There is currently a strained relationship between the City of Alamosa Fire Department and the Alamosa Fire Protection District that is causing communication issues, creating mistrust and could lead to problems with fire response among the largely volunteer fire crews if not resolved, according to a consultants’ report that examined the working relationship between the fire agencies.
While the city pays for the salary of its police chief and two deputy chiefs, the Alamosa Fire Protection District covers the majority of other costs to run the municipal fire department; it also covers the costs of the Mosca-Hooper Volunteer Fire Department which is responsible for fire protection in that area of Alamosa County.
The Alamosa Fire Protection District is a special district authorized by voters to collect a property tax via a mill levy that then pays for fire protection both in the city of Alamosa, East Alamosa, and unincorporated Alamosa County. It has a five-member board led by Greg Higel and has called for a special board work session on Feb. 2 to address the report.
Under the district formation is the city of Alamosa fire chief, in this case Bill Stone who’s been on the job for 19 months after replacing longtime fire chief Don Chapman. A problem, the consultant report points out, is that the city fire chief reports directly to both the Alamosa Fire Protection District board and to the city manager of Alamosa.
This has led to communication problems and a lack of planning among Alamosa Fire and Mosca-Hooper Fire, among other concerns, according to the report.
“From an external standpoint, the relationship between the ACFPD, the City of Alamosa, and the AFD Chief appeared to be a challenging path to navigate. This sentiment was repeatedly reinforced during the study, as (on paper) the Chief reports to the District Board about matters within their area but reports to the Alamosa City Manager as his direct supervisor,” noted the consultants in their executive summary.
They went on: “A position structured in a manner that it answers to two different supervising structures, that ultimately will have different expectations for the services provided for the department, is designed to fail. Historically, this relationship has worked well enough, but there was clearly strain occurring based on interviews discussing the past few years.”
“Given the population affected and the potential for limited funding to be available, it would benefit all the organizations involved to have a well-detailed and public plan.”
Alamosa County Fire Protection District Staffing and Operational Analysis Final Report
The fire protection district and city of Alamosa paid the Public Consulting Group LLC out of Boston to study the structure between the Alamosa Fire Protection District and Alamosa Fire Department and offer recommendations on how to cure the current problems.
The report is the subject of a work session by the fire protection district board on Tuesday, April. 2. The public meeting is at 6:30 p.m. at the Alamosa County Commissioners Chambers and because it is a board work session, there is no public comment period.
The consultants noted that operationally and financially there were “no significant issues identified throughout the course of the study.”
“It should be noted that all organizations appear to be striving to provide what they deem to be appropriate levels of service for the public that they serve. Whether it is the desire for MHVFD (Mosca-Hooper) to provide medical first response, or the City to potentially have paid staffing, each department has a different opinion of what level of service is currently needed within the County today. Compounding the strain between the involved organizations, no verbal or written strategic or master plans could be located. Given the population affected and the potential for limited funding to be available, it would benefit all the organizations involved to have a well-detailed and public plan.”
Stone, in an interview with Alamosa Citizen, said he was well aware of the reporting structure he signed up for when he was hired in September 2022 to replace the long-serving Chapman. The report, he said, speaks for itself and should be the basis for any decisions that are made toward improving fire protection in Alamosa County.
“I think my opinion would obviously be biased, but theirs is objective and they’re standing from the outside saying these things are working well and these things aren’t working so well. So I think a lot of the direction probably should be derived from what was observed by professional outside parties and what they wrote,” he said.
He acknowledged the challenges around communication with the Alamosa Fire Protection District Board and Mosca-Hooper Fire, which the consultants make a strong point of in the report.
Not only did Chapman retire after 39 years with the fire department, but so did his longtime lieutenant Tony Bobicki, both native to Alamosa with longstanding relationships in the volunteer fire ranks and with the Alamosa Fire Protection District.
“The sentiment expressed by each department suggested that they would be more comfortable working with departments outside of their County than working with each other.”
Alamosa County Fire Protection District Staffing and Operational Analysis Final Report
“There have been greater attempts to communicate and until this point … there were different players and everyone kind of knew each other a lot better. I’m an outsider and come from a different place,” Stone said. “So there’s that warm-up period of how do we communicate with each other? Like I said in the beginning, there’s great opportunities to increase that and enhance that. And I think we’re on a path toward that.”
The consultants group made a series of recommendations on how to be organized but in reality, said only two made sense: Maintaining status quo but improving communication, or removing the Alamosa Fire Department as part of the fire protection district and entering into a contract instead that pays Alamosa Fire for services it renders in providing fire protection within the city limits.
“The most important change is that each department should actively strive to improve communications with the other. These communication efforts should include the written documentation provided to each other, as well as the simple verbal communication each agency representative has with the other. Any other recommendations, planning, changes, etc., will likely continue to struggle until all the organizations are on the same page,” the consultants wrote.
The report went on: “This does not mean that each department must have the same expectations for service, but it does mean that each department should understand what those expectations are by the other department. The sentiment expressed by each department suggested that they would be more comfortable working with departments outside of their County than working with each other.”
Read the full Alamosa County Fire Protection District Staffing and Operational Analysis Final Report HERE. It covers everything from staffing levels of Alamosa Fire and Mosca-Hooper Fire – which it notes are adequate – to call volumes and response times of the two fire departments.
“Mosca-Hooper Volunteer Fire Department and the City of Alamosa Fire are the two primary fire departments in the County. It is important to note that regardless of how separate the departments may seem, they both function under the ACFPD umbrella in the current configuration throughout the county,” the consultants wrote.
“While it is a possibility that the two departments could operate in their respective silos, without the mutual aid of their partner agency, there is a greater chance that a large incident will dictate the use of personnel/apparatus from both agencies. Ensuring the continuity of fire protection for the community should trump any issues between the two departments. The two areas of pertinent communication recommendations are in the areas of planning and organizational structure.”