Excerpts from the DailyHerald.com:
Another failed tax increase request would be the worst outcome from efforts to maintain the financial solvency of the Fox River & Countryside Fire/Rescue District. So to avoid that, district trustees may not ask voters for a tax increase at all. Trustees met with the district’s fire and ambulance service provider, Maryland-based Public Safety Systems Inc., to find a way to cut costs.
“Everybody would love to do the referendum, but it was 3-to-1 against it last time,” said district President Bob Handley. “We know the chance of success is slim. Like any organization, our biggest line item is personnel. So we’re going to look at staffing, but we’ve got to keep the safety of the guys in mind.”
A month ago, trustees introduced the idea of cutting ambulance service. But fire calls represent less than 20 percent of the district’s workload. That makes a change to staffing far more likely, said Ken Shepro, the fire district’s attorney. One option that may make sense is staffing engines and ambulances entirely with a part-time staff. Shepro said several other local departments, including Pingree Grove, use that model and more may be headed that way.
The viability of that model for the district, and its ability to at least defer a tax increase request will be key aspects trustees will weigh in the decision for if and when to hold a referendum. Aside from personnel, the district has some major capital replacement costs looming, including the replacement of a 30-year-old fire engine.
District trustees have until Dec. 28 to put a tax increase question on the March ballot. They will meet Dec. 14 to make a decision.
If trustees don’t put a question on the ballot in March, Shepro said, it’s unlikely voters would see a tax increase question until 2017 at the earliest. Conventional wisdom says most taxing districts should avoid tax increase questions when presidential races are on the ballot. Those elections tend to have higher voter turnouts with more people voting no on tax increases regardless of how much they know about the ballot question.
thanks Dennis
#1 by MABAS 21 on December 2, 2015 - 7:56 AM
Because failure isn’t an option for enormous EGO’s! The board obviously bit more than they could chew and replacing a 30 year old engine should be the least of their worries. I sympathize with the tax payers in that district since they’re on the hook for the wasted money!
#2 by Jim on December 1, 2015 - 11:48 PM
Why aren’t they talking about going back to St. Charles?
#3 by ffpm571 on November 30, 2015 - 10:14 PM
Replace a 30 year old Fire engine.. Oh the 25 year old one they bought 5 years ago.. They spent money like a drunken sailor to start up this fiasco. Instead of negotiating with St. Charles they … Gaffeny.. Thought they could do better. Eventually they will when they dissolve and go back to contracting with St. Charles.
#4 by cmk420 on November 30, 2015 - 10:00 PM
So, how would it work if they were to switch to an all part-time staff? Would they “lower” their standards to make sure they have enough. As I recall, they got rid of all their part-time / POC staff as a “cost-cutting” measure.
#5 by mike on November 30, 2015 - 8:39 PM
The lack of responsibility on the trustees part is disgusting. Why would you eliminate ambulance service? If it’s 80% of your workload and brings in revenues that help sustain operation. I hope if they eliminate the ambulance, which would mean an 80% reduction in workload they refund 80% of the taxes they collect back to the taxpayers for the service they are not providing. Mr. Gaffney has shown what a failure this entire venture has turned out to be and he was told that this was going to fail since its inception. The biggest losers from this venture have been the taxpayers.