Monday, April 30, 2012

South Fire District Votes On Budget Tuesday

The South Fire District is a self-taxing district whose residents must vote each year on the budget for fire protection. This contrasts with the Middletown (central) fire district, whose budget is approved by the Common Council.

The South Fire District budget referendum is today, from 6AM to 8PM. Residents can cast their ballots at the Fire Station.

The proposed budget is $4,606,932, a 5.5% increase over last year's budget. The three items most responsible for the increase are insurance, salaries, and "Capitol [sic] Non-Recurring". The mill rate on South Fire District properties will rise 2.1%, from 3.574 to 3.648.

The 2012/13 budget is available HERE, through the SFD website.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Given that my Fire Tax will be less than that of my friends in the city district by about 37%, I will gladly Vote Yes on the lower Budget. Since we at South Farms Do Not Pay any Fire Tax to the City of Middletown, it is nice to see that The South District Fire Commission does such a good job keeping our Taxes at a minimum. Thank you and Yes you have My Yes Vote

Anonymous said...

The Firefighters are outstanding, but their budget is not. Why the need for duplicate services? Why have a south fire tax office? The city tax collector could collect the fire taxes and cut a check to the south fire dept. Vote the budget down.

Anonymous said...

If you review the proposed as compared to current fiscal year budget , you will see its actually a 15.7 % increase in real spending which is more than $650,000 for the coming year alonme . It's a bit confusing and not clear in that only the CNR, Capital $ are added for the current fical year to the bottom line but the actual Capital, using savings from previously approved years are also included /listed below the summary as CNR. Please vote NO!

Anonymous said...

Why isn't South Fire receiving any funding from the State for the work they do at CVH. Why do the tax payers have to pay for this service.

Anonymous said...

The first poster drinks the local cool aid at SFD. Let's see, put the Fd's together, save hundreds of thousands on less Chief's , less Deputy Chief's , less tax collectors, less secretaries, less fire trucks, less boats, smaller building, less services duplicated by ones that already exist, more divirsified safer workforce which is more efficient and sticks around because they have job security . Quit scaring the taxpayers with lies.

Anonymous said...

unfortunately public perseption may be that a NO vote is a vote against our heroic firefighters. The reality is there is much room for administrative consolidation, saving south fire taxpayers, and city taxpayers money. Please vote NO.

Anonymous said...

I've lived in towns where we've had a couple of paid EMTs and the rest volunteers. No one complained about the service or cost. The people in Westfield pay MUCH less and I don't hear them complaining. I cringe when I pay nearly $1000 a year for a service I've never used in 16 years. Why not ONE chief in a town? no deputy chiefs, no tax collectors (you can outsource that service for much less) and get rid of trucks grossly oversized for the district. Every time the budget comes up for a vote we get the threats of less service...what like the kind Westfield has? Would be fine with me.

Anonymous said...

Dan and Joe, look to Torrington for guidance, they outsource 100% of their tax collections

Anonymous said...

You people who vote no do not have a glue !!! It is cheaper to live in the South Fire District then it does in the Middletown Fire Dept. District (Central District) by more 2 mills. If you want to pay 5.95%, instead of 3.648% move to the "Central District" (Middletown Fire) & pay more taxes. After all, if you vote the budget down, you want to pay more taxes. Supporting the SFD budjet is a no brainer !!!

Anonymous said...

At least South Fire and Westfield get a vote-JUST SAY NO!Not so in the city district which is the largest area with majority of taxpayers. Westfield has it made with their mil rate- the voters there know the city district is subsidizing their fire coverage- JUST SAY NO TO UNION! If the City district got to vote- yes not legistlated into existance like South Fire and Westfield- closing a fire house would bring the city mil down for a large number of taxpayers. How about the double payment made by those who own more than one property in Middletown? If you pay for City fire..Why do you pay again for your home in another district? A flat tax system per resident? Stop draining revenue from homeowners to support a grossly overpaid Fire pension system which deterrs consolidation of the fire Departments. The buildings in the city district are neglected to avoid the excessive FIRE TAX. If South Fire gets their mil to the city mil rate, then South Fire can enjoy the truly exhorbitant tax of the city district and don't forget your cars too.
Yes, the structure of the Middletown fire tax is lucrative to the Cheifs,deputy,assistant deputy who go on to collect a state pension additionally and sometimes a second pension between districts. The agenda appears to be the collection of pensions and not much money left to pay actual producers of the work. A layer of city pension plus state pension plus possibly a Federal? How much coverage do the taxpayers need? Anyone with snow damage from 2011 winter learned, water does more damage. Pay the firemen, stop supporting and training the state's expansion- we all should have learned from the gas explosion- WE ARE NOT SAFER WITH THE EXCESSIVE FIRE DEPARTMENT. How many levels do you want to pay?

Anonymous said...

amen!

Anonymous said...

First, Anonymous 2:15 should really consider a course in English Composition.You are a glaring condemnation of our educational system.
Second, what the heck are you writing about?
Third, while the city district has the majority of taxpayers, it is not the largest in area.

Anonymous said...

I will never understand why Middletown has three seperate fire departments, each with its own management structure and salaries in triplicate.