Firefighters watched a house burn down

[doctorjj]

This may become more and more common. As minicipal and county governments continue to go broke providing services, even essential emergency services such as fire, medical and police are going to get harder to provide financially. My primary concern lies with where to draw the line. At what point are emergency service providers pointing a needle, fire hose or gun at local residents and saying "your money or your life"? What if a resident cannot pay the fee due to poverty issues? Are renters or property management companies going to be required to pay as well? Will it void insurance payouts if the homeowner refuses to pay the service fee up front?

Also, if you're paying a service fee, does that then obligate the emergency service provider to meet a minimum performance criteria? In most cases, emergency services are immune from liability in the event their services do not perform as expected for a community at large. When they charge an up front service fee on each individual property owner, does that strip them of their immunity? If I pay your service fee up front for a specific service, based on an expected response and you don't meet that expectation, I'm going to want my money back and more.

This is not a simple problem. In this case, I think the city of Fulton and Obion county are wrong. If Obion county cannot provide fire response to rural residents, but Fulton is willing to do it, then Obion county needs to pass a property tax initiative to pay Fulton for fire service. Expecting each individual resident to pay Fulton, when they don't reside in Fulton is wrong. Emergency services is not something we want to provide or deny based on ability to pay in advance by each individual. That does not meet the criteria of community service.

Thoughts?

Well thought out response, Jerry. I agree, I think it does open them up to some liability.

Also, if you noted in the original article, the spokesman said "There's no way to go to every fire and keep up the manpower, the equipment, and just the funding for the fire department". Well, if it's a manpower issue, then why were the firefighters able to go to the fire and just sit to watch it? If another fire broke out at a subscribers house and they had to stop fighting the fire of the non-subscriber to go to the subscriber's house, well, that would be fine. I still think they should have put out the fire and then charged double or triple the going rate. Making services prepay only is not a good situation.

 

[RidgeHunter]

Had I been the fire department, and been there, I'd ask him for a check for all payments due since 1990, when it was enacted in that area. or whatever he owed to bring him current. $75x21=$1575+any fees incurred in coming out that one time. Surely if he had been paying the $75 all along I wouldn't be wanting the additional fees incurred but I feel it would be necessary in this case as a penalty for being stupid. If we could figure out a way to tax stupid in America we'd be out of the financial hole we're in by the end of the decade and well on our way to prosperity.

Hell, I'd come soak all the charred remains of their trailer with water for $500 cash and save them some money.

They probably did just as well not paying the $75 bucks. I've watched a couple old trailers burn, and by the time you can say "Hey, is that smoke?" they've turned into a a giant Durflame log soaked in diesel. By the time a rural FD shows up and rolls out the hoses, there's nothing left to save.

For that matter most stick built homes don't fare much better. They do their best at helping people and preventing fires from spreading. I fully expect my house not to be worth saving if it ever catches on fire.

 

[inactive]

I am actually surprised as how quickly the fire in the second video was tamed. Of course, it's all pretty much a total (contents smoke damaged if mot already destroyed).

 

[ripnbst]

Emergency services is not something we want to provide or deny based on ability to pay in advance by each individual.

By enacting a tax you are still very much paying in advance. A little bit at a time but that does not mean it is not happening. If someone doesn't pay taxes do they still get to reap the benefits of welfare? You better believe it. THAT is the broke way, what happened here is the right way.

If only I could opt to not pay federal taxes, if only.

This is a very informative video

 

[inactive]

I had to read the video description to determine the difference.

Legacy room uses dated furnishing made with (mostly natural) fibers, i.e. wood furniture, cotton upholstery and silk curtains. The Modern room uses newer materials when we know are mostly synthetics.

Pretty interesting stuff.

 

[Glocktogo]

Emergency services is not something we want to provide or deny based on ability to pay in advance by each individual.

By enacting a tax you are still very much paying in advance. A little bit at a time but that does not mean it is not happening. If someone doesn't pay taxes do they still get to reap the benefits of welfare? You better believe it. THAT is the broke way, what happened here is the right way.

If only I could opt to not pay federal taxes, if only.

This is a very informative video

By applying an across the board tax, you're spreading out the cost much more effectively. Instead of $75, it may only be $20 or $30. That may be amortized over the year, costing only a few dollars a month. People also tend to complain less when a cost for service is spread out, equally shared and covered under a tax for a multitude of services. To a guy living in a trailer house, it's a lot easier and less aggravating than getting a bill annually for $75 that basically says you're gonna be screwed if you don't pay.

Also, in this case the town is going to operate a fire dept. for the town, regardless of whether they respond in the county or not. It's not like they're going to shut the FD down if they don't get the county residents to pay. There's no reason for them to deny service to county residents if they're willing to pay the FD's rate for responding, when they actually respond (as in this most recent case). In many cases, homeowners insurance would pay for FD response if it wasn't provided as a taxpayer service. The insurance companies probably already charge higher rates in the county due to longer estimated response times and a lack of automatically provided service.

At the very least, homeowners ought to have the option to either pay the $75 annually, or sign an agreement that they or their insurance company will pay a higher rate if the FD is called to provide service. The policy of demanding payment up front or they'll come watch your property burn is neither compassionate nor neighborly, especially when you consider that most of those county residents provide economic benefits to the town in the money they probably make or spend there.

 

[NikatKimber]

This may become more and more common. As minicipal and county governments continue to go broke providing services, even essential emergency services such as fire, medical and police are going to get harder to provide financially. My primary concern lies with where to draw the line. At what point are emergency service providers pointing a needle, fire hose or gun at local residents and saying "your money or your life"? What if a resident cannot pay the fee due to poverty issues? Are renters or property management companies going to be required to pay as well? Will it void insurance payouts if the homeowner refuses to pay the service fee up front?

Also, if you're paying a service fee, does that then obligate the emergency service provider to meet a minimum performance criteria? In most cases, emergency services are immune from liability in the event their services do not perform as expected for a community at large. When they charge an up front service fee on each individual property owner, does that strip them of their immunity? If I pay your service fee up front for a specific service, based on an expected response and you don't meet that expectation, I'm going to want my money back and more.

This is not a simple problem. In this case, I think the city of Fulton and Obion county are wrong. If Obion county cannot provide fire response to rural residents, but Fulton is willing to do it, then Obion county needs to pass a property tax initiative to pay Fulton for fire service. Expecting each individual resident to pay Fulton, when they don't reside in Fulton is wrong. Emergency services is not something we want to provide or deny based on ability to pay in advance by each individual. That does not meet the criteria of community service.

Thoughts?

I'll have to think about this some more, but my understanding (haven't read the initial story since it was originally posted) is that they didn't risk their lives to save the belongings, but that had there been a human life in danger they would have acted. That changes the equation a little bit, imo.

 

[Twmaster]

Organized fire brigades were begun in the 1760's by insurance companies. You paid your premiums and the fire brigades from the company would come and work to put out any fire in your building. They used a plaque called a 'fire mark' to identify what buildings were covered by what fire brigade. Needless to say if your neighbor was on fire they didn't come.

The idea of a subscription is not new. You have choices. Pay the subscription, live somewhere that your taxes pay for fire service or take your chances.

 

[ripnbst]

I'll have to think about this some more, but my understanding (haven't read the initial story since it was originally posted) is that they didn't risk their lives to save the belongings, but that had there been a human life in danger they would have acted. That changes the equation a little bit, imo.

This is not an uncommon approach to any fire. If there is no one inside and its already ablaze when they show up why risk their lives for worldly possessions? That's what insurance is for. I think had he said "My daughter is in there" they would have acted. If a fireman were to be hurt or killed in the fire and they found out the guy lied he'd be in serious trouble.

 

[Twmaster]

As a former firefighter/EMT I can assure you if anybody was in danger those firefighters would have acted. It's likely they were on the scene to ensure other subscriber's homes were not damaged as in the event that started this thread.