Mosquito Fire Protection District*

While elimination of status quo of an organization. Consolidation and positions can certainly lead to resistance to change within an reorganization are likely to lead to elimination of redundant organization, it is the position of MFPD that the most likely positions, which typically will not be well received by cause of resistance to consolidation will be the reluctance to current employees. Should consolidation occur, these provide a degraded level of service to the residents in the difficulties can be ameliorated by district. a) Selecting at least one director from the district to be a director of the new district, and b) Continuing former district volunteer firefighter associations, such as was done with the mergers from the El Dorado County FPD. 3. The County Board of Supervisors supplements revenues The MFPD disagrees in part with

In the background for six FPDs on the County west slope and two small section of the report, the Grand Jury states that "Operationally, Protection District Response to Grand Jury Case No. 07-025 <b>Grand Jury Finding</b> <b>Mosquito Fire Protection District Response</b> districts providing fire protection in the Tahoe Basin, Fallen Leaf Lake CSD and the Meeks Bay FPD. This is a subsidy boundaries between west slope County fire protection districts by the County at large to these particular fire districts. These are transparent. With respect to emergency response, they act subsidies raise a fairness issue for taxpayers outside these together as one fire department." This statement is districts who are supporting their own fire protection district contradictory to the fairness assertion, as taxpayers outside of through various taxes while also contributing, through the the subsidized district clearly receive benefit from subsidized County's general fund, an extra amount of money to these district operations. In the MFPD, for example, the subsidy is subsidized districts. used to finance an emergency vehicle. As this vehicle is often called to emergencies outside of the Mosquito district, non- These subsidies are based on an agreement between the Mosquito taxpayers receive a direct benefit from the general County Board of Supervisors and the eight districts, "Supplemental Funding Agreement for Rural Fire Districts for Enhanced Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services." This agreement was amended by an Auditor- Controller memo of October 4, 2001, to provide for a correction in tax rates for fire protection in some of these districts. Under this agreement, the eight districts receiving less than 13 percent of the ad valorem property tax revenue collected within their boundaries will receive a supplemental contribution from the County general fund. This supplement is intended to be sufficient to provide the district with revenue for fire protection services equal to approximately 13 percent of their tax revenue base. The amount of this subsidy is calculated by the Auditor- Controller each year using the final assessed property valuation from the prior year to establish the 13 percent <b>Mosquito Fire Protection District</b> Response to Grand Jury Case No. 07-025 <b>Grand Jury Finding</b> Mosquito Fire Protection District Response threshold. The difference between the 13 percent threshold and the prior year estimated actual tax revenue plus the prior year subsidy is the basis for the current year subsidy. For the eight subsidy districts, their percentage of Tax Rate Area (TRA) taxes is always less than 13 percent; whereas for the five non-subsidized fire districts the percentage exceeds 13 percent. Exhibit A, column D, shows the amount of the County supplemental contribution to bring all fire protection districts up to the equivalent of 13 percent of the total TRA taxes for FY 2006/07. The supplemental amounts contributed by the County to all eight subsidized districts in FY 2006/07 totaled $1,188,142. The share of this amount receieved by the six West slope FPDs was $856,908, which is 72.2 percent of the total subsidy for FY 2006/07. The County supplemental in FY 2006/07 for all eight subsidized districts was 1,188, 242. The subsidy for the six FPDs in the present year, FY 2007/08, is 926,948, an 8.2 percent increase over the previous year. The subsidy for all eight districts in FY 2007/08 is 1,300,347, which is a 9.3 percent increase over FY 2006/07. 4. All of the subsidized FPDs receive "special taxes" and/or The MFPD agrees with this finding. "special assessments" except pioneer FPD. These funds are not considered when the subsidy calculation is made. These special funds have been previously authorized on a Lase No. 07-025 <b>Grand Jury Finding</b> continuing basis by an election of property owners within the <b>Mosquito Fire Protection District Response</b> district. Special taxes require a vote of 2/3 of the property parcel owners. Special assessments are "fire suppression assessments" which are allowed under State law and require only a property parcel vote of 50 percent plus one. 5. The tax revenues for FY 2006/07 for the West Slope FPDs are summarized in Exhibit B. The tax revenues for each district, including special taxes and special assessments The MFPD agrees with this finding. are combined in one column. Note that all but Pioneer FPD and Latrobe FPD receive tax revenues exceeding 13 percent of their tax base, and all but Pioneer FPD have total funding including the County Supplemental Contribution that exceeds 13 percent of their tax base. With the exception of Pioneer FPD and Latrobe FPD, the County supplemental is much smaller than the other tax revenue received by the 6. With advanced notification, the Board of Supervisors can discontinue these subsidies. The County has fiduciary responsibility to minimize them preferably without degrading The MFPD disagrees in part with this finding. fire protection capabilities. Elimination of the subsidies would require these fire protection districts to either find Firstly, the Board of Supervisors also has responsibility to other sources of revenue in a similar amount, or find ensure its citizens are adequately provided with emergency equivalent budget savings that would not degrade fire medical services and are protected against fire hazards; the protection capability. subsidies are an important component of these services. Without a thorough analysis of the manner in which the subsidies are spent, the Grand Jury has no basis for establishing whether or not the elimination of the subsidies would be fire <b>Mosquito Fire Protection District</b> Response to Grand Jury Case No. 07-025 <b>Grand Jury Finding</b> Mosquito Fire Protection District Response protection capability neutral. Secondly, it is the position of the MFPD that degradation of fire protection capabilities is not an acceptable consequence of subsidy elimination. Finally, the MFPD believes this finding is internally inconsistent, stating on the one hand that the county can eliminate the subsidies and try its best not to degrade fire protection capabilities, and on the other hand asserting that the FPD's cannot degrade capabilities if the subsidies are discontinued. Clearly, the standard should be the same for both the County and the FPD's - capabilities cannot be degraded. 7. Consolidation of the six West Slope subsidized fire The MFPD disagrees with this finding. districts, and especially mergers into the three financially stronger fire districts on the West Slope, should allow Firstly, consolidation will not necessarily eliminate the elimination of the fire chiefs and other administrative personnel costs to the extent the Grand Jury claims in Exhibit C positions in the subsidized districts. The potential personnel of the report. While consolidation may remove a salaried savings that could result are shown in Exhibit C, where the position with the title of "Chief", it is likely that in order to administrative personnel costs for each district are shown in maintain the current level of fire protection capability, a column L, with a total amount of $944,084. The County salaried position of "Captain" (or similar title) would be supplemental contributions for these fire districts are shown created. Similarly, it is unlikely that a single secretary or in column M, and the total amount is similar to the total Administrative Assistant in the consolidated organization could administrative personnel costs shown in column L. perform all of the functions of the four positions the Grand Jury proposes to eliminate; some positions would need to be carried over or new positions created. Thus, Exhibit C of the report <b>Mosquito Fire Protection District</b> Response to Grand Jury Case No. 07-025 <b>Grand Jury Finding</b> <b>Mosquito Fire Protection District Response</b> overstates the level of savings that could be realized by the County. Second, stating that the County supplemental contributions for the subsidized districts is similar to the total administrative personnel costs can be misleading. Although the total subsidy and personnel costs are of the same order in sum, the two are grossly disparate in some FPD's. For example, in the MFPD, the total personnel costs are estimated to be $107,122 in Exhibit C, while the county supplemental contribution is only $28,246. Finally, the MFPD notes that the total of column L in Exhibit C is $726,919, not the $944,084 mentioned in this finding. 8. If supplemental payments to the six West Slope fire The MFPD disagrees with this finding, as it believes that the protection districts are eliminated, the savings to the County Grand Jury has over-estimated the savings. general fund will be recurrent, rather than one-time. Over ten years and with annual increases of 9 percent, the Firstly, the calculation assumes an annual increase of 9 percent, SAVINGS will amount to $14,018,235. If supplemental cumulatively, over the ten year period. This level of increase is payments to all eight subsidized fire districts are eliminated, not predictive nor consistent with the current economic the SAVINGS over ten years will amount to $19,665,148. conditions. For example, the assessed property valuations in the county will clearly be less in FY 2008/09. Secondly, the calculation assumes that all subsidies from the general fund can be eliminated once consolidation occurs. As the level of fire protection capability must be maintained in the new organization, it is not clear that (nor has any study been done to validate such) all subsidies can be discontinued. <b>Mosquito Fire Protection District</b> Response to Grand Jury Case No. 07-025 <b>Grand Jury