Mutual aid v. automatic response
By the way, on October 20 there will be an item before committee regarding a firefighting agreement between the city and county governments. The issue is replacing the mutual aid agreement between Pensacola and Escambia with an automatic response agreement for select areas.
As it is now, if the fire were to happen at Jerry's Cajun again, the City of Pensacola would have to wait for a request from Escambia County in order to respond. Under the new agreement, the response would be automatic. Jerry's Cajun is in one of the County nubs that are almost entirely enclosed by the City. Just a couple of blocks from Jerry's in any direction places one back in the City of Pensacola.
It's a good deal all around, but it's a MUCH BETTER DEAL for those in the county than in the city. Pensacola residents pay just as much tax to Escambia County as non-city residents do but there is almost ZERO spent by County in Pensacola. The City delivers far greater services to its residents than County does, but it comes at a cost of paying above our county taxes.
Pensacolians might ask why they should expect to subsidize those who choose to keep their properties' from being annexed, like mayoral candidate Mike Wiggins. He's a big advocate of annexation and for the right reasons, but he refuses to annex his own property.
But for whatever reason he chooses, he escapes paying the City tax, so most feel he should not get City fire protection.
Yet, the humanitarian and good neighbor thing to do is respond to fires wherever and whenever you are able. Besides, a burned down business in the county affects property prices in the nearby city neighborhood but the City has no code enforcement authority over that property.
I have very mixed feelings on this, but I am leaning toward not approving this agreement. City services should go to city properties.
Posts
11 comments:
Talk about the good neighbor policy AFTER the city council was crying for a fire assessment for city residents a few months ago?
What changed?
With residents like mayoral candidate Mike getting city services living in the county, why would he annex and pay at least another 4 mills?
How does this help city residents PAY for fire services and if it doesn't how can we afford to do it?
If this is the kind of recommendations we can expect from Mike, don't want to have MY business in the city, Wiggins,
No thank you!
Vote C J Lewis . He's MANAGED a budget .
Wiggins and Nobles should resign.
Willamette
If the geographical puzzle of the city and county boundaries is the only reason this mutual aid v automatic response question is on the table, then why not fix the boundary?
I don't see any point in changing the current agreement when what needs fixing is the borders. Wouldn't fixing the borders solve the problem?
Property owners know the consequences of worst case scenarios. They can move, or they can accept whatever risk, imaginary or not, there may be in living or running a business where they are.
I don't see any point in juggling agreements when redrawing the border in some logical way will do.
Doing that will also preclude the debate of who pays more and who gets more, which always tend to escalate tempers. The latter of which is something we could do with less of.
In one of the last meetings I attended the city has already taken two Rescue Trucks off duty 80% of the time. Now with less trucks and manpower the Fire Department wants to send trucks outside the city limits. I pay city taxes to keep my Fire and Police in the city where they belong.
If this is what the "policy maker" council recommends in a downturned economy after telling us city needs a fire assessment then it's time to find some new policy makers.
Was the fire assessment a real need or a bogus way to round up some cash for the depleting city budget?
The fire assessment fee was option that council asked the finance director to report on.
You can't just "fix" the boundary. Residents have to vote to be annexed -- or not. If the majority in an area object, then they won't be annexed.
Don't give away this service for free. If county residents want our services then let them pay.
I pay county property taxes and what services do I receive? Slim & none.
I chose to live in the city & pay more because I wanted the higher level of services provided by the city -- a professional police department, a paid, professional fire department, great sanitation services, etc.
Let those on the outskirts vote to be annexed or settle for less.
What hope is there for consolidation if we can’t even cooperate for the public safety?
This is political theater played out before an election. Council members now indignant could have acted anytime sooner to include at the September 16 Joint Meeting of the Escambia County Board of Commissioners and the Pensacola City Council. In fact, they should have addressed the automatic aid issue in March 2007 right after the Jerry’s fire.
Instead they got weak kneed days (September 25) before the "Interlocal Agreement for Automatic Aid in the Provision of Fire Suppression and Emergency Services Between Escambia County, Florida and City of Pensacola, Florida” was supposed to take effect (October 1). The agreement doesn’t even mention money though the need for a reimbursement provision seems pretty obvious.
But as imperfect as this agreement may be (and it is oddly one-sided) petty bureaucrats must sometimes choose the least bad option when their own hand-wringing delay jams them up against an immovable deadline. So just sign it for the next fiscal year (starts October 1) and move on.
Then fix the real problem when you’re all not under political duress. During 2007 our city fire department attacked 70 structure fires. Fire suppression is their primary mission in name only. They mostly (70 percent) are a very responsive (fast) Basic Lifesaving Support (BLS) emergency medical service.
The city doesn’t get reimbursed by health care providers for their responses and our Paramedic/ Firefighters are capable of but not authorized to perform Advanced Lifesaving Support (ALS) and coordinate transport of patients to the hospital.
In a real life example, a county friend was involved in an accident on city turf. Station 6 was on-scene in about 3 minutes. They all then waited (her in agony with a fractured elbow, a head wound, scrapes, bruises, etc.) for the short-handed county EMS to reach the scene which is did 16 minutes later.
Give proper authorization by the EMS Medical Director (something the city and county can work out) she’d have much sooner been in the Sacred Heart ER. The city did much of the work; the county got all the money. The same policy could apply to county fire/rescue and I think it already does to the Pensacola Beach station.
County EMS runs like an enterprise operation and partial reimbursement to the city for mutual aid support (perhaps at a 70% rate) could be reinvested back into the city fire department to support the rescue function to include equipment purchase and Paramedic training for EMTs. Aside from reducing the burden on the general fund accounts, this maintains our premium fire/rescue service while giving city residents the best chance of making it to the hospital alive.
In the the interim just let county EMS ambulances park at city fire stations whenever they want. That will at least prep-position them deeper into city limits.
"The fire assessment fee was option that council asked the finance director to report on. "
The finance director dreamed up a fire assessment?
The same finance director
that missed the mistake of being overpaid by on Cox cable fees,
that watched the pension boil over to 103 million obligation
If Mike Wiggins wants to sell the annexation plan, I suggest he start with his own business which is located less than one block from the city limits.
"The finance director dreamed up a fire assessment?"
Of course he didn't dream it up. It's an option that some municipalities use to fund their fire service. Council asked him to report back to them on that option. He did.
doesn't the county do msbu's for enhanced services? i'm not well versed on how and when they can be used, but can they do one for these areas to reimburse city costs? then the property owners may actually consider annexation.
The only problem with sharing services is providing it FREE to county residents while City residents pay FULL COUNTY TAXES in addition to city taxes and receive relatively NO SERVICES from the County.
What changed from a few months ago when the council was proposing additional taxes/assessment to today when the council is offering Free services to the County.
Am I missing something?
Post a Comment