Timberline Board compromise keeps merger on track
Dissolution/ inclusion – 50/50 split reconsidered
At their November 30, 2009, meeting, the six-member Timberline Fire Authority (TFA) Board of Directors overcame one obstacle which has been hanging up the merger of High Country Fire Protection District (HCFPD) and Colorado Sierra Fire Protection District (CSFPD), and then took a giant leap toward clearing one other, major, hurdle. The Board is made up of three members from the CSFPD Board of Directors (Gail Maxwell, Chris Schimanskey and Rick Wenzel) and three from HCFPD’s Board (Paul Britton, Roger Durham and John Rittenhouse). All were present. Currently, “Timberline” is simply the authority (in this case, the TFA Board) charged with preparing for the merger and getting it to the vote.
At their October meeting, the wheels began coming off the merger when HCFPD wouldn’t commit to covering a greater share (80%) of the merger costs. The Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the two districts calls for a 50/50 split. Schimanskey said CSFPD is able to pay only 20% of the estimated $78,000 costs. Those costs could be much less, depending on how the merger is done. If it is taken to the voters of both districts there will be election costs in two counties as HCFPD includes area in Boulder County. If it is taken to just the CSFPD voters (to approve dissolution and inclusion into HCFPD) there would be costs in only Gilpin County. Whichever way it is accomplished, once the merger has been approved (and it must go to a vote of the people to do that), both CSFPD and HCFPD “go away” as separate entities and become one district under the name of Timberline Fire. But CSFPD’s Directors balked at dissolving their district and HCFPD’s Directors wouldn’t agree to pay more than their 50% share unless the merger was accomplished as inexpensively as possible. Stalemate.
Following the October stall, the TFA members agreed to put their questions in writing, turn them over to their merger consultant, Don Taylor, and have him present them to the Board in full. Some questions referred to how the new combined district would handle matters of nepotism, job descriptions, pay scale, oversight and board chairmanship. Others asked how the Fire Chief and Fire Marshal positions would be filled and what the attorney’s role would be. Many of these issues will be dealt with by committee at a later date or decided by the district’s Board following the merger. Some questions regarding the Fire Chief position revolved around whether HCFPD hires a Chief in 2010 and they have not yet made that decision. They will know by the next TFA meeting, said Rittenhouse. One question, HCFPD’s reasons for objecting to changing the IGA to the 80/20 split of costs, generated discussion that, in the end, put the merger wheels back on track.
An actuarial study showed, and the TFA Board approved, the two districts could merge their pension plans into one, paying out at the higher HCFPD rate of $14 per month. Another, the Board structure following the merger, had been researched per statute. The initial post-merger board will consist of ten members – the five member boards of each district. After six months, those members must pare it down to five or seven members. A seven member board would require establishing seven voting districts with the population distributed equitably among them. That would be costly and time consuming, but it is an option. The ten-member merged board will decide. TFA’s recommendation will be a five member board and that HCFPD and CSFPD each select two members; one for a four-year term and one for a two-year term. The fifth member would be selected by the ten-member merged board. Those not winning Board seats, will serve as advisors. Finding that CSFPD would be treated equally in the pension and board structure after the merger, was enough for Schimanskey to say he was comfortable with dissolution/inclusion. Finding that CSFPD would choose the less costly route, was enough for Britton to accept a potential 80/20 split. Their colleagues followed suit, passing a motion, unanimously, to go with dissolution/inclusion. TFA can now focus on tasks, moving the merger forward.
Maxwell asked if HCFPD’s trucks were now fully equipped and was assured they were close. TFA plans to review capital needs prior to approving the TFA 2010 budget. Because of the way they’re organized, TFA does not have the December budget deadline looming and can take more time. That gives Rittenhouse time to check with the TFA attorney for a hopefully lower estimate of merger costs based on dissolution/inclusion. TFA’s currently has around $6,236 in their account.
Some items were again put off to the next meeting. Neither HCFPD Chief Richard Bulich nor CSFPD Chief Ryan Roberts were present so there was no “Chief’s Report.” The Board directed Taylor, by passing a unanimously approved motion, to e-mail and telephone the Chiefs, informing them there is to be a report at every meeting. The commanding officers of both districts were to have met to come to agreement on proposed new Standard Operating Guidelines (SOG’s) but had not met. A rumor about Red Card requirements (for wild land firefighting) had totally missed the mark and it was suggested firefighters communicate with commanders whenever they had questions or needed to get the straight facts. A Training Coordinator and Fire Marshal are still being sought. The district survey is in the works and will cost about $3,500, Maxwell reported.
An inventory of equipment had been completed and e-mailed to the Board.
Maxwell announced the computer at CSFPD’s station is open to use by HCFPD personnel. As with HCFPD’s computers, it is to be used on-site, not accessed remotely, and any abuse of the privilege will result in new policy, she said.
TFA meets next on December 17, 2009.