Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They charge you big time. Just like the guy who lost his house...it just wasn't the price he thought he was goint to pay.
No it is not comparable because Triple A will help you and charge you a fee instead of leaving you there and refusing to help. The fire department did not extend this option.
I agree that they are RIGHTS of all of us but along with RIGHTS comes RESPONSIBILITIES. These services cost money and EVERYBODY should help pay for them. This guy decided that his neighbours could pay and he didn't have to pay which is why I have little sympathy for him.
I only want to talk about this aspect of your post, because I don't want it to turn into a political feud.
I may not have explained myself well enough with my post, but with the department accepting federal aid in the form of grants, or receiving any kind of a shared revenue from the state, everyone has already paid for it.
I admit that I have not put a great deal of effort into researching all facts pertaining to this departments funding, but most places are fairly similar. Every community in the state, here, receives tax money for budget relief, which the state collects and returns in the form of shared revenue. Most, if not all fire departments across this nation are swallowing up every form of grant they can secure.
My point is that this department may have been legally bound by the terms of any grants they may have taken to perform their tasks.
I was actually very surprised when I read that subscription based fire service still exists in this country. I was well aware of issues arising from city/county/state borders, and which agency is responsible to provide service for a particular home, but I had honestly believed that subscriber fees had gone out in the early 1900's.
It's a bad, bad system. In my opinion, if this department received federal monies, or state monies, or any kind of sales tax relief, everybody has already been paying for the service. That includes people thousands of miles away.
I have a very difficult time believing that the seventy-five dollars is the departments sole source of funding.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with your statement about personal responsibility. I just never want to be put in the predicament of having to determine whether a homeowner has paid their subscriber fee, or not, before I perform my job.
Here, in my own city, there are many people who haven't paid their property taxes in years, who it could be argued are no different than this gentleman, in that they have not paid their "fair" share, either.
I think we could make this argument everywhere.
No it is not comparable because Triple A will help you and charge you a fee instead of leaving you there and refusing to help. The fire department did not extend this option.
They also make sure you can pay the full fee for services rendered up front. Telling this guy "you can pay your $75 right now" is an invitation for everyone to not pay up until their house is actually on fire. Do you wait until someone is on life support before trying to take out a life insurance policy? Do you wait until a hurricane is 50 miles offshore before trying to buy homeowner's insurance? In both cases the insurance company is going to tell you to knob off, and rightly so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyGavin
Here, in my own city, there are many people who haven't paid their property taxes in years, who it could be argued are no different than this gentleman, in that they have not paid their "fair" share, either.
I think we could make this argument everywhere.
In your scenario, the city gets its money by gaining a de facto ownership interest in the property in the amount of the back taxes plus interest and penalties. In the case before us, the city doesn't have that authority over properties outside its taxing district. People who want guaranteed government services need to live within the boundaries of a municipality that provides the particular service(s) they desire, which in turn is entitled to a guaranteed revenue stream directly from the beneficiaries to pay for them.
The people who live in this particular county have evidently made the decision that the benefit of having their own fire protection district is not worth the cost. That's their choice whether you agree or not with the wisdom of it. Those who want a FPD need to either persuade their fellow citizens to vote to create one, or move to some place that has one. They should not expect it to be provided by someone else for free.
I agree that they are RIGHTS of all of us but along with RIGHTS comes RESPONSIBILITIES. These services cost money and EVERYBODY should help pay for them. This guy decided that his neighbours could pay and he didn't have to pay which is why I have little sympathy for him. I bet he is a Republican too and like most of them, he wants government benefits but wants somebody else to pay for them. You can get away with that on the Federal level because the Chinese are more than happy to foot the bill for us but on the state and local level, you have to actually pay for the services that the government offers. And yes, I would say here and now that TAXES need to be RAISED on everybody but especially the 2 classes of people that do not pay their fair share- those under $50,000 and those over $200,000 a year.
Not sure why being a democrat or republican makes a difference here. The bottom line, he didn't pay, because he didn't think he had to get something that he was TOLD that he had to pony up for.
In Obion County there are eight municipalities. South Fulton, Union City and Kenton are the only ones on subscription service, meaning if you don't pay, you don't get help.
"I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," said Gene Cranick.
Edmison said Obion County has entered into a letter of intent with all eight fire district municipalities, so all eight departments will soon respond to county residents through subscription service only.
All I can say is WOW... If I lived there, I would pay 2 years in advance!
No it is not comparable because Triple A will help you and charge you a fee instead of leaving you there and refusing to help. The fire department did not extend this option.
If you don't HAVE Triple A, and have not PAID "AAA", then they are not going to send someone out to help you.
Try it.. In fact, try having an accident and then signing up for insurance and asking them to cover the accident!
In your scenario, the city gets its money by gaining a de facto ownership interest in the property in the amount of the back taxes plus interest and penalties. In the case before us, the city doesn't have that authority over properties outside its taxing district. People who want guaranteed government services need to live within the boundaries of a municipality that provides them, which in turn is entitled to a guaranteed revenue stream directly from the beneficiaries to pay for them.
I get all of that and don’t disagree. However, the city South Fulton, TN Fire Department accepted at least one AFG (assistance to firefighters grant) in 2006. Because these grants and others like them are federally funded, any recipient department is required to provide service outside of their typical jurisdictional boundaries, as a condition of the grant. The logic is that the grant is paid for by the nation, not just that single community.
Is that the case here with this grant award? It certainly could be, and should maybe be looked into with a little more depth.
I’m not going to, because this guy could have avoided any and all problems by paying the seventy-five dollars.
I guess my perspective is from a professional sense. It may be a city policy, but people, such as myself will be the ones who have to carry out that policy. That means that people such as myself will have to endure the wrath, harassment and ill-will that enforcing such a policy will lead to. At least one of the firefighters involved was assaulted by a family member of the property owner, due to their letting the house burn.
I don’t wish to be asked to make those kinds of decisions, and I’m sure those firefighters don’t, either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
The people who live in this particular county have evidently made the decision that the benefit of having their own fire protection district is not worth the cost. That's their choice whether you agree or not with the wisdom of it. Those who want a FPD need to either persuade their fellow citizens to vote to create one, or move to some place that has one. They should not expect it to be provided by someone else for free.
There in lies the problem. With federal grants, state-level shared revenue and sales taxes, who is truly paying for what? Is the seventy-five dollars per house fee the sole revenue source for the fire protection?
There are a lot of things that exist in this country without everyone paying for their “fair” share.
In any case, I appreciate your remarks and, they are very thought provoking. Maybe I just take it for granted that you call 9-1-1 and get help.
I don't see how a grant received in 2006 entitles people outside the FPD to receive services in 2010.
Clearly those who want the direct benefits of municipal services need to be direct contributors. Claiming a right to a service because the municipality may have received a few pennies of your tax revenues filtered through Nashville or Washington is extremely tenuous. If revenue sharing entitles everyone to the services provided by every municipal agency that receive shared revenues, we might as well dispense with municipal boundaries altogether and provide all services at the state and federal level.
I guess my perspective is from a professional sense. It may be a city policy, but people, such as myself will be the ones who have to carry out that policy. That means that people such as myself will have to endure the wrath, harassment and ill-will that enforcing such a policy will lead to. At least one of the firefighters involved was assaulted by a family member of the property owner, due to their letting the house burn.
I don’t wish to be asked to make those kinds of decisions, and I’m sure those firefighters don’t, either.
As a professional, you as I do what we are told. If you are told that someone's house is covered and if it catches fire, you put it out, then that's what you do. If you are told that someone' else's house catches fire, and they are NOT covered, and you respond, and while responding, someone elses house who IS covered catches fire, you lose your job.
Even if that DOESN'T happen, you lose your job, because as a professional, someone is paying your wages, and you do as you are instructed.
No one was in danger, so you cannot use that as a caveat to this argument, and remember they DID say that if there was danger to someone, then they WOULD have responded
I don't see how a grant received in 2006 entitles people outside the FPD to receive services in 2010.
Oftentimes, when these federal grants are awarded there are specific strings attached to the grant money. That was also the only grant I was able to find between quarters of the Packer game.
Here is an example from the department for which I work. We have received any number of grants to fund equipment, rigs and tools. In agreeing to take the grant, the city and department agreed to have those particular rigs and the personnel assigned to them available to any community within a five county region, free of charge, any time a community calls.
As far as I know, there is no sunset-clause on the out of city response requirement.
I don't have any knowledge on the grant this city accepted or the strings that may or may not be tied in with it. I apologize if I implied that I did; I was speculating on possible conflicts with their policy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
Clearly those who want the direct benefits of municipal services need to be direct contributors. Claiming a right to a service because the municipality may have received a few pennies of your tax revenues filtered through Nashville or Washington is extremely tenuous. If revenue sharing entitles everyone to the services provided by every municipal agency that receive shared revenues, we might as well dispense with municipal boundaries altogether and provide all services at the state and federal level.
Well, I didn't say that. I said that if we're going to bicker over who paid for what, then it is entirely plausible that this home owner in some way, thru some form of taxation contributed to this fire protection that he did not receive. It's just a thought.
It can also be more than just a few pennies, at least in regard to state level shared revenue. Nearly seventy percent of the annual operating budget for the city I live in comes from either the state or federal government. I know this happens in a lot of other places, as well.
In the context of the discussion, it revolves around a subscriber fee and the residents of that community. A lot of people have made the statement that this homeowner isn't paying for the service, or that he was free-loading.
I was just trying to offer a view point that could maybe have been overlooked.
I will say that the whole of the problem would have been solved if the homeowner would have just ponied up seventy-five dollars.
Communities will still draw revenue from any and every source there is, be it property tax, income tax, user fees, shared revenue, etc... I'm just glad that no one was hurt or killed in the incident.
You can't, but WHY is this area pretty unique? A subscription fee is NOT the norm in most places. Most rural places have volunteer FD's. Why doesn't the place in question? It's the key question. Do they make more money off of the subscription fee then they would a tax? Something smells wrong with their entire system. Smells like corruption.
This has already been covered, but let me reiterate that subscription services like this are common, especially in rural and semi-rural areas. This is not corruption, more like "the way it's always been done". Perhaps nothing like this ever happened before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold
It's probably far less costly and more efficient to pay an existing company to cover an extended, untaxed area than it would be to have to finance a separate building and all the necessary equipment.
Volunteer depts also need.......get ready,now......ready,willing and able, not to mention trained, volunteers...something that is a big problem for many rural depts.
Also for many small towns. I grew up in a small town with a VFD. This was in western Pennsylvania where, when I was a kid, lots of people worked shifts in steel mills, so enough people were usually available any time of day to respond to a fire. However, as more people have gotten into regular "day jobs" and also more women started working, it became harder to find volunteers who were available during the day. This town's FD ended up merging with another VFD. It hurt their feelings of independence, but it is better for the public.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkatt
As a professional, you as I do what we are told. If you are told that someone's house is covered and if it catches fire, you put it out, then that's what you do. If you are told that someone' else's house catches fire, and they are NOT covered, and you respond, and while responding, someone elses house who IS covered catches fire, you lose your job.
Even if that DOESN'T happen, you lose your job, because as a professional, someone is paying your wages, and you do as you are instructed.
No one was in danger, so you cannot use that as a caveat to this argument, and remember they DID say that if there was danger to someone, then they WOULD have responded
This is true. I once worked for a health department that was paid for by city taxes. Occasionally we would get a referral for care for someone who lived outside the city limits and we couldn't help them. They couldn't attend our clinics, either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Buy insurance after the accident much?
