no lower cost option. Their solution is to vote no so that the decision is kicked down the road and maybe the costs will be lower in some future negotiation. Nah, don’t think this is a viable alternative.
Gerry, my friend, that’s the whole point of their opposition and recommending a NO vote now. Just like you, the city decision makers just PRESUMED annexation was the lowest cost option to maintaining fire protection and decided to waste over a quarter of a million dollars on a totally unnecessary special hurry up election. Doesn’t stupid spending like that make you wonder at all about how sharp these folks are with spending our tax money? Spoiler alert: “the group” isn’t even claiming to have a lower cost option at this point. What they are doing is claiming that possible lower cost options were never investigated by the city as they should have been and there is still time to do it. These are local citizen volunteers who would even give the city free time and effort to do an honest and reliable study of what taking back our own fire service, using our own buildings would involve and the true cost of doing it. The city is just counting on people like you, following the herd as usual. I say ask questions and keep demanding some accountability for the money that they are just throwing away. The Mayor has $150,000 he can spend anyway he wants with almost no accountability. Is that a good idea too? How many PR people does one town need?
Correction: I’ve been informed that the Mayor’s discretionary spending amount is actually $100,000 at this time. Still seems like a lot and maybe something that aught to be reconsidered considered our current delicate financial situation and need to cut spending.
I am sorry but this is not a good Web Site and it is very sad. I have shown this to my grandbabies and they are content creaters and they are laughing at this pause button that does not work. The text is really small and they talk about less expensive options but do not say what they are. I am wondering why the volunteers who erected the Web Site did not spend time doing the cost analysis that they are asking the City to do. That would be a better way to spend time.
Janice- sorry you don’t appreciate the work the citizen volunteers are doing. Our website is a ‘work in progress.’ We don’t have an unlimited budget like the City seems to have – as they are spending $64K on a PR firm to ‘spin’ the RFA annexation vote in their favor. That $64K was committed last August – when it could have been spent on a professional fire/ems consultant to vett the less costly alternatives to the RFA’s $21M annexation price. Fire departments across the country are reducing costs and improving response times to address the fact that 85% of 911 calls are for medical emergencies. They don’t need to roll fire trucks or have as many fireman on call – when firefighters are only are needed on 10% of the 911 calls! Vancouver, WA is similar in size to South County RFA. They contract with AMR for paramedic service. AMR charges less than $1,300 per 911 medical response. RFA charges Edmonds $1,973 per 911 call under the current contract and that price will increase to $3,315 post annexation. Do you think Edmonds should be paying 2.5X for 911 calls compared to Vancouver residents? Placentia, CA runs their fire/ems operation for 52,000 residents for $10M per year – which is $192/resident – compared with Edmonds’ $292/resident. Why didn’t the Council do an analysis of fire/ems options?
Hi Janice, wouldn’t it be nice if clicking the “pause” button paused our city leaders push to off-load their responsibilities onto an organization located outside of Edmonds?
I for one, will not support my city leaders every time they throw their hands up and say “it’s too hard”.
Edmonds consultant in 2016, highlighted inefficients in SCF / RFA delivery model. Providing 3 recommendations that would improve service & reduce costs up to 20%.
Take care,
Nick
https://edmondscandobetter.org/pdf/Fitch_Executive_Summary_Report.pdf
https://myedmondsnews.com/2016/04/report-edmonds-fire-ems-services-can-improve-performance-reduce-costs/
Wow, this just keeps getting more comical in a “gallows humor” sort of way. You can’t give any reasonable answers to the questions the volunteers are asking so you make fun of their website and blame them for not doing what the Mayor and Council should have done in the first place which is the whole point of why the volunteers are questioning the city so hard about the wisdom of just doing the RFA’s bidding without considering options and putting up at least a symbolic fight on behalf of the people who put them in office. The Mayor and Council can’t even give a straight answer to what this “special election” is really costing and why they didn’t just have this election next Fall when they have to ask for a General Fund tax levy anyway. Hey, why pay for one election when you can pay for two? Great management of our tax money; and they want more to mismanage with moves like this? I really question the wisdom of giving them more money for anything.
Clinton your comment is confusing and I think it is directed at me. Are you asking me to answer the volunteer’s questions? Or are you telling me to answer them? I do not believe that either of those is my job as a voter and Edmonds Resident. I am not the Mayor or the Council I am a voter who pays taxes. I have to say I am really taken a-back by being attacked here for my opinion and feedback but I guess that is how it is on the Internet which is really sad when you think about it.
Janice, no I’m not asking you to answer the volunteers questions or telling you to do anything for that matter. Like you, I’m just a fellow voter and taxpayer who, in my case, doesn’t like the way this town is being run right now. I don’t like being shined on and being told a government viewpoint is unbiased when it most obviously is biased. I am pointing out that it’s not helpful to the discussion for someone to make fun of a website because they don’t agree with what the people who put it up are saying. Figuratively speaking what you did looks like trying to kill the message by killing the messenger; and that’s just a little not too nice IMO. I guess what’s sad is just in the eye of the beholder so to speak.
Clinton you wrote: ” You can’t give any reasonable answers to the questions the volunteers are asking so you make fun of their website … .” I am not making fun of your website, I am sharing feedback that says it is not good by way of providing solutions and that your pause button does not work. You are saying that I need to give reasonable answers to the volunteer’s questions and frankly I do not know what you mean by that what do you mean? It is distasteful and cruel to state that by sharing my opinion and feedback that I, as a woman in this Community and City, and trying to kill the message. This is going around and around and it seems all of us need to take a time out and really think about what is sad in this town and in this World right now. Thank you and God Bless.
As far as I can see Edmonds has a couple fire stations but the only trucks and Emergency services I see responding daily is South Snohomish County. I am concerned about continued good service that we seem to get now. South Snohomish County is a well-run, well-respected fire district…. In place. Costs with South Snohomish Co will go up but It would be costly for Edmonds to gear up.
Janice. I didn’t make it personal to you. You did that. Also, it’s not my website as I’m not in the group that put it up. I do absolutely agree with them, however, and whether their website is good or bad or what your relatives think about the website is totally irrelevant to this entire conversation. The simple fact is you said their website is bad and your relatives are experts and they are laughing at it. Have a good day.
Numerous website updates, including endorsements from respected Edmonds Residents and a former fire commissioner.
https://edmondscandobetter.org/