Here’s what to know about the Olympia, Tumwater fire department regionalization proposal

This week, ballots were mailed to registered voters who will determine whether or not to combine Olympia and Tumwater’s city fire departments into a separately governed Regional Fire Authority.

Ballots are due on election day, Tuesday, April 25.

Public forums and community conversations have showcased questions still lingering about the regionalization effort, what it would cost, and exactly how it would work.

Here are some of the key features of the RFA proposal, as well as some sticking points between supporters and opponents.

What is the ballot proposition?

The proposition would form the Olympia Tumwater Fire Authority and adopt a plan to provide both cities with fire protection and basic emergency medical services without jurisdictional boundaries.

The idea is being proposed to create stable and dedicated funding for fire and emergency services, instead of having those services compete for limited funding with other city services and necessities.

The plan proposes funding the RFA with a property tax and a six-year Fire Benefit Charge. The RFA property tax will swap in for property taxes now being collected, and an amount no greater than $1 per $1,000 of assessed property value will go toward the RFA budget.

Right now Tumwater allocates around $15.7 million a year for fire and EMS services, and Olympia spends nearly $19 million a year on the services. The public would be charged for the RFA starting in 2024. According to the RFA 7-year financial plan 0isummary, about $39.9 million would be collected in 2024, with $10.5 million of that coming from the Fire Benefit Charge (FBC).

Collections would rise every year, and by 2030, the RFA would bring in $52.3 million for fire and emergency services, with an estimated $12.9 million coming from the FBC.

What would the RFA fund?

If approved by voters, the RFA would fund the enhancement and expansion of fire and EMS services throughout Olympia and Tumwater. Olympia City Council member Lisa Parshley, who supports the RFA, said services would run more efficiently through an RFA, with a plan to hire two new transport teams with a total of 18 firefighters.

Opponents, who are running the saveourFD.org campaign, contend those 18 firefighters are already being added by the city of Olympia, and are not part of the RFA proposal. They point to administrators that will need to be hired to run the standalone RFA, support staff that the cities now provide.

Supporters also point to three new positions in the Community Assistance Referrals and Education Services, or CARES, program will be added to help with non-urgent situations that don’t require traditional emergency response. It would create a behavioral health unit of emergency services, composed of social workers and behavioral specialists to support people who are in crisis. However, the CARES program is grant-funded, and not part of the RFA financing structure, opponents contend.

The Olympia Fire Department has had plans to hire more firefighters to assist in transport services for some time now, and also is administering the CARES program. However, Parshley said the city doesn’t have the funding to pay for these new positions long term, or to pay for new equipment such as fire trucks or ambulances. She said an RFA sets up a loan repayment program with the two cities, which would provide funds to get the RFA off the ground before tax and FBC charges are collected.

The city of Olympia would loan $8 million and Tumwater would loan $2.2 million.

How would it be governed?

The RFA would initially be controlled by a commission of council members from both cities. Council members would slowly be phased out over five years and replaced with commissioners elected by the public. In the end, it would be governed by five elected members and one council member from each city.

Parshley said the commission would oversee the RFA’s budget. She contends there’s not much transparency now with how money is or can be spent within the city’s budget. She said the public would be able to see what every penny is spent on within a regional fire authority budget.

Parshley said by combining services under one command structure, the cities can ensure there are no gaps in service and ensure firefighters and EMTs are deployed efficiently. It makes calling for mutual aid simpler, which is done daily. Now, Parshley said Olympia firefighters have to wait until all local units available are at the scene before they can call for help from another jurisdiction such as Tumwater or Lacey.

That issue could disappear with an RFA, given the increase in employees in the joint department and fewer bureaucratic hoops to jump through. She said it could make the fire departments’ goals of 6- to 7-minute response times down from 8 minutes more attainable.

And if more fire departments are needed as the population continues to grow, the two cities could locate one new regional station in the place that makes sense within the larger boundaries.

One argument against the RFA is fear that the two cities and their fire departments are losing their unique identities. Former Tumwater mayor Pete Kmet said the two departments already train together and often work together on larger calls, so the boundaries are already disappearing.

The FBC argument

Council members from both cities have spoken out in previous meetings about just how equitable the FBC is. Opponents, however, contend it charges the smallest homes more per square foot than the largest homes, and takes into account the size of the building that needs service, not the assessed value of it.

Therefore, if two houses that were the same size sat side by side and were both on fire, they would require the same level of response and number of personnel on scene. According to previous reporting from The Olympian, an average-sized single-family home would pay anywhere from $380 to $450 a year.

Kmet said he calculated how much different apartments around Tumwater would have to pay for the FBC. He said most hover around $60 a year, or $5 a month. That number fluctuates depending on the type of apartment and if the apartment is in a larger building.

Residents of Olympia and Tumwater can calculate what the FBC would be for their homes using the online tool on the City of Tumwater’s website. All you need is the parcel number for the property your home is on, which is on tax records or can be looked up on the county assessor’s website.

The FBC can cover a maximum of 60% of the RFA’s budget, but Parshley said the majority of models they looked at only charge residents enough to have the FBC cover 20-30% of the overall budget. She said the amount the FBC charges people is ultimately up to the voters and commission and is subject to change in the future, if the RFA is approved.

Salary increases

Olympia firefighter Steven Busz, a former president of the IAFF Union Local 468, served on the RFA planning committee. He said salaries and benefits for union members are based on contract negotiations that are done every three years. Unions salaries are negotiated based on the size of the population they’re serving, as well as the assessed value of all buildings in the jurisdiction.

Under those terms, that means if Olympia and Tumwater join forces in an RFA, union members will be negotiating for raises because the RFA would be much larger than the individual fire departments. It wouldn’t happen immediately, Busz said, because a steady stream of funding has to be there first. Therefore, Tumwater employees would continue to be paid less than their Olympia counterparts for some time.

Busz said according to 2022 numbers, salaries and benefits for an Olympia employee of at least five years was $102,660 a year. In Tumwater it was $98,290 a year. For 2023, Olympia’s is $107,700 a year, and Tumwater’s is $103,464 a year.

Under an RFA, and using 2022 numbers, the planning committee suggested a salary of $106,340 for all employees. That would make the RFA salaries more competitive with Lacey Fire District 3.

If not approved, then what?

Without the RFA, fire departments in both cities will continue to compete with other services for funding, which could potentially put all services the cities pay for at risk. More firefighters, crisis workers and equipment are needed, but there’s currently no long-term funding for them without taking away from other services, RFA supporters say.

Busz said if the RFA doesn’t pass, services the two departments currently provide will start to dwindle, despite population growth. He said the cities will need to find a new funding plan.

Larry Dzieza, a former budget director who has spoken against the RFA, has proposed a property tax levy lid lift in the two cities to fund the city fire departments with their existing structures. He said it would raise enough money without making people pay a Fire Benefit Charge, and it’s much simpler.

Kmet argued raising property taxes could be harmful to low-income residents.