By Scott Harvey
Vashon Island Fire & Rescue has a tax increase on the ballot for this August. The previous VIFR levy, approved in 2017, has grown from $2.4 million in 2017 to $5.4 million in 2023. The new proposed levy continues this growth, reaching $9.2 million by 2030.
Our population has grown by roughly 5% over this timeframe, and total calls have remained somewhat consistent: 1710 in 2018, 1630 in 2022; 2022 incidents are also right in line with the 8-year adjusted average. The serious medical event rate is also stable, and those are handled by Medic One, which has its own levy and management outside of VIFR.
The information sheet for VIFR’s levy proposal tells us they have only 13 firefighter/emergency medical technicians available. While true, the 2023 budget already authorizes 20 firefighter/EMTs. Our population is barely growing, the incident rate is stable, and we’ve yet to see all of these authorized, funded personnel join the department. Do we truly need another six years of significant budget growth for VIFR?
With the current VIFR staff plus the seven new full-time firefighter/EMT hires planned for 2023, all information indicates the department’s regular workload should be nicely handled. There are few if any stories of buildings burning because VIFR was too busy elsewhere, and VIFR’s average 7-minute response time is better than for most big cities. In 2022, Vashon averaged one structural fire per month, and the average over the last six years is even lower.
For most of our Island’s history, volunteers provided a very flexible pool of responders. One or more of your fellow citizens would get paged, drive over, get their firefighting gear out of the trunk, and help at an incident. Vashon still has some volunteers, though their number has faded. Their flexibility and cost-effectiveness would solve most of the challenges named by the new levy request, and yet VIFR is not currently advertising for volunteer firefighters. This should be happening year-round.
The Chief and Assistant Chief have always been available to respond to calls. The new VIFR Strategic Plan has the Chief and two Deputy Chiefs dedicated to administrative duties. There is no reason they cannot continue to respond to calls, as needed, while accomplishing their administrative duties. Why is it a good plan to discontinue this assistance?
The VIFR plan includes adding two EMTs at the Burton Fire Station to prevent Burton homeowners’ insurance from increasing when the Island is rerated this summer. We have two Burton volunteers, but we need six to avoid the increased insurance. How many Burton residents might volunteer, if they knew VIFR only needed four more volunteers to reduce their insurance costs by $1,000-2,000?
Here are some other considerations that could help VIFR work better and more cost-effectively.
Partnerships – Our EMTs spend too much time off-Island. Why not add an ambulance service to reduce VIFR transports? With the SeaMar subsidy gone, the Hospital District has over $1.0 million in unallocated funds, which could subsidize this venture.
Even without Hospital District ambulances, VIFR could still call TRI-Med ambulance service for transport, freeing the emergency responder. Why does VIFR not pursue this for every transport? Since King County Medic One is responsible for all life-threatening incidents, handoff to an ambulance will generally present no danger to the patient, and enables the responders immediate return to service.
Redeploy – After the new firefighters graduate in July, there will be five firefighters on every shift. If VIFR does not have enough volunteers for Burton, why not staff two of the new firefighters there? While a fire engine company normally has four firefighters, it does not have to be housed in the same building. By staffing two firefighters/EMTs in Burton, the south end gets more coverage, with no additional expense to the taxpayer.
Refurbish – Rural emergency vehicles are used less than urban vehicles, and have less “wear and tear.” While some VIFR vehicles may be chronologically old, the chassis and many non-moving parts remain in good condition. That is why some rural fire departments refurbish their vehicles, instead of replacing them.
Bonds – The vehicle and building needs of VIFR would be much better addressed by a bond. It would spread the cost over many years, and lock in the price against future inflation. Fire vehicles are also highly specialized, with lead times of two or more years. If they’ll be needed soon, they should be ordered now. There are lenders offering very favorable terms for fire districts.
VIFR must certainly be funded by its public. But the public looks to its agencies to spend money wisely and to always seek cost-effective solutions. Sometimes a failed levy is the catalyst for needed, beneficial changes in plans.
