Fire plan too rich for taxpayers

[Ken7]

It appears to me that when I see a fender bender that there are 2 police cars, 2 fire trucks and an ambulance attending.
That would be 10 taxpayer funded employees attending a single accident from three different services each of whom report their attendance as an incident for funding purposes.
This seems to me to be about growing a bureaucracy vs public safety. There is a union battle between the firefighters and ambulance workers and the firefighters are trying to extend their employment into first responder services.
Real fire incidents have been in steady decline for decades due to building code changes so these guys have to try to
make work for themselves.

I agree with you on all you have written. Fact of the matter is we will always need Fire fighters.

You may have brought something up I did not realize being new to the province. The First Responder, it would certainly increase their call volumes and show a apparent need to be kept up and bewell paid. I did not think of that avenue which would be why they have chosen to travel that direction.

[Queller]

I don't think RCMP, Fire, or Ambulance need to "pad" their stats. The fact is, these are some of the busiest detachments / departments in Canada (call volume per member). Kelowna has some of the lowest property taxes in the province, one of the reasons these services (RCMP & Fire, anyway) are run at a minimum service level. That is why the RCMP Superintendent and the Fire Chief are always asking the City for more manpower / resources. It is to maintain a minimum level, not build a cadillac service. Years of underfunding to keep taxes down means all these services are playing catch up now, and no one wants to pay!

[Queller]

Speaking to a paramedic in town recently, he indicated they need fire department first responders to maintain a basic service level across the province. They also work together at car accidents. This is a fairly common model North America wide. I guess you're always going to need the fire department, so they might as well assist the ambulance when they can.

[knowledgeisking]

Sounds like a far better use of our tax dollars than fancy light poles for Bernard or a parkade for use by IH workers

I assume parking is needed at the hospital and giving our tourism corridor a fresh look is money well spent.

[cv23]

I assume parking is needed at the hospital and giving our tourism corridor a fresh look is money well spent.

If you followed local news you'd know the parkade won't be at the hospital (were it actually is needed) and $14k for a new light pole when an equally new $1k unit would serve the same purpose is just a waste of money compared to keeping our fire dept uptodate.

[5VP]

At the very least, insurance companies should be expected to foot a greater portion of the bills for all emergency services as it is they who benefit most from having the populace and their assets well protected.

Why should a firefighter risk their life to protect an unoccupied building or policemen risk theirs to apprehend bank robbers when the money is insured anyways?

[cv23]

At the very least, insurance companies should be expected to foot a greater portion of the bills for all emergency services as it is they who benefit most from having the populace and their assets well protected.

Insurance companies are nothing more than a license to print money, they NEVER lose money. If they are forced to pay more out then they simply raise their rates so they recoup the payout and restore their profit margins.
Those at City Hall could care less if individual homeowners insurance rates went up due to a lack of adequate fire protection within the city. Walter and Ronnie would just say "That's not in our control" when in fact providing adequate fire protection, and corresponding lower insurance rates, is well within their realm of control.

[5VP]

Aha...

The heart of the matter...

Why should a firefighter risk their life to protect an unoccupied building or policemen risk theirs to apprehend bank robbers when the money is insured anyways?

Why then, should taxpayer's be on the hook for something that only benefits the insurance companies.

[knowledgeisking]

If you followed local news you'd know the parkade won't be at the hospital (were it actually is needed) and $14k for a new light pole when an equally new $1k unit would serve the same purpose is just a waste of money compared to keeping our fire dept uptodate.[/quote]

I've been away for a year so don't know exactly where the parkade in question is located. I assume there is a logical reason for where it is located.

As for spending a premium on more striking light fixtures on Bernard, why not? If those are the black poles at Richter they are giving a dynamic look to the street. The arguement can be made always about bare bones basic look when cities spend money vs spending extra $$ for something better in terms of appearance. Its not always a bad thing.

I know three firemen and they either laugh or complain how boring their jobs are because they usually dont have much to do so not sure if we need more?

[fiscalmind]

Those at City Hall could care less if individual homeowners insurance rates went up due to a lack of adequate fire protection within the city. Walter and Ronnie would just say "That's not in our control" when in fact providing adequate fire protection, and corresponding lower insurance rates, is well within their realm of control.

So would you be in favor of it if the tax increase was less than the insurance increase due to poor fire protection. This is one of the factors in fire protection that people need to consider. Spend a little to save a lot.

[cv23]

So would you be in favor of it if the tax increase was less than the insurance increase due to poor fire protection. This is one of the factors in fire protection that people need to consider. Spend a little to save a lot.

Totally in favour

[cv23]

I've been away for a year so don't know exactly where the parkade in question is located. I assume there is a logical reason for where it is located.
As for spending a premium on more striking light fixtures on Bernard, why not? If those are the black poles at Richter they are giving a dynamic look to the street. The arguement can be made always about bare bones basic look when cities spend money vs spending extra $$ for something better in terms of appearance. Its not always a bad thing.
I know three firemen and they either laugh or complain how boring their jobs are because they usually dont have much to do so not sure if we need more?

Maybe you should be a bit more uptodate with things in your community before you post about them?
Boredom can rapidly turn to extensive and exhausting overtime in just one nite and about as quickly as an entire apartment building housing a hundred people can go up in flames. I'd be very interested to hear what you have to say when all of a sudden your insurance company hears Kelowna does not have adequate fire protection and raises your insurance rates because of it. Would you rather invest in your, your family's and your communities safety or increasing the profits of an already greedy insurance company?
So 14 times the cost is only a "premium" in your mind? If your son bought a $280k car with your money, just for appearance sake, when a $20k vehicle was more than adequate would you still be happy he paid that "premium" price? What if you were a senior or just having a tough time making ends meet, would your son's "premium" purchase with your money still meet with your quick approval? You might make a case for double or even triple the price in the name of appearance but 14 times the price is simply a waste of the taxpayers money.

[Queller]

Hmmm...No money for Fire Department staff in the budget again, I see. More money for RCMP (as usual), and lots of money for parks. "The commitment to protective services has resulted in Council approving a 1 per cent tax increase just to support police and fire services." Seems like most of the extra 1% is going to the RCMP right now! I guess we'll just put off the Fire Department for another year.

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

[grammafreddy]

Your link went to the 2012 budget page and the graph is from 2011.

This is 2013 info:

http://www.kelowna.ca/CityPage/Docs/PDF ... 20Plan.pdf

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

[Queller]

Your link went to the 2012 budget page and the graph is from 2011.

This is 2013 info:

http://www.kelowna.ca/CityPage/Docs/PDF ... 20Plan.pdf

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

Thank you. You are correct. The link I provided is from the current City website budget page, though, and the percentages spent on different services are still about the same, I believe.