KP Fire Board Asks For Public Input, But Where Do They Stand?

Editor's note: This article has been corrected in two respects. The KPFD public survey will be available until March 31, not Feb. 28. The interlocal agreement contemplated between KPFD and Central Pierce Fire & Rescue in 2021 could have been provisional or permanent (see sidebar: The Future). 

The Key Peninsula Fire District Board of Commissioners has asked the community to weigh in on critical issues facing the district — funding, property acquisitions, spending priorities, and the future — through a survey available on the KPFD website and elsewhere until the end of March. The public’s input will be discussed by the commissioners at a town hall March 8 from 6 to 8 p.m. at the KP Civic Center. 

But where do the commissioners themselves stand? 

Key Peninsula News asked each of the five board members — Shawn Jensen, John “Pat” Kelly, Stan Moffett, Cambria Queen and Randy Takehara — the same four questions on these topics. Their responses offer insight into their priorities and approaches to the district’s challenges. 

Do you support putting another levy before voters? If so, what specific changes would you advocate for to increase the likelihood it passes? If not, how do you propose funding essential services without it?

JENSEN: Yes, I support putting another levy before the voters to provide funding necessary to maintain current career firefighter positions for staffing three 24/7 stations. Rather than attempting another M&O levy renewal in 2025, I’ve suggested that we run an EMS levy lid lift. With our current permanent EMS levy in its sixth year, when levy lid lifts are typically run, this would be the year to ask the voters this question as it would provide funding similar to the M&O while only requiring a simple majority for passage. 

KELLY: I am advocating for a levy lid lift next year to ensure we can maintain our current (reduced) staffing levels to avoid laying off firefighters next year. I am confident this levy lid lift will pass, as it requires only a 50% voter approval. I would, however, like to discontinue the use of the M&O levy as a means to regularly fund our budget. I believe, to be successful, an M&O levy should be used as a supplement to fund a specific project. Voters want specifics so they can hold us accountable for following through, especially if there is a lack of trust of the board. That is how you get a supermajority. 

MOFFETT: I support putting an EMS levy lid lift before the voters this year. We (currently collect) approximately 33 cents per $1,000 of assessed (property) valuation. We are authorized to collect up to 50 cents per $1,000. With the failure last year of the M&O levy, this lid lift for 2026 is much needed. Unfortunately, nobody, me included, likes paying additional taxes. However, to keep abreast of rising costs, the fire district needs additional funds to maintain its services to the community. Moreover, on the Key Peninsula, where we have few businesses to help shoulder the burden, almost all support comes from individual property owners since the district does not collect any county, state or federal dollars. If we do not pass an EMS lid lift this year, we may have to lay off some of our firefighters/EMTs/paramedics next year. 

QUEEN: The board has begun hosting quarterly town hall meetings in the hopes of getting more information out to the public. It is my hope that the board continues to do so and provides the community with as much accurate information as possible. With that being said, I do believe we will need to put some form of funding option on the ballot for the voters to consider. The type depends on the results of (our) survey. It is my personal hope that we receive the community’s feedback prior to our next town hall so we can determine the best course of action to take and what type of ballot measure we should consider. I believe this ballot measure is necessary to allow the district to, at a minimum, provide the services currently being provided. My hope is that we could increase those services, though. 

TAKEHARA: There are several funding streams. As far as floating another M&O levy, no. The public has spoken. We are able to fund essential services as is. Meaning the citizens get what they want. They understood that not passing would mean cutting back from 2024 levels, so we will move forward with the funding we have, and the fire chief and his team will staff and equip the best they can with the funds available. 

In 2021, the district spent nearly $2 million on three parcels of property in Key Center. After the decision to list the Calahan property for sale, what are your intentions for the remaining parcel, rental house and pasture (Olson Estate)?

 JENSEN: I feel that planning for the long-term future of the 52-year-old Station No. 46 (Key Center headquarters) is prudent and responsible. Previous direction from the community has been to maintain a fire district presence in Key Center, where suitable property is in short supply. The two Olson parcels purchased in 2021 provide a good location for a future Station 46, with sufficient space to include administrative, training and community spaces all behind the commercial frontage on Key Pen Highway. 

KELLY: I would like to see the Olson property sold for a huge profit, but I don’t think it is likely. If the community supports it, I prefer to find a less controversial piece of property and start the process over, this time with transparency and input from citizens. I would prioritize an improved training facility for our firefighters before a new administration building. I cannot approve building new firefighter residential spaces when we have empty residential spaces at the Wright-Bliss station. 

MOFFETT: I personally believe the district needs to retain the two remaining parcels it purchased in 2021 (the Olson Estate) for future use in building out a new headquarters and training facility. I believe we should make the house property rental-ready and lease it out until such time as we put a bond before the community to finance a new facility. If a bond were submitted and approved in, say, 2028, design, architectural and engineering would probably put construction at around 2030 to 2031. 

QUEEN: At this time, no decision has been made regarding the (Olson) parcels. Again, I want to see what the community wants before deciding anything on that. We need to decide something soon, though. 

TAKEHARA: Long-term planning for the parcels has not changed. However, I think there will be more discussions on the matter of whether to rebuild the headquarters building on those parcels or sell them and move out of Key Center. I am still in favor of, at some point, moving forward in Key Center because it’s the most central to the entire KP, and it seems residents want a FD presence in Key Center. The part that maybe people do not realize is that the current FD building in Key Center is not a viable solution for the long term, nor is the property itself. The structure is past its useful life, and the parcel it’s on is too small to support a new station with the current and forecasted needs. 

Given the district’s financial constraints, difficult trade-offs must be made down the road. If you had to prioritize, would you focus on improving conditions for non-fire-fighting employees, hiring more firefighters/paramedics, upgrading equipment, or improving facilities? Why does this take precedence, and how would you justify it to the community? 

JENSEN: Improving facilities is a multi-year process that we should always be aware of and planning for. Improving working conditions and ensuring required ongoing training is maintained is equally important to retaining the high-quality people that we are blessed with. Hiring additional firefighters/paramedics, especially in sufficient quantity to staff a fourth station, brings significant annual costs that I don’t know if the community is able to financially support. 

KELLY: There are three essential needs for a fire department: firefighters, equipment and fire stations. Those are my priorities in that order. 

MOFFETT: It is a fact that to continue to provide the community’s much needed services, the voters must continue to authorize funding the general levy and EMS levy. As the population continues to increase, we will need to provide updated facilities and equipment from which to operate. Obviously, balancing all these current and future needs with the community’s ability and willingness to fund is a difficult task. It is always difficult to put more emphasis on one need versus another when, really, all are important. Yet, we as individuals must do this daily in our own lives and budgets. However, to my mind, all of us that live here, in a remote area of the county, rely heavily on the services of our fire department and we must ensure that its needs are met. 

QUEEN: My first focus is to ensure our firefighters and EMTs have the tools and equipment that allow them to do their job in a safe and successful manner. Whether that means repairing existing apparatus, replacing equipment, or ensuring our crews have working oxygen tanks, then that should be the first focus. The second most important thing, in my opinion, is to increase the number of firefighters and EMTs, either through increasing the volunteer program or, if financially feasible, hiring additional full-time crew members. This also allows the district to provide for the community through possibly manning more stations, reducing fatigue of the crews, and limiting overtime hours. 

TAKEHARA: I think a little of all the above is prudent, but the language of the question is deceiving. “Improvements” and “upgrades” are off the table. However, there are needed replacements that will have to occur. For example, we are not looking to upgrade any apparatus, but we need to replace several to keep us able to respond reliably as we do now. The HQ rebuild wouldn’t so much be to help conditions as much as get them out of the current building before it’s unusable. Hiring line personnel is always at the top of the list, but we can only do so much to keep within the budget. I feel one problem we are faced with is the fact that KPFD is a small, rural fire district near several departments, both city and large districts that have much different budgets than we do. We will continue to be dedicated to carry as large of a roster and keep as many fire stations open as possible with the resources we have. 

What is your long-term vision for the fire district, and how will you pay for it?

JENSEN: Being a rural fire district with minimal commercial and industrial properties, we rely heavily on residential property taxes to fund the district’s operations. This puts a significant burden on KP homeowners, many of whom already feel their taxes are too high. While it can be difficult to make the case that budget challenges homeowners struggle with are the same challenges the fire district faces, the fact remains that inflation and increasing regulatory impacts drive fire and emergency services costs higher each year. With a growing population and increasing call volumes, this district may soon find itself unable to provide sufficient resources to meet these needs independently. 

KELLY: An improved training center on the Key Peninsula would improve the service we provide our citizens and decrease costs, mostly overtime, to train out-of-district. I would like to see all of our current stations manned with both career and volunteer firefighters. I would like to improve our service on Herron Island. I would pay for the everyday operations and maintenance with better financial stewardship and cutting the overtime to the absolute bare minimum. Any new facilities will require the taxpayers to approve a bond. Period. 

MOFFETT: Long term, I think we need to continue hiring top quality individuals who are willing to put their life on the line in service to the community. We need to ensure funding for them, the facilities they use, and the equipment they work with. I think we must continue to put aside funds for engines, medic and support vehicles, but I also feel we need to have a vision of where we will be 10, 20 or 50 years down the road. This requires looking at replacing our outdated headquarters/training facility. If and when that facility is replaced, the current facility may then be sold for future business activity in the Key Center corridor. This decision will ultimately fall to the voters of the district. 

QUEEN: My long-term vision is for the district and the community to come back together as one. If we all take time to truly listen to each other and consider all positions and needs, I believe we can reach an understanding that will allow everyone to succeed so the community and district can grow together. 

TAKEHARA: Long-term vision is to continue to grow the fire district and staff as many stations as possible with safety always in mind. I would love to get to a point that the Wright-Bliss station is open. I’d love to get all the recommended seismic upgrades done to the stations, as well as replacing the Key Center station and training area. I see us getting back on track with our apparatus replacement fund so we can get back to paying as we go and establish a lifecycle replacement program for the engines and medic units. All that is the vision of simply delivering the best service to the public as possible.