Setting the record straight
Get the Facts About the Fire Assessment
There is a lot of information being shared about the proposed fire assessment. Some claims are supported by the record. Others leave out important facts, have never been documented, or conflict with information the City has already provided.
Here are the facts.
Claim 1
A 166% Increase in Calls Shows Fire Demand Has Increased 166%
Misleading
Claim 1
A 166% Increase in Calls Shows Fire Demand Has Increased 166%
MisleadingTotal Fire Department calls increased significantly.
But total calls are not the same as fire calls.
A large portion of the increase came from medical response. The fire assessment study says approximately 78% of the department's calls are medical.
Using the 166% number without explaining what types of calls increased gives residents an incomplete picture.
Claim 2
DeFuniak Springs Has Already Achieved an ISO Class 4 Rating
Unsupported
Claim 2
DeFuniak Springs Has Already Achieved an ISO Class 4 Rating
UnsupportedThe City Manager has confirmed that DeFuniak Springs is still rated ISO 5X.
ISO evaluated the department earlier this year, but the City has not received a new rating.
Until ISO issues a new rating, claims that the City has already achieved Class 4 are not supported.
Claim 3
Walton County Fire Service Would Hurt Our ISO Rating
Misleading
Claim 3
Walton County Fire Service Would Hurt Our ISO Rating
MisleadingWalton County Fire Rescue currently has a better ISO rating than the DeFuniak Springs Fire Department.
That does not guarantee what rating the City would receive under a future agreement, but it does show there is no basis to simply assume County service would make our rating worse.
Claim 4
Fire Department Calls Have Exploded Because the City Is Growing
Misleading
Claim 4
Fire Department Calls Have Exploded Because the City Is Growing
MisleadingThe increase in calls is real.
But the fire assessment study says approximately 78% of Fire Department calls are medical.
The large increase in total calls happened after the Fire Chief asked for approval and certification for the department to begin responding to more medical calls.
That decision greatly increased the department's workload.
It also increased staffing costs because EMTs and paramedics cost more, and it placed more wear on fire vehicles being used for non-fire calls.
Claim 5
Homeowners Would Save $150 to $300 Per Year on Insurance
Unsupported
Claim 5
Homeowners Would Save $150 to $300 Per Year on Insurance
UnsupportedResidents are being told that insurance savings could offset most or all of the $238 assessment.
No insurance company, actuarial study, or other documented source has been presented to support the claimed $150 to $300 yearly savings.
The Fire Chief was also asked directly what ISO rating the City's proposed plan could achieve and did not provide a clear answer.
There is no documented connection showing that paying the assessment will produce these savings.
Claim 6
Walton County Fire Service Could Increase Insurance Costs by $300 to $600 Per Year
Unsupported
Claim 6
Walton County Fire Service Could Increase Insurance Costs by $300 to $600 Per Year
UnsupportedNo insurance study has been presented showing that a partnership with Walton County would increase homeowner insurance by $300 to $600.
The claim depends on first assuming that County service would cause a major ISO downgrade. That assumption has not been proven either.
Claim 7
Walton County Service Could Drop the City to ISO Class 6 or 7
Unsupported
Claim 7
Walton County Service Could Drop the City to ISO Class 6 or 7
UnsupportedNo ISO study has been presented showing that a partnership with Walton County would result in a Class 6 or Class 7 rating.
Walton County Fire Rescue currently has a better ISO rating than the DeFuniak Springs Fire Department.
Claims about a future City rating should be based on an actual service plan and ISO analysis.
Claim 8
The City's Five-Year Plan Is Designed to Achieve ISO Class 3
Misleading
Claim 8
The City's Five-Year Plan Is Designed to Achieve ISO Class 3
MisleadingThe Fire Department presented a five-year and ten-year plan to the City Council.
That plan did not tell the Council that it would achieve ISO Class 3.
The Fire Chief has never presented documentation showing how the plan would move the City to Class 3.
ISO Class 3 has now become a major selling point for the assessment, but it was not part of the plan originally presented to Council.
Claim 9
The Proposed Spending Will Move the City to ISO Class 3
Unsupported
Claim 9
The Proposed Spending Will Move the City to ISO Class 3
UnsupportedFirefighters, equipment, water systems, training, and other factors can affect ISO ratings.
But no ISO roadmap has been presented showing how many points the City currently has, how many more points are needed, or how the proposed spending would reach Class 3.
There is no documented calculation tying the assessment to a Class 3 rating.
Claim 10
Water Infrastructure Can Be Used to Improve the City's ISO Rating
Possible, but no plan or analysis has been presented
Claim 10
Water Infrastructure Can Be Used to Improve the City's ISO Rating
Possible, but no plan or analysis has been presentedWater supply, including water mains and hydrants, can play an important role in an ISO rating.
But the Fire Chief has never presented the City Council with a plan showing what water system improvements are needed to improve our ISO rating.
No analysis has been presented showing how many additional ISO points could be gained, which water projects would earn those points, or what those projects would cost.
If water infrastructure is now being presented as part of the path to a better ISO rating, that analysis should have been done and presented to the Council as part of the Fire Department's plan.
Claim 11
DeFuniak Springs Has 24/7 Four-Man Fire Crews
Misleading and not what the long-term plan provides
Claim 11
DeFuniak Springs Has 24/7 Four-Man Fire Crews
Misleading and not what the long-term plan providesThere is an important difference between having four people working a shift and having four firefighters assigned to one fire engine.
More importantly, the Fire Department's own plan does not maintain four-person crews once the proposed second fire station is opened.
Under the plan presented to Council, available staffing would be divided between two stations, resulting in three-person crews.
The City Manager specifically called this out during a public meeting.
So while "four-man crews" are now being used to promote the assessment, the long-term plan being used to justify the assessment would actually reduce those crews to three when the second station opens.
Claim 12
The Assessment Will Quickly Increase Fire Department Staffing
Misleading
Claim 12
The Assessment Will Quickly Increase Fire Department Staffing
MisleadingThe Fire Department plan does not immediately add all of the proposed new firefighters.
The staffing increases are planned over future years.
Residents would begin paying the assessment before many of the staffing improvements being discussed actually happen.
Claim 13
Grants Cannot Pay Firefighter Salaries
False as a general statement
Claim 13
Grants Cannot Pay Firefighter Salaries
False as a general statementSome grants can pay firefighter salaries.
The federal SAFER program was created specifically to help fire departments hire firefighters.
It is not accurate to say that grant funding cannot be used for firefighter salaries.
Claim 14
Grants Will Help Fund the City's Fire Department Expansion
Possible, but not guaranteed
Claim 14
Grants Will Help Fund the City's Fire Department Expansion
Possible, but not guaranteedThe Fire Department should aggressively pursue grants.
But grants are competitive and cannot be treated as guaranteed income.
The DeFuniak Springs Fire Department has not historically applied for or received large amounts of grant funding on a regular basis.
The department has averaged roughly $20,000 per year in grants, while the Police Department has regularly brought in more than $100,000.
A long-term fire plan cannot be built on a hope and prayer that future grants will arrive.
Claim 15
CDBG Grants Can Be Used to Improve the City's ISO Rating
Possible, but no plan or analysis has been presented
Claim 15
CDBG Grants Can Be Used to Improve the City's ISO Rating
Possible, but no plan or analysis has been presentedCDBG funds can sometimes be used for eligible water and infrastructure projects.
But the Fire Chief has never presented the City Council with a plan identifying CDBG-eligible projects that would improve DeFuniak Springs' ISO rating.
No analysis has been presented showing which projects are needed, how many ISO points they could produce, what they would cost, or whether they would qualify for CDBG funding.
CDBG funds also have many competing uses. The City's last awarded CDBG project was used for sewer infrastructure.
It is one thing to list CDBG as a possible source of money. It is another to have an actual project, demonstrate that it would improve our ISO rating, show that it qualifies for CDBG funding, and make it a City priority.
That work has not been presented to the Council.
Claim 16
The Assessment Is Needed So the City Can Afford Grant Matches
Unsupported by recent City history
Claim 16
The Assessment Is Needed So the City Can Afford Grant Matches
Unsupported by recent City historyThe City has not refused reasonable Fire Department grant matching money when it has been requested.
In fact, this year's budget specifically included approximately $30,000 in matching money for a fire truck grant.
There is no demonstrated history showing that the Fire Department has lost major grants because the City could not provide a required match.
Claim 17
Reaching ISO Class 3 Would Save Homeowners 8% to 12% on Insurance
Unsupported
Claim 17
Reaching ISO Class 3 Would Save Homeowners 8% to 12% on Insurance
UnsupportedISO ratings can affect insurance rates.
But no insurance study has been presented showing that DeFuniak Springs homeowners would automatically save 8% to 12% by moving to Class 3.
Insurance companies set their own rates, and no documentation has been provided to support this specific percentage.
Claim 18
Walton County Response Times Would Be 8 to 15 Minutes or Longer
Unsupported
Claim 18
Walton County Response Times Would Be 8 to 15 Minutes or Longer
UnsupportedNo formal analysis has been presented showing that Walton County response times inside DeFuniak Springs would be 8 to 15 minutes.
A City-County agreement would determine how local coverage would actually work.
Without such an agreement, these response-time claims are assumptions.
Claim 19
County Fire Trucks Could Be Regularly Pulled Away From DeFuniak Springs
Unsupported as a certainty
Claim 19
County Fire Trucks Could Be Regularly Pulled Away From DeFuniak Springs
Unsupported as a certaintyA partnership with Walton County would not simply happen without rules.
The City and County could negotiate an agreement covering station locations, staffing, response expectations, and local coverage.
Claims about how County units would be deployed should be based on an actual agreement, not assumptions about what might happen.
Claim 20
County Service Would Cut On-Scene Staffing in Half
Unsupported
Claim 20
County Service Would Cut On-Scene Staffing in Half
UnsupportedNo formal County staffing proposal has been presented showing that a partnership would cut on-scene staffing in half.
Any City-County agreement would need to spell out how many firefighters, engines, and other resources would serve DeFuniak Springs.
Until that happens, claims about staffing being cut in half are speculation.
Claim 21
A County Partnership Would Leave the City With "Zero Local Recourse"
False
Claim 21
A County Partnership Would Leave the City With "Zero Local Recourse"
FalseThe City could negotiate a detailed service agreement with Walton County.
That agreement could include requirements for stations, staffing, equipment, response, and other service expectations.
The City could also choose not to allow the County fire assessment to be imposed inside the City limits.
That would give the City significant financial leverage if County service failed to meet the agreement.
A partnership would change how fire service is managed, but it would not leave the City powerless.
Claim 22
Grants and Other Outside Funding Can Build the Fire Department Without Burdening Local Taxpayers
Contradicted by the assessment argument
Claim 22
Grants and Other Outside Funding Can Build the Fire Department Without Burdening Local Taxpayers
Contradicted by the assessment argumentGrants should absolutely be pursued.
But grants are competitive, limited, and not guaranteed.
The same campaign promoting grants as a way to avoid burdening taxpayers is also arguing that taxpayers must pay a new $238 yearly assessment.
Both claims cannot be treated as complete answers by themselves.
The City needs a realistic plan based on dependable revenue, not hoped-for grants.
Claim 23
The Five-Year and Ten-Year Plan Provides a Clear Roadmap for Future Fire Department Needs
Major questions remain
Claim 23
The Five-Year and Ten-Year Plan Provides a Clear Roadmap for Future Fire Department Needs
Major questions remainThe Fire Department plan includes renovations to the existing fire station around years two or three.
The proposed ladder truck comes later.
The current station cannot fit the proposed ladder truck, but the renovation plan does not clearly say the bays will be extended to accommodate it.
That could mean renovating the station once and then returning later for another expensive round of construction at an unknown cost.
The plan also uses today's estimated costs for projects that may happen years from now.
It does not clearly account for inflation or future increases in construction, equipment, and labor costs.
The actual cost of the plan could therefore be much higher than the numbers being shown today.
The Bottom Line
Fire protection is important. That is not the debate.
The question is whether residents should be asked to pay a major new assessment based on claims that have not been fully documented.
Before asking citizens for more money, the City should clearly show what residents are buying, when they will receive it, what it will actually cost, and what measurable improvements it will produce.
Residents deserve facts, not assumptions.