The Daily Herald has an article about a village board meeting in Barrington where the issue of the fire department split with the fire district was on the agenda.
Barrington’s village board Monday night was deluged by a standing-room-only crowd of firefighters and residents angered by the planned split of the village fire department and Barrington Countryside Fire Protection District at the end of the year.
Many in the crowd held yellow signs with slogans like “We Support One Barrington Fire Department” and “Public Safety Should Be Public Knowledge.”
Both the village and fire district have been making plans to end their long-running contractual relationship, under which the larger area of the district has received service from an expanded Barrington Fire Department. Trustees of the fire district, which serves a 48-square-mile area, have cited frustration with their efforts to ask the village for seven more firefighters to be paid for entirely by the district.
But Village President Karen Darch sought to explain Monday that the village is struggling with the long-term costs of a fire department staff far larger than the village itself needs.
These long-term costs are not just the salaries the district has offered to pay for more employees, but also the pensions, insurance and disability payments due these firefighters and their spouses long after they’ve stopped working.
Even though the village has been paying ever higher contributions to the firefighters’ pension fund each year, the fund has dropped from being fully funded in 2007 to only 78.9 percent funded in 2012, Darch said.
Barrington Trustee Tim Roberts said he sympathized with firefighters who could lose union benefits if transferred to the fire district, but he didn’t believe the changes would hurt public safety.
The complete article is HERE.
We have covered the controversy in a series of posts, the most recent of which is HERE.
thanks Chris
Pingback: Barrington Countryside FPD update « chicagoareafire.com
#1 by cmk420 on June 15, 2013 - 11:05 PM
Does anyone believe it’s only a matter of time before we see county-wide fire departments?
#2 by Chad Tinsley on June 15, 2013 - 5:43 PM
Commenters: please check out the Barrington Local 3481 Facebook Page for more information or Email us at infolocal3481@gmail.com
#3 by Jim on June 15, 2013 - 5:20 PM
Drew- I agree with you on the consolidation. In the past the problem has always seemed to have been egos getting in the way.( Mayors, Trustees, Chiefs) In today’s economy, I think a lot of those egos could go away because of financial concerns. If there was a more regional approach we could see the needed staffing per piece because it would be allocated in a much more logical manner rather than municipal boundaries. It is the next step to mutual aid. It takes true leadership to stick your neck out to start this but once it starts it will be like dominos falling.
#4 by Drew Smith on June 14, 2013 - 11:40 PM
Jim-
I’m with you 100%. Often times these administrative matters are viewed by the municipal firefighter/fire department without regard that the municipality (and all its departments – FD,PD,PW, etc.) is the employer and the Feds/state count them all when applying laws or regulations. After all, these matters are why I joined the fire service. They are far more interesting than saving lives and property while getting to work and live with great brothers!
On a more serious note, I feel strongly that for a department to be both financially and operationally efficient and secure a certain scale of economy is needed. That scale would often mean a minimum force of 100-150 members operating from a minimum of 4-6 stations so that ambulances and trucks/squads have a certain volume of work to keep them proficient and make the expenditure practical. Good intentions don’t justify expense. Additionally, the number of administrative staff to properly operate is contingent on being of a certain size. Often we see little departments with a chief and little to no senior and junior chief officers to manage major functions. A fire district that consolidates 2 or more departments into one allows those excess 5-bugle positions to be used more efficiently as staff chiefs or even repurposed as line personnel.
Some departments are engaging in functional consolidations (regional dispatch, auto aid that is mutual, common SOPs/SOGs, a shared training officer, joint apparatus purchases, two or more FDs funding one aerial apparatus). These approaches make sense and work well when true leaders make them happen by compromising with others when they find value.
#5 by Jim on June 14, 2013 - 10:16 PM
Drew- I was talking about the municipality and hiring part time employees. If they are currently an IMRF employer, which I’m sure they are, the parttimers would be eligible for IMRF if they work over the hourly standard. I don’t think many part time firefighters or municipalities realize this fact.
#6 by Drew Smith on June 14, 2013 - 3:21 PM
To participate in IMRF the fire district would have to elect to participate. If they have not already done so then they can remain out. If they elect in then they select the 600 or 1000 hour participate level. If they elect in then it is all or nothing: 100% of the employees not covered by another pension system would be required to participate.
As for the ACA (Obama care), the 30-hour rule applies only when the employer has 50 or more full-time equivalents. For a fire district it may be possible to stay below this level and not be required to offer health insurance. Generally a municipality cannot avoid this since its obligation is based on all employees and not just the ones of the fire department.
#7 by Jim on June 13, 2013 - 12:54 PM
Watcher- Can you explain how it is cheaper to have part time people in the station? Depending how much these employees work(600 or 1000 hours) they are eligible for an IMRF pension. And if they work more than 30 hours per week they will be eligible for insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
#8 by Watcher on June 13, 2013 - 12:32 PM
I agree with the jump company idea for the village. This would not be like how it currently is at the outlying stations, what we are saying is that in addition to the 5 or so at Station 1, they would have 2 or 3 more on duty there to act as either a second ambulance or engine. That way they could go to two calls at once. The village used to have POC staff, so it is possible that they could do that again if money is really that much of an issue. There are some 1 station towns in the area with a similar call volume that have up to 8 on duty for that very reason.
#9 by Jim on June 13, 2013 - 12:21 PM
Scott ISO pertains to all properties but the classification may not effect a homeowner in the same way it would a business. For example it may be once you get under a 4, a homeowners rates will not change but a businesses would.
#10 by Scott on June 13, 2013 - 11:34 AM
CMK240… part of the problem is the “JUMP” Company. That doesn’t work! The district wants to have 5 personnel at each outlying firehouse, 2 on the amb & 3 on the engine- all the time! They also want a 2nd tanker (tender). The Village runs jump companys at the outlying firehouse’s and depending on the call type either the engine or amb is taken. The Village also only wants one tender, the district 2 and the district says they will pay for the 2nd.
This is just some of the issues, not all.
#11 by cmk420 on June 13, 2013 - 10:08 AM
I don’t know all the particulars about this situation, nor do I claim to know everything about staffing a fire department. Here’s just another thought to add to the pot–Assuming the village & district split, if the village is concerned about staffing, then maybe should swallow their pride & keep a few extra people around (should they have to let people go) & staff a “jump company” for that second call or out of town mutual aid response, if needed, in order to keep their village covered. Or, maybe see what it would cost to hire some part-time/POC staff for the same reason. Again, just some thoughts.
#12 by Bill on June 13, 2013 - 9:57 AM
No one sees the ponzi scheme here. The district will be successfull and the department will be a failure. In 5 or less years the town will get rid of the fire department and it will be one big district.
End result no full time personnel, all contract personnel. A big ponzi scheme.
#13 by Scott on June 13, 2013 - 6:34 AM
ISO doesn’t pertain to homeowners, only businesses.
#14 by Jim on June 12, 2013 - 9:41 PM
The district can’t hire the existing employees of the village. That is the problem. There aren’t any laws pertaining to this situation.
The mutual aid system is broken in many areas. What started out as a good idea is now being used by the politicians as a means to cut manpower but say they are not reducing services. The system does not control them, they control the system. They sign the agreements.
#15 by Watcher on June 12, 2013 - 8:22 PM
Mike,
I don’t disagree with you on some points, and I’m not particularly taking any sides here. I don’t think the village would go down in ISO ration though, because as of right now, the district itself is a lower rate than the village. So unless the staffing was that much of an issue, it should remain the same or even go up.
You mention the giving of mutual aid. I heard this a lot from people and I don’t understand what point you are trying to make. If they receive mutual aid from a small 1 station town, then the same issue exists for that town that is giving it, who is probably also under-staffed. It isn’t a 1 to 1 deal. Some towns receive substantially more mutual aid than they give. It’s all worked out by the chiefs in advance and the outcome just depends on who gets the calls. I still think the village believes that they can just rely on mutual aid if they are busy, which is not a good practice at all.
I think the district taking it all over would be fine too, it does not matter to me, but now that they don’t seem to care much for their current staff, who knows what they would end up doing. It seems like there are so many goofy policies between the village and district regarding payroll, staffing, funding, etc, that I wish they could just CHANGE that and carry on how they are currently. It’s like one side feels burdened by a responsibility but is also unwilling to let go of the power.
#16 by Mike on June 12, 2013 - 7:03 PM
No, there is a massive reduction in service and the homeowners are going to pay for it when the ISO rating goes up. Answer me his, if they get mutual aid or auto aid from the neighboring towns, most of which are only 1fire house towns, how are they supposed to supply aid in return? Yes there are some issues coming up from the district but in the end the district will have 2 fully staffed houses unlike the village. There was a study done and all th district is doing is following it and the village is forcing the district to leave. What needs to happen is the district needs to take over and get the village out of it.
#17 by Watcher on June 12, 2013 - 6:27 PM
The irony here is twofold
For one, there won’t be a massive reduction in service, unless they don’t have any mutual aid or auto aid agreements. I agree that the Village is depending on this too much and not seeing the big picture. But, since they did not want to hire additional staff, now the Village is going to be faced with hiring more if they want to be able to go to two calls at once. Everyone is acting like all hell is going to break loose if there is only one station covering town. They do not get a ton of overlapping calls, and they have the apparatus to cover it, but it is the STAFF that will determine if mutual aid is needed. The staffing issue is going to come right back and bite them.
Second, let’s not forget that it is the DISTRICT who is deciding now to go with contract employees. Originally everyone thought that they would split and everyone laid off would just work there under a new union. The village cited pension concerns as why they didn’t want to hire additional staff, and the district said they had the money, yet now they are avoiding the pensions themselves. So don’t blame the village for that one, there’s nothing they can do about that. If you want to help these firefighters keep their jobs, people need to get out and contact the district.
This whole thing started out sounding pretty logical, but now both sides are taking cheap shots, someone is misinforming the public, etc. I’ve never heard so much concern over mutual aid before. All the while this has been in the works for a long time and out of nowhere the whole town seems to have this huge concern over it now that it’s too late. I’d like to see if anyone goes to the district meeting and complains. I also hope that if anyone gets laid off, they get the preference from the contractor that they are supposed to get so they can continue working.
#18 by Mike on June 12, 2013 - 4:53 PM
Good luck with this. There will be a massive reduction in service and if the village thinks mutual aid is going to bail them out they need to think again. The sad part is the firefighters that have served the residents and dedicated themselves will be the ones losing because you can’t just go out and get another job. The people need to remember that the livelihoods of 15-21 people are at stake.