Northwest Fire District hoped the Ironwood Hotshots would be a moneymaker

On Tuesday the Northwest Fire District which serves the northwest metropolitan area of Tucson, Arizona announced they were disbanding their Ironwood Hotshot crew at the end of the 2014 wildland fire season. Various reasons for the decision were reported in the media, with representatives of the District quoted as saying it was mostly for financial considerations. John Hoellerich a firefighter on the Ironwood Hotshots who started a petition to retain the crew, said it was related to lawsuits filed against the Prescott Fire Department over the fatal Yarnell Hill Fire that killed 19 members of the Department’s Granite Mountain Hotshot crew.

Ironwood Hotshots
Ironwood Hotshots. Photo by Ironwood Hotshots.

When the concept of having a hotshot crew was sold to the Tucson community, one of the justifications was that the 20-person firefighting crew would make money for the district, or at least break even.

David Gephart, the District’s Finance Director, told Wildfire Today the crew is being disbanded for “financial and operational” reasons. He said one of the operational considerations is that the District has some vacant structural firefighting positions it needs to fill, and the seven permanent members of the crew will be offered those positions. Four of those seven have already been through the structural fire academy, while three have not but will be scheduled to receive the training.

When a firefighting resource, such as a hotshot crew or fire engine, from one agency helps to suppress a fire in another jurisdiction for an extended period of time, formal agreements usually stipulate that the lending agency is financially reimbursed for their expenses. The reimbursement amount is based on the crewperson hours worked. That rate is almost three times the actual hourly rate the District pays the firefighters, in order to cover other expenses related to the fire assignment. For example, the Prescott Fire Department was reimbursed for 95.5 percent of the total expenses of operating the Granite Mountain Hotshots in the 2012 fiscal year, according to an article in The Daily Courier.

Mr. Gephart provided figures for the fiscal years 2011 through 2013 showing that the operational expenses for the Ironwood Hotshots for that three year period were $7.3 million. They were reimbursed for $7.2 million, or, 98.6 percent of their costs.

Right now there is a positive balance in the Hotshots’ account of $1.2 million when considering payments the District expects to receive for fire assignments last year, Mr. Gephart said.

Ironwood Hotshots costs

We asked if the 200 other firefighters that the District employs were expected to generate their own funding, and Mr. Gephart said they were not.

He pointed out that there are other costs for maintaining the Hotshot crew that are not included above and are more difficult to put on a spread sheet, including overhead, indirect, capital needs, and IT expenses.

Since the crew came within one percent of being self-supporting, we asked why the Hotshots were created in the first place. Mr. Gephart said they expected the crew to make money for the District, or in a worst case, break even. He went on to say future costs will have a negative effect on the crew’s financial situation, such as a new requirement that the 13 seasonal firefighters have health insurance, and increases in the cost of pensions.

Typos, let us know HERE, and specify which article. Please read the commenting rules before you post a comment.

Author: Bill Gabbert

After working full time in wildland fire for 33 years, he continues to learn, and strives to be a Student of Fire.

12 thoughts on “Northwest Fire District hoped the Ironwood Hotshots would be a moneymaker”

  1. In terms of Federal crews versus this case, it’s a bit apples and oranges. There is big money in fire, potentially. And, if one of the driving reasons for starting the crew was money, which seems to be what the District say, then the District all of a sudden can see the huge potential liabilities. Making maybe a hundred thousand a year and then after 15-20 years potentially being on the hook for millions is bad business if you can’t insure in a cost-effective way. Apologies for potentially sounding crass, but since the District explicitly stated a profit motive I think looking at the downside is part of the profit/loss analysis.

    0
    0
  2. Sad to say but Plenty of government pork way above the level of Hotshot etc… that should be trimmed before any Shot crew gets disbanded if they want to attempt to save money. It’s high time folks in this country wake up and speak up and get rid of a bunch of the cushy useless positions in government that one person with their act together could do instead of 3-5 clowns just looking for a paycheck, benefits, and to lord over some percieved minions each day till retirement. For those that would loose that cushy job I say tough beans, buckle down, EARN a job that you can use your skills at and help anyone else you can that also wants to WORK at their job every day.

    0
    0
  3. I assume fuels mitigation, conservation and safety projects, and the occasional non-fire disaster response all count as productive non-fire use of crew resources. And some of that sort of work can maybe do double duty, for example as saw training for newer crew.

    Now an interesting question might be what sort of odd duties fire fighters have performed while recovering from injuries and unable to work fire but able to do light duty. Shuttling crew vehicles, campground duty, maintenance chores, liaison with private landowners, and who knows what else?

    0
    0
  4. Hot Shot crews give the tax payer their biggest bang for they’re buck! But only if they are utilized in a productive manner when not not engaged in fire suppression.

    0
    0
  5. It is worth noting that the Hotshot crews that are employed by the Federal land agancies are not expected to make money for their home units and are regulated in a way that they can not. These crews make up the largest group of Hotshots. These hotshots, smoke jumpers, engine crews, helitac crews, and wildland fire modules are simply federal employees hired to do a demanding job at the highest professional level without regard for the finacial benifit they bring to their home units. They tend to be the highest quality firefighters while costing the least of most resources on a fire.

    0
    0
    1. I agree, but their costs and benefits are diluted by the 330,000,000 folks in the US that pay their salaries: on a local fire district, there is a lot more scrutiny of the $$ spent on all functions, including a HGotshot Crew. Sounds like a local issue to me??

      0
      0
    2. The average IHC crew needs right around $800k a year to operate, based on not stepping foot on a single incident. This is regardless of being a federal crew, or non federal crew. Now once a crew starts accruing overtime, hazard, mileage, that cost will rise. Every program costs money, and the fed crews have an established budget set aside for their base operating costs. The smaller agencies do not have a budget set aside for these crews, so they in essence need to generate their own funding. This revenue would be either through fire suppression reimbursed funds, or project related funds. There will always be overhead costs associated with supporting a crew as well. Light bills, office space, IT costs, etc. Again smaller agencies see these overhead costs more than a large agency will.

      Fed crews are not expected to earn money, but the expectation is there that they will save the hit on their base budget by P code savings. We all know that P Code savings equates to money being able to be utilized to support other ailing budgets. So the support of other programs is there regardless of being a big or small agency.

      0
      0
      1. Federal hotshot crews cost a fire $5200 or $5400 per day. Well worth the money.

        0
        0
  6. Why would a district expect a hard working crew to be a “money maker”? This crew is not costing any one at Northwest a dime. In the last 6 years “finacial burden” has not even been reported.. These men and women work for ever dollar they earn and put money in fellow fire fighters pockets when they need fillers! They are feeding their families, making house payments, paying for college educations! Supporting loved ones! I do not believe this is a financial burden to Northwest. This is poor discussion making and a poor business move. The chief of northwest should be a questioned, so should the board! And aparently the accountant!

    0
    0
  7. Bill,
    First I must say this is a great article. While it looks like many other news outlets are willing to accept Northwest Fire’s statement that the crew is costing the local taxpayers money I can see you’re willing to ask questions and find out the truth. Correct me if I’m wrong, but according to your article once they collect the 1.2 million owed to them from the previous season they will actually show a positive balance of 1.1 million right? I can’t imagine it takes 1.1 million to offset the costs of doing paperwork, maintenance, and IT support for 22 people who use handtools and chainsaws to fight fire. Also, if the crew was started to make money then they are accomplishing their goal according to these numbers. Please continue to ask these good questions.

    0
    0
    1. Jesse, after the District receives the money owed to them for the crew’s fire assignments, they will have $1.2 million in the crew’s account if everything else stays the same.

      0
      0
  8. Quoting Bill, ” We asked if the 200 other firefighters that the District employs were expected to generate their own funding, and Mr. Gephart said they were not.”

    Bill, thank you for asking that question!

    0
    0

Comments are closed.