Last night the Advisory Committee to the Lake St. Louis Fire Protection District met once again to continue discussing options for our fire district. This is a fairly small group of citizens who volunteered to come together and address our issues and ultimately present a plan to the voters. I am happy to report that we are making progress and that the people involved seem to be good folks who honestly care about the community.
I have not written much about this lately for a couple of reasons. First, I recognize my own ignorance about a lot of this and I have been trying to learn before I spout off too much. Second, I respect the process and don’t want to prejudge or corrupt it. And so I will try to avoid some specifics for now, but I wanted to lay out my thought process as we proceed. I will therefore call this Part 1, with the expectation of more updates as we go along.
I made a commitment to start with square one and so I want to start with some very fundamental questions that on the surface may seem silly. But we need a foundation to build from here, so bear with me. Most of these things we take for granted and never question, myself included. And so perhaps just this one time let’s start from scratch.
Should there even be such a thing as a public Fire District?
My libertarian friends will understand this question. Whenever we use the force of government to compel citizens to pay for something they may or may not want, there is a question about whether or not it is moral to force people to pay for things.
These arguments have been played out in the discussion of Obamacare. Everyone needs health care, but not everyone wants the government involved. Likewise, everyone needs fire protection, but some ask if the free market might not do a better job of providing it. It is a legitimate question.
Philosophically I see the point, but unless we devolve into anarchy government will use force to make people pay for things. In this case we are talking about the most local of governmental entities. Our fire district covers only 7 square miles, nearly all of which is residential. The city is larger, as are the school district and the ambulance district. It is not possible for government to be closer to the people.
As I study the needs and the resources we have, it is apparent that we are providing a basic necessary function that, like the water department, the free market would have a difficult time providing in a cost effective manner. The citizens of this community would not be able two support “competing” fire protection providers, and so competition would not exist.
With a nod to my Liberty friends, my answer is: We should have a public Fire District.
The above question makes me realize that some people are not going to be happy that we are taking money from them by force to provide fire protection. With that in mind, I take any increase in the amount we are asking them to pay very seriously, and it reinforces the idea that we must look very carefully at every dollar. It also means that people expect us to provide good service in exchange for those tax dollars.
Should we maintain the Fire District in this form, or consider some sort of consolidation?
It is a fair question. Our district does not even follow the city boundaries. The mutual aid agreements we operate under mean that we respond to calls outside our boundaries, and other fire departments respond in our district as needed. Dispatch is directed on a countywide basis, and so in some respects we are all one big organization, loosely organized.
As we discuss how to cover all of our residents with good response times, and how to reduce costs, it becomes apparent that we are going to need help from neighboring districts, and we are going to need to help them as well. Obviously this is already the case, and trucks are dispatched on the basis of who is closest and available.
There is also a question of duplication of resources. When each district has a Board and a Chief and administrative costs, there are possible cost savings that could be realized by combining. It is somewhat similar to the multitude of small municipalities in north St. Louis County, all trying to maintain their own little cities.
The current map of fire districts in St. Charles County came about over time, with small changes and annexations that resulted in Wentzville and O’Fallon covering half of the City of Lake St. Louis. One might assume as I originally did that the fire districts matched the city boundaries, but that is not true. Our district is essentially the same as when the district was founded in 1972, while more “aggressive” districts have expanded around us.
I have considered this question a lot in the last few weeks. I have come to believe that if St. Charles County wanted to consider some sort of “unified” fire district plan I would be interested in discussing that. I think a county-wide coordination of resources is an idea that COULD have merit. This would be an enormous challenge and I could see some issues, but as a long-term plan I would be willing to consider it.
Having said that, simply dissolving our district and being absorbed by a neighboring district is not something I can support. Each of our cities has their own unique character. Wentzville and Cottleville and St. Charles are not the same and their citizens all have different concerns. Our fire district should reflect the needs and desires of our citizens, not those of Wentzville or O’Fallon.
I have come to be aware that some of these fire districts have become little “kingdoms” with rather expensive tastes and aggressive plans. Our district has always been more frugal and reasonable. I would like to keep it that way. The people who live in this 7 square mile area can decide what we want and need and how much we are willing to pay. Becoming part of a larger entity dilutes that control and moves government farther away from the people.
While I will keep an open mind, my answer is: We should maintain our district in its current form.
As we move forward it will be with the assumption that our district will maintain its current form and if for some reason this becomes impossible or there is some larger plan we will re-evaluate the question at that time. I think both are unlikely and so I think this question is settled.
Do we need one fire station or two?
Last night we looked at all of the numbers for a number of possibilities. One thing we wanted to know was what it would take to have two fully manned fire stations? This is the top-of-the-line, first class plan where we would have two houses, fully manned and equipped.
It is too expensive. I am not going to share the numbers, but no such proposal would ever pass, and if it did it would likely be unsustainable. (I am not sharing numbers out of respect for our process, but will share them all in the near future)
We do currently have two fire houses, but they are not fully manned. There is one on Lake St. Louis Blvd., and one on Ellerman Rd. Last night we met at the Lake St. Louis station, but the firefighters on duty were over at the other station. That is because response times across the district are better from that location. Generally speaking the firefighters operate out of the Ellerman Road location for that reason.
Reducing from two fire houses down to one would save operating costs and allow us to sell property, which would help with our finances. It would also help with communication and coordination of resources to have everything in one place.
At our last meeting the Chief shared a number of maps that they have put together in years past, along with a few new ones that showed a number of possibilities should we go to a single fire house. The key factor is response times, with the lake being our major obstacle.
When looking at the best location for a fire house we have to consider response times from a given location but we also need to look at the locations of fire stations in neighboring districts. The maps showed those stations along with response times from each of those to each spot in our district. There is no need to try to cover areas of our district right next to another district’s fire station just across the boundary.
There are a lot of details to be worked out but I think the members of the committee were in agreement that we cannot support two locations. My answer is: We only need one fire station.
Having considered these first three questions I think the framework for the discussion has been set. There is of course a lot more to consider and so I will now start working on Part 2. If you live in the Lake St. Louis Fire Protection District I ask that you PLEASE reach out and let me know your thoughts. I would also ask that you consider casting a vote for me on April 5th as I am running for the Fire Board.
Even if you do not live in the district I would be interested in any ideas or comments as we move forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment