No more money in the boot from me… and please don’t stand in traffic, it’s dangerous and causes additional driving hazards.

Review 63-1311A that requires publication and a hearing before new fees can be implimented.

EDITOR NOTE–It was “legal.” They published notices and in fact the meeting was indeed a public hearing Tuesday. Problem is even the resolution is very vague using terms like “certain fees” for various departments including fire, parks, etc. It was merely lumped in as presented. Kudos to the Statesman for the Tuesday story.

Just the latest tool to increase city revenue to waste at Bieters discretion. All the cities in the valley will follow suit if this survives legal challenge.

Citizens should have the right to refuse – and therefore refuse to pay for – all “emergency” services not specifically requested.

If the paramedics show up and I’m ambulatory, I reserve the option to refuse their ministrations by simply telling them “thanks, but no thanks.” Any expenses incurred as a result of their decision to show up should be on them.

And I agree with those who decry the “Fill The Boot” antics of firefighters. Any other citizen disrupting traffic in such an unsafe way would be ticketed.

If my insurance company wishes to pay $75/hour for an arson investigation I have no problem, However, if they want to saddle me with that cost it is baloney!

Our tax dollars paid for these guys to get the training as arson investigators and now they want more of our money? I get the feeling the new fee schedule is all about featherbedding rather than service to the community.

I still can’t figure out why the BIG RED TRUCK shows up at virtually every EMT call along with the Paramedic Ambulance. They aren’t going to haul anyone to the hospital in the BIG RED TRUCK so why do they show up in addition to the EMT people? More pumping of service numbers I suppose

I would like to propose a few more poor behavior city fees:

$500,000 for refusing to in a timely fashion release records to the public which should have been plus $100,000 fine per each lame excuse such as janitorial contracts could not be made public for safety/security reasons.

$1.50 per minute for each idling police vehicle

$75 per hour per police motorcycle used outside of the city of Boise, plus 50% commission on all citations written.

$100,000 for improperly bidding/awarding city contracts

$50,000 per each occurrence of P&Z staff or commission imposing development contingencies outside their authority (JUMP)

$1,000,000 per occurrence of the city trying to issue bonds without proper voter approval and $2,000,000 for city participation in new “innovative” methods to issue bonds which purposefully attempt to circumvent established law.

$5,000 for showing up to a public meeting with a good idea such as river safety signs, and an additional $1,000 fine for offering the signs to the city for free, plus disbarment for life from media events if someone from the media actually offers an opinion versus their primary job to echo the brilliance of our elected leaders.

$15,000 fee for registering a vehicle in Idaho which was previously registered in California.

$1.00 fee for shooting at a wolf, fee waived if wolf is killed.

I’ve always maintained that anyone involved in something idiotic, like floating the river off season, should be fined for putting fire fighters lives at risk while saving theirs. But some of this stuff is going to be difficult to prove. Arson investigation? And if there was no arson, then no bill??

I wish more of you all had shown up last night. There were only three (3!!) of us that made comments on this issue. For all the angst towards this issue(rightfully so I must add) I expected a larger turnout. The best part is the $40,000 revenue figure is purely a guess with no math behind it. When I asked the Chief to extrapolate the revenue figure he simply said that it was a working number and he wasnt sure of a final dollar amount. REALLY? then why was this up for vote if you dont have an actual plan in place??

Why does the BFD even respond to river problems or “clear the river of debris” ? By state law, water ways are the responsibility of the local sheriff. What is the liability of the BFD when they say it’s OK to float the river? looks like more money for Doan’s drones.

Boisean, it helps justify jobs for firemen. 85% of their calls are medical. If they only went out on fire calls, they’d probably forget how to put the fire out much less drive the truck the calls would be so few and far between.

Why do you think the fire union wants to get in the paramedic business?

The question I have is just how much more does it cost to rescue/respond to a call/serve the stupid public than it costs to sit around the firehouse?

Answering calls is the only way these people have to keep their taxpayer paid skills honed and up to date. Practice, practice and more practice is what is needed here. Fire vehicles are not retired due to mileage but from lack of use. Gaskets, seals, and other moving parts depend on use to work when needed. Answering calls keeps everything in the equipment moving and lubricated, batteries charged in vehicles.

Who came up with this lame-brained fee deal?

While I like the idea of holding “Grossly” negligent (as opposed to the run of the mill daily kind of negligent) people responsible….I have several thoughts:

1- I understand that the fees will be collected by a “for profit collection agency”. What is their cut? In my experience, these collection agencies tend to take 75% of the take. Does this make it worthwhile?

2- Most of the “stupid people” don’t have insurance, very little income, and it is doubtful they will even pay. I see “write off’s” in the future.

3- Where is the oversight and the appeals process? I don’t feel comfortable with a person whose agency will directly benefit from this making the final decision.

4- Seems to me the court process for restitution and/or fines is more appropriate for this, but then that would add a level of oversight, accountability, and the need to meet a minimum standard of proof that is woefully lacking not only in this ordinance but in city government in general.

Bike Boy: We have needed a PUBLIC SAFETY Ombudsman for years. Don’t hold your breath.

In response to the several questions as to why BFD units go to EMS calls, that has been discussed here many times. They are “Quick Response Units”, generally located just minutes from every address in the city. There are times when ACEMS is 10 minutes or more away from a call.

Let’s say your baby isn’t breathing, or you are bleeding to death from an MVA. Wouldn’t you rather have an Engine Company staffed with EMTs at your door in three minutes, rather than waiting 10 minutes for the medics?

I think it’s a great idea and here is why…

If BFD is going to charge for a false alarm people and business are going to get their alarms in good working order and the incidents of false alarms will go down. With less false alarms will come the need for less fire department/ costly taxes going to waste!!!

I propose a city ordinance to retrofit every house/business w/ fire sprinklers and eventually the fire department will permantely code themselves out of a job and save the city $40 million a year. Keep up the hard work boys in blue.

Then insteed of 17 engines keep one pumper, one truck so when the next cat gets stuck in the tree, oh plus the public information officer to say how these guys put their lives on the line while in the tree to save the cat for channel 7.

Jeff, good idea but it will never happen. The rent seeking fireboys goal in life is to continually reap higher pay and benefits and lower work requirements. I believe, if played out to its natural end, we’ll still pay fireboys, but they’ll stay home and never have to show up!

Emirates, There ya go again, reading from the manual! You need to get a grasp on reality. Many times EMS beats you guys to the call anyway, and the reason you are there is to PAD the call sheets for the next budget cycle!!
It is one thing to falsely justify an expense, taxpayeres find it insulting when such a lame reason is used by city employees to hang on to their jobs!

The fire calls I see on TV are brush fires for the most part. The fire guys respond to Paramedic Calls (a redundant cost to taxpayers). Here’s my solution..terminate all the firemen and go to a volunteer FD. Most of the houses and buildings these days simply do not catch on fire. I have never seen a foundation or basement burn to the ground. Smoke and water damage render most structures useless.

How many structure fires do firemen deal with each year? What is the cost benefit to taxpayers? Plenty of people live in homes with no fire departments to protect them and they have been around for years and years.

Fire codes may have rendered firemen a luxury we can now call into question.

EDITOR NOTE– Fire departments are an “insurance policy” for a community and serve a vital purpose. No doubt fire codes and modern building materials have reduced the frequency of fires (sprinklers and smoke detectors are prime reasons). However there are still plenty of old structures and more than enough fires to go around. MOST of the firefighters in the USA are part time or volunteer. How about having volunteer medical responders and river LIFEGUARDS just like ski patrol and much of Australia’s surf lifeguards?

Okay Matt. Prove it. If medical calls don’t make up 85% of your workload, what percent are they? Does your union still want to get into the paramedic business?

Also, the fire union’s goal is to maximize wages and benefits and minimize workload. If that’s not true, then why is there bargaining? Last time, what % increase did the fire union ask for, not what they got, but their opening bid? What new benefits did you all get? Actually, what benefits did you give up for the good of the taxpayer? None? Maybe you all don’t love your jobs that much.

Why did you all go to a 48 hour on, I don’t even know how many off? Why didn’t you stay with the 24 on 48 off? Do you all still do personal work in the fire stations? Have you all started to train on Saturdays and Sundays? If not, why not? Why do you all do your grocery shopping on our dime, in our fire truck, using our fuel? Why don’t you all do your grocery shopping on your days off and bring the food to the station like every other employee in this world?

Do Boise taxpayers still pay for your uniform socks? What percentage of your medical premiums do you pay?

Maybe the next time you’re “on duty” you can answer these questions Matt using the taxpayer provided internet access. If you don’t answer, I’ll guess we’ll have to take your being “insulted” with a grain of salt.

Sounds like the animosity towards the fireman are about like teachers.

Wow, nan emouse has some pretty deep issues with firefighters. I’m guessing a disgruntled ex-employee.

I have no problem with the false alarm fees or other “stupid” fees.

I also have no problem paying taxes for everything you just complained about.

Firefighters are there as insurance, and need to be ready to leave immediately. Because unless you have the ability to predict the future, we don’t know when they’ll be needed.

Debating on the Internet is pointless. But, you are wrong still.

EDITOR NOTE–Agreed. We will close debate with this post.