November ballot will include Maple Valley Fire and Life measure, which failed in August

Maple Valley Fire and Life Safety will get one more shot at passing Proposition 1, thanks to pre-filing for the general election over the summer.

The levy, with 52 percent of the votes going against it, was defeated in the Aug. 19 primary election.

“The big message that we need to get out right now is that it did fail in August and it will be running again in the general election,” said Maple Valley Fire Chief Tim Lemon. “If it passes, then we’re solid in the budget, and if it doesn’t, then that’s a real clear message.”

If the proposition, which is informally known as a levy lid lift, passes in November, it will allow Maple Valley Fire (also known as Fire District 43) to restore its taxing level to $1.50 per $1,000 of assessed valuation. For a home that costs $350,000, the owner would pay an additional $38.50 per year toward the fire district, or $3.20 per month. Much of the fire district’s revenues come from property taxes.

Lemon said he discovered in the first week of September that the district would end up on the ballot again. The deadline to remove the levy from the general election was about a week prior to the primary, it turns out.

In the meantime, the district’s commissioners and Lemon have been discussing some of the reasons the levy failed the first time.

“There’s two messages I’ve gotten consistently from talking to folks out there,” Lemon said. “There are some that, with the economy the way it is and the increased assessed valuation, they just couldn’t see doing that at this time. The other half, more than half, were completely complacent about the vote. We had a variety of folks who just thought it would be easy for the fire department to get a simple majority and didn’t vote.”

Of the 21,882 registered voters in the district, 8,353 (38 percent) cast ballots.

Lemon said that the fact the vote was during the summer had an impact on the voter turnout, and with the significant interest in state and federal races, the levy could benefit from an anticipated higher voter turnout in November.

While the district gears up for another campaign, Lemon said, his staff is busy working on two budgets and “looking at what are the must-haves.”

“One would maintain our current levels and make the improvements demanded by the growth of the community,” he said. “The other budget is based on the revenue stream we currently have.”

The cost of diesel fuel for fire trucks has gone up 27 percent since last year and makes up a significant chunk of the department’s budget after paychecks are cut. The budget this year was $7.91 million.

If the levy doesn’t pass, the district will reduce the number of personnel on each shift. And when the fire trucks go out, they’ll do the best they can to conserve fuel.

Lemon said it is also likely that the department’s part-time fire inspectors would have to be cut, as well as community outreach Maple Valley Fire does during the year.

“When your budget’s running 87 percent to 90 percent personnel, there’s not much to cut in the bare essentials,” Lemon said. “The 1 percent (allowed increase) just isn’t doing it for us, especially when we have to live off 1 percent for two or three years.”

This is the fourth time since Initiative 747 passed in 2001 that Maple Valley Fire has put a levy lid lift on the ballot. If the one this year is approved, the plan is to not come back to the voters again for another six years, Lemon said. This is thanks to legislative changes that allow special taxing districts like Maple Valley Fire to set an inflationary factor.

Lemon said the fire district will make a more concerted effort to educate people about Proposition 1 – that it failed the first time, as well as what the levy will pay for if passed in November, Lemon explained. For one, taxes generated in District 43 stay in the district, and those revenues mean that it is a self-contained and self-sufficient fire department.

“This is the revenue stream that maintains us through the community demands,” Lemon said. “This is not a new tax. It is a continuation of an existing tax. If (voters) say yes, then we’re funded in 2009. And if they say no, then they’ve sent a clear message that they want us to live within our means.”

Staff writer Kris Hill can be reached at (425) 432-1209 (extension 5054) and khill@reporternewspapers.com