After failing to pass both a bond measure and tax increase during the previous election, the Warrenton Fire Protection District will return to the ballot in an effort to pass one of their funding measures on Aug. 6.
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active subscription, or you are a print subscriber who had access to our previous wesbite, then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you have not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
If you are a current print subscriber and did not have a user account on our previous website, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
After failing to pass both a bond measure and tax increase during the previous election, the Warrenton Fire Protection District will return to the ballot in an effort to pass one of their funding measures on Aug. 6.
The $10 million bond issue, Prop L, would increase the district’s current tax request by 24 cents per $100 of assessed value. If approved, the funds would be used to repair and replace aging equipment and renovate Station 1 to include living quarters according to Fire Chief Anthony Hayeslip.
“It’s going to be paid off in 20 years, or sooner,” said Hayeslip. “But at the latest 20, you can’t go any longer than that. Our plan is to fortify our equipment and convert the existing building, station one, to have living quarters to prepare for the next phase of what we need to do with our district.”
That 24 cent increase would bring the district’s total tax request to roughly 68 cents per $100 of assessed value, although depending on the bond terms the district is able to acquire pending the passage of the ballot measure it may be lower.
“We have estimated that at the highest point, it would be 24 cents, with the upcoming assessment year it’s potentially going to be lower than that, because as the assessment goes up, the amount we need to pay the payments every year goes down, but we have to put the worst case scenario on there,” Hayeslip said.
He said as the district’s costs have continued to increase without commensurate increases in revenue the district has had to forgo replacing aging equipment as their budget is eaten up by other costs like payroll and insurance.
In fiscal 2023, those two line items alone accounted for 66% of the district’s total expenses, with payroll and benefits taking up a whopping $1.012 million, or 59% of their total expenses.
The measure requires a four-sevenths majority, or 57.14%, to pass. It narrowly missed that mark during the April election falling just over a quarter of a percent short of passage.
Hayeslip said he hoped that since it was so close to passage they would be able to move the measure forward this time.
In previous years the district has faced opposition to tax increases as they have failed to pass similar measures 10 separate times at the ballot box since their last bond issue passed in 2001.
Previously, Hayeslip had said that should they pass the bond measure they would then move forward with the tax increase as well at one of the following elections. He has since walked that statement back and said the board will reevaluate after they see the results of the Aug. 6 election.
“The board has not made any decisions towards that. So right now that’s up in the air,” Hayeslip said. “They kind of made a commitment that these two things go hand in hand, and we needed both, but seeing as we were so close on the bond they wanted to focus on that.”
