Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Queller
Board Meister
Posts: 539
Joined: Jan 13th, 2009, 4:52 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by Queller »

Hmmm, the Kelowna firefighters supported the other Mayoral candidate in the last election. The current Mayor and a certain councillor are now showing the Kelowna Fire Department a decided lack of support, despite several studies, plans, insurance reviews etc, that all seemed to indicate the the KFD needs to grow its professional resources to support a growing city. Their answer seems to be "use the volunteers more", however volunteer response times are slow and are made slower as a city becomes bigger and roads more congested. Something I'm sure the Mayor is well aware of. Maybe the Mayor needs to stop playing politics and do what is right for the city. I think everyone has a right to an equal level of fire protection, no matter where in the city they live.
Queller
Board Meister
Posts: 539
Joined: Jan 13th, 2009, 4:52 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by Queller »

"The City of Kelowna spends $13.2 million annually on its fire department, the second most expensive municipal cost next to policing.

There are 96 full-time firefighters in Kelowna and 50 volunteers who are paid on-call. Volunteers operate in three of the city’s 10 stations.

But expansion plans are coming head-to-head with penny pinching politicians who question if more volunteer firefighters will help the city meet increasing emergency response demands.

Jeff Carlisle, chief of the Kelowna Fire Department, recently presented a 10-year strategic plan to Kelowna City Council. The plan included better response time for more of the city, but shorter response times for more neighbourhoods would mean the addition of two more manned stations.

“In our analysis, we did considerable effort to quantify the risks in areas where there’s a gap in coverage,” said Carlisle. “In particular, the north end of the city, around UBCO and the airport as well as the KLO/Gordon/Pandosy area.”
Building, equipping and manning the two halls would cost the city upwards of $8 million plus an additional $4 million a year for staff.

“If you’re going to save money, how do you do it? To us, the most obvious way would be to make better use of the volunteers,” said Kelowna mayor Walter Gray.

But Carlisle disagrees. He says career firefighters can respond to emergencies within 80 seconds out of the stations but it takes between five and seven minutes for volunteer firefighters.

Former Kelowna fire chief and current city councilor Gerry Zimmerman says he would like to see resources increased downtown, where call volumes show they are needed the most.

“The city looks different than it did before so does that create new challenges for a fire department? Sure it does. Does that create more costs? Probably that too,” he said.

Carlisle will now work with city staff to answer questions to help bring forward a new plan that works to protect the city and its cheque book."


© Global News. A division of Shaw Media Inc., 2012.


[/quote][/quote]

I know people in Glenmore who have been told for years that they are going to get a full-time hall "soon". Still nothing. The downtown fire station is one of the busiest in Canada. We haven't built a new fire station in Kelowna in years (decades?), where has all the taxation revenue from new buildings/highrises, etc gone? City hall renovations, new parks? Certainly not the Fire Dept. Now I see they want a new "plan" (third or fourth one in the last few years), just another delay tactic, I think. Maybe it's time for some action and to actually hire some new firefighters.
Last edited by Queller on Nov 29th, 2012, 8:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Queller
Board Meister
Posts: 539
Joined: Jan 13th, 2009, 4:52 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by Queller »

From the City's website:

http://www.kelowna.ca/CM/Page2906.aspx

It looks like the Fire Department is fourth in line for budget funding, after Police Services, Transit & Transportation, and Parks, Recreation, and Cultural services. Of course, the Fire Department doesn't generate any revenue and is an added expense to any city.
User avatar
Ken7
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10927
Joined: Sep 30th, 2007, 4:09 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by Ken7 »

I was somewhat surprised by the news this evening.

I’ve noticed the Fire Department from a different viewpoint. As my past is emergency response I on many occasions responded and was first responder. Our Fire Department was 100% volunteer other then Chief and Deputy.

They always left the hall in less then 5 minutes first truck out that could be any time of the evening. Sounds impossible but it is true. Second truck at times took a little longer as others lived a little further away from the hall.

My line of thought to drastically reduce cost utilized the Fire Department as designed. Stop being First Responders and attending all motor vehicle accidents. As I have witnessed and do not see the need to have Fire crews attending all accidents.

In looking at 2010 summary report and the link is attached, Fire had 9403 calls. These broken down were:

Medical Responses – 6457

Fires – 1762

Accidents –774

Other – 410

I question what is their main responsibility or mandate of a Fire Department?

Yes it is outlined although possibly a shift of responsibility is in order. Let medical (Ambulance) deal with medical responses. Fire deal with Fire and as required attend for extractions at Motor Vehicle Accidents as they are equipped with the Jaws of Life.

Other costs that have to be considered, are Fire Truck costs, which would likely be equal to the cost of two or three ambulances, the figures I am only guessing please don’t hold me to it. A Fire crew is what four members, where as an ambulance crew of two. When you do all the numbers it would be cheaper I’d suggest to increase ambulances and reduce the over current all costs of the Fire Department.

In the end you could afford to build another hall or two where required and have full time crews on board.

http://www.kelowna.ca/CityPage/Docs/PDF ... Report.pdf


Why do Police cars have red and blue lights, so Fire Fighters can have heros too!
Last edited by Ken7 on Nov 30th, 2012, 7:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ken7
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10927
Joined: Sep 30th, 2007, 4:09 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by Ken7 »

I think if the City wishes to have their cake and eat it too, they should look at the purpose of a Fire Department.

If you look at the 2010 Fire Department calls, 6457 calls for Medical. That is out of a total of 9,043 calls.

Coming from another Province and seeing Fire at every motor vehicle accident (774 in 2010) appears to be overkill and I question is it necessary? It would be of interest to know, what percentage they were required to cut out victims or extinguish a fire. Very expensive at many calls just having them there only seeing them sweeping the street.

Further costs, a Fire truck which is a huge expense, crew of I believe four members to each medical emergency. The costs of a new truck may be equivalent to three ambulances, not certain on the numbers as this is only a guess. In the long run it may be a cost saving if needed to build up the Ambulance Service in this City and use them as responders for Medical as I believe that is their mandate. They certainly don’t put out fires.

In the end, the Fire Department budget could be spent on halls and trucks and be more cost effective with full time members in all locations providing a more efficiant service for Fire Protection reducng their arrival times.


Why do Police cars have red and blue lights, so Fire Fighters can have heros too!
User avatar
Y-Wine
Fledgling
Posts: 234
Joined: Mar 11th, 2007, 8:15 am

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by Y-Wine »

Queller wrote:From the City's website:

http://www.kelowna.ca/CM/Page2906.aspx

It looks like the Fire Department is fourth in line for budget funding, after Police Services, Transit & Transportation, and Parks, Recreation, and Cultural services. Of course, the Fire Department doesn't generate any revenue and is an added expense to any city.

Very scarey when the budget for parks is worth more than saving or protecting people and property. Do we really have to have equipment and people driving around the city watering hanging flower pots for 8 months a year? Especially when water is such a valuable commodity? But hey we spend a ton of money on flowers to be in a contest with other communities. Priorities Priorities.. :trippyquoter:
User avatar
verve_80
Fledgling
Posts: 217
Joined: Nov 7th, 2008, 6:54 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by verve_80 »

Kelowna city council needs to realize they are no longer a small town. Most cities the size of Kelowna don't have to rely on volunteers to get proper fire protection. Sure, volunteers work in a small town atmosphere, but Kelowna is no longer a small, one horse town.
User avatar
Ken7
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10927
Joined: Sep 30th, 2007, 4:09 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by Ken7 »

verve_80 wrote:Kelowna city council needs to realize they are no longer a small town. Most cities the size of Kelowna don't have to rely on volunteers to get proper fire protection. Sure, volunteers work in a small town atmosphere, but Kelowna is no longer a small, one horse town.



Is this a British Columbia thing, using volunteers to do the tasks of trained professionals?

I was wondering that although do not know if there are any fire fighters here or past employees. In most large Cities I'm aware of, you have a Fire Department that is all paid trained members. There are smaller ones which have volunteers, although the Chief etc is full time City employee.
theyeti
Übergod
Posts: 1360
Joined: May 10th, 2009, 9:01 am

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by theyeti »

maybe the fire dept could make money somehow ? maybe we can charge ppl who have fires ?? user pay ?
User avatar
cv23
Guru
Posts: 9649
Joined: Jul 4th, 2005, 2:59 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by cv23 »

theyeti wrote:maybe the fire dept could make money somehow ? maybe we can charge ppl who have fires ?? user pay ?

OK let"s say we go user pay. We'll pay them when we have a fire but then we shouldn't have to pay for the same service twice by paying that portion of our property taxes. The fire dept would be flat broke in a year.
Adequate fire protection is more important than art, new logos, skating rinks , parkades or fancy street lights all of which Wally and his crew have no problem throwing money at yet then tell us keeping our fire protection up to date is to expensive for us. If City Hall actually practiced fiscal restraint rather than just preaching it we would have more than enough money to keep our fire protection up to date.
theyeti
Übergod
Posts: 1360
Joined: May 10th, 2009, 9:01 am

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by theyeti »

i agree fully they spend way too much on flower pots and trees in the middle of streets .

but just the same so many ppl on here want everything to be user pay i figured id toss out a bad idea or two see who bit
User avatar
grammafreddy
Chief Sh*t Disturber
Posts: 28548
Joined: Mar 17th, 2007, 10:52 am

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by grammafreddy »

Wouldn't it be refreshing if the City of Kelowna would place more emphasis on being #1 in Public Safety rather than spending so much on being #1 in Green Leeds and #1 in Community Blooms and #1 in Arts and Culture type of stuff?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
We are a generation of idiots - smart phones and dumb people.

You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
User avatar
verve_80
Fledgling
Posts: 217
Joined: Nov 7th, 2008, 6:54 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by verve_80 »

grammafreddy wrote:Wouldn't it be refreshing if the City of Kelowna would place more emphasis on being #1 in Public Safety rather than spending so much on being #1 in Green Leeds and #1 in Community Blooms and #1 in Arts and Culture type of stuff?


That would be nice! Sharon Shepard was in favour of the 10 year fire plan. She wasn't re-elected and now we are stuck with a mayor who isn't putting public safety first. If my house is on fire, I'd rather have firefighters coming instead of having money spent on a bunch of new parks and stuff that we don't really need right now.
canuck500
Fledgling
Posts: 277
Joined: May 29th, 2011, 5:28 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by canuck500 »

Actually one of the biggest cities in BC still has a composite (mix of full time career/paid on call volunteers) fire department http://www.surrey.ca/city-services/4646.aspx

A far as first responder with more halls then ambulance stations the fire department can often be there before the ambulance especially when things are busy and in a lot of medical situations time is precious. The fire department guys are being paid, why not utilize them.
commonsense65
Newbie
Posts: 28
Joined: Aug 7th, 2010, 1:19 pm

Re: Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

Post by commonsense65 »

I think it needs to be clarified after speaking with one of the firefighters. Kelowna uses POC's and when I asked what he was talking about he said Paid On Call. They get a minimum two hour pay per call whether they get used or if it is cancelled or not and pay for training. I found it suprising that Kelowna has a fair amount, he said he thought around 60 POC's and they have very few responding to emergencies. I guess they were all called to the fire at Burtch Rd the other night but only a handful showed even though they get paid. No different than anyone else now days, busy busy busy and no one has any free time, although here it is paid time. He gave me an example as well that sometimes in the McKinley area no one responds depending on when the call is. Ive seen fire and I want to know people are responding immediately and a guaranteed number if I need them. Im willing to pay as well for it, I have always had fire insurance and thats a cost that I have never used but im happy to pay it if I do need it one day. Got a chuckle of the one post here saying that Mayor Shepherd supported the last plan. So did Hobson, Stack and even the lil guy Blanleil and they are still on council. So why the change in thought now? Maybe the old chief just wants his old job back? I was even told that it was him that closed a volunteer firehall on KLO and in the upper mission years ago!!!
Post Reply

Return to “Central Okanagan”