• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

Diane

Beach Comber
May 11, 2009
26
9
Bob,

Yes, that is an actual quote, trust me, I remember it clearly. I agree with "Scooterbug's" reply that other measures could have been taken before laying off two very dedicated, hardworking, long term people who loved the Fire District and this community. It just seems odd to me that since that layoff, no other cost measures have taken place and time is running out to find over two million dollars (at least I have heard that is the recent figure). But, that's just my opinion and I am just one resident/taxpayer.

You are correct, layoffs are never pleasant for anyone, but they are heartbreaking when there were other options at least for now and until negotiations were close to conclusion. After 12 years with the District, I probably know more about what is going on than the ordinary taxpayer.

I am not a bitter or disgruntled employee, but if I thought that the approximately $200,000+ saved by the layoff was going to save the Fire District, I would have volunteered to leave; but I don't think that was the case.

Diane
 

Bob Hudson

Beach Fanatic
May 10, 2008
1,066
739
Santa Rosa Beach
Bob, I'm not sure what I can and can't legaly post.

The document was distributed in a "open meeting" per Florida statute. The document has no legal protection and you were given a copy - you are free to use,distribute,duplicate it in any manner that you see fit. That being said you also were recording the negotiations.

My only reason to ask that you post the offer was I knew you:

1. Had a copy
2. That you also recorded the session
3. That you could best summarize the key points or simply provide a copy rather than relying on memory on some issues that were very technical.

I believe that when you publicly release one "option" and another option is on the table it should be also disclosed in the spirit of fairness.

For the record I have made a public records request to obtain the document and will post it here.

If I remember correctly (?) a key different proposals - no- on second thought let me just simply post the offer when I receive it.

I will also secure the actuarial study to confirm the 109 life span statement. I personally find it difficult to understand that, but I have been wrong before.
 
Last edited:

Henry Apfelbach

Beach Lover
May 14, 2011
61
13
Bob, I was surprised about the 109 life span, but that was the number given to me by Mr. Flanagan who sits on the pension board via the Fire Board. This number seems very inflated but the way he explained it we have no option but to use this number.

Also, as far as the proposal you were only off on one number, they proposed a .07 raise in mills. The rest of that proposal had to do with taking money out of reserves, cash forward from beating the budget, the 3.5 positions they have now cut from management, and as we found out in the last meeting they assumed the continuation of the cut to service that was done this year. This is a matter that is subject to possible arbitration and we are hopeful that we can work this out so the District does not spend even more money on lawer fees. As far as what was asked from us there was a Pay Freeze to stop step increases that are granted by the contract, a stop/restart of the retirement plan to offset their costs, and an increase in the amount of money paid to our retirement plan also reducing the cost to the District. I have said it before I think we are close to a deal. We need more information before we can make an informed decision.

I asked a very specific question of the board and at that time they were not able to answer. I was just wondering if anyone in the community had the same question. Diane is right there were a number of options given to the board in February and none of them have been implemented as far as I know. Chief Talbert presented these options to the board and no action was taken. I am concerned with the lack of communication that exists between the board and the taxpayers. If they are not discussing these things in the public meetings where are they being discussed? Bob, you had a better answer than what I was given. I get that the need to reorganize might exist I was just hoping that there was a good explanation as to how these positions were picked. The things that were said in the news article were spot on about morale in the department and that is why we (SWPFFA) have a concern.
 

Henry Apfelbach

Beach Lover
May 14, 2011
61
13
Also, before I forget at the last meeting the budget shortfall going into next year based on the sheet that we were given was 2.75 million. We are trying to identify all things that are going to drive that number up so we can get a solid number.
 

NotDeadYet

Beach Fanatic
Jul 7, 2007
1,422
489
30a, I wish I could explain how they came up with the fact that we are all going to live to be 109. I was told the only person who knows when your going to die was the actuary. I asked this question to a member of the retirement board and I was told they use a chart. My point in mentioning this was that we spend a lot of time worried aobut these unfunded liabilites but, it just appears to me that these numbers are too easily manipulated. I say that also knowing that the national average life span of a retired firefighter is about 9 years. That number is also changed by many things. Someone asked me why the low lifespan and all I can say is I don't know, but if I did I'd probably be rich.

Does anyone else find it weird that the average life span after retirement is 9, and the pension board is using 109??
I'd hate to find out it was a typo somewhere along the way.
 

30ashopper

SoWal Insider
Apr 30, 2008
6,846
3,471
56
Right here!
Does anyone else find it weird that the average life span after retirement is 9, and the pension board is using 109??
I'd hate to find out it was a typo somewhere along the way.

Bob's trying to get a hold of one of the studies, so hopfully we shall see what state this fund is in. Legislation this year also mandates more transparency for these things, so given time we'll be able to get a better understanding of what if any liability taxpayers have.
 

30ashopper

SoWal Insider
Apr 30, 2008
6,846
3,471
56
Right here!
30a, I wish I could explain how they came up with the fact that we are all going to live to be 109. I was told the only person who knows when your going to die was the actuary. I asked this question to a member of the retirement board and I was told they use a chart. My point in mentioning this was that we spend a lot of time worried aobut these unfunded liabilites but, it just appears to me that these numbers are too easily manipulated. I say that also knowing that the national average life span of a retired firefighter is about 9 years. That number is also changed by many things. Someone asked me why the low lifespan and all I can say is I don't know, but if I did I'd probably be rich.

I did a little searching around, and it turns out a number of retirement benefit systems have done research showing that the shorter life expectancy for safety personnel claim a myth. Police and firefighters live just as long as long as the rest of us (even a bit longer since they tend to retire earlier).

http://www.newgeography.com/content/001145-police-pensions-and-voodoo-actuarials
 

Diane

Beach Comber
May 11, 2009
26
9
Thanks Henry. I totally agree with you regarding Board and taxpayer communication. Staff was told in the February 2011 staff meeting that options included five to fifteen percent pay reductions, health insurance plan changes which would include staff participation, selling of SWFD owned land, reduce or eliminate commissioner stipends of $500 per month (this figure does not include the taxpayer money that is paid for two spouses to be included on the plan), use more reserve funds and increasing the millage to 1.0. All this was going to be considered in order to save jobs (at least that is what we were told). So, while eveyone was not overjoyed about paycuts and paying for health insurance, it was certainly a better option than losing one's job. Two months later, without any of these options being put in place, Sean and I were gone.

For almost 12 years, I was told that the Fire District is a family, that it is different from working in the public sector. In my opinion, this is not how you treat family. You do everything you can to save them. I am also wondering when did the Fire Board of Commissioners wake up and realize that the District was in dire financial straits. I knew over two years ago and could see the direction that this was going. The only cost saving measures that were put into place when it was obvious that things were going "downhill" were eliminating the postage meter, getting rid of the "doormat service", cancelling water, coffee service, plastic spoons, station temperatures were to be reset to save on the electric bill, etc. There were some fuel conservation efforts put into place and staff vehicles were no longer taken home. Right after Sean and I were laid off, staff vehicles were taken home again (so much for the fuel savings). These are all good efforts (well, most of them), but the financial problems are huge and these efforts are minor compared to the big picture. Truthfully, I just don't get it and sorry, but it seems absurd to me.
 

Bob Hudson

Beach Fanatic
May 10, 2008
1,066
739
Santa Rosa Beach
I received the attached document that was the SWFD's proposal to the FF union negotiating team.

View attachment Gmail - Management Proposal.pdf

This is Chief Talberts comment concerning questions that Henry says were not answered.


Quote: I took the time to look at the bulletin board you mentioned and would say that you are "spot on" with regard to the Fire District's analysis of containing/reducing costs and ultimately our reduction in force to capture costs this year to help reduce the impact next FY. Unfortunately it appears that Mr Apfelbach refuses to accept the response that was given to him directly by me days after I reduced our staff as well as our board at the last fire board meeting. I think you would agree that any reduction in force is painful for all involved particularly those on the receiving end of this tough decision. However, it is of utmost importance that we maintain our professional presence and stature in the community and not engage in any theories and innuendo regarding two long-standing and dedicated employees of our Fire District. They are already unfortunate casualties in this challenging economic time for all of us.
 

scooterbug44

SoWal Expert
May 8, 2007
16,732
3,330
Sowal
Thanks Henry. I totally agree with you regarding Board and taxpayer communication. Staff was told in the February 2011 staff meeting that options included five to fifteen percent pay reductions, health insurance plan changes which would include staff participation, selling of SWFD owned land, reduce or eliminate commissioner stipends of $500 per month (this figure does not include the taxpayer money that is paid for two spouses to be included on the plan), use more reserve funds and increasing the millage to 1.0. All this was going to be considered in order to save jobs (at least that is what we were told). So, while eveyone was not overjoyed about paycuts and paying for health insurance, it was certainly a better option than losing one's job. Two months later, without any of these options being put in place, Sean and I were gone.

For almost 12 years, I was told that the Fire District is a family, that it is different from working in the public sector. In my opinion, this is not how you treat family. You do everything you can to save them. I am also wondering when did the Fire Board of Commissioners wake up and realize that the District was in dire financial straits. I knew over two years ago and could see the direction that this was going. The only cost saving measures that were put into place when it was obvious that things were going "downhill" were eliminating the postage meter, getting rid of the "doormat service", cancelling water, coffee service, plastic spoons, station temperatures were to be reset to save on the electric bill, etc. There were some fuel conservation efforts put into place and staff vehicles were no longer taken home. Right after Sean and I were laid off, staff vehicles were taken home again (so much for the fuel savings). These are all good efforts (well, most of them), but the financial problems are huge and these efforts are minor compared to the big picture. Truthfully, I just don't get it and sorry, but it seems absurd to me.

I think that some of the savings items mentioned here should still be implemented, but I agree that items like plastic spoons are not going to fix the budget.

I really don't understand staff vehicles being taken home. I can somewhat understand the arguments presented for the police taking cars home, but aren't all FD responses done in trucks/ambulances by people on call AT the fire houses, or who go to the fire houses to be deployed w/ supplemental vehicles/equipment?

Not to derail the discussion, but IMO (especially with $4 gas and budget crunches) we need to get practical about all of the vehicles provided to various government employees.

My guess (and I would love to see numbers to contradict me if I'm wrong) is that if we paid the standard IRS rate for someone to use their personal car on the rare occassions when they must deploy from home we would save a lot of $$. (2011 rate is 51 cents a mile).

I also question why the private sector is expected to drive themselves to work for free, yet politicians and government employees (many who make multiple times the pay and are salaried) need to be compensated for doing so.

Eliminating $500 a month stipends for fire commissioners seems like a budget no-brainer.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter