Fire Service Delivery Report — Department of Commerce (December 1, 2023)
Summary
Fire Service Delivery Report to the Legislature, dated December 1, 2023, from the Department of Commerce Research and Development Services, pursuant to Chapter 475, Laws of 2023 (SB 5187). The Fire Service Delivery Workgroup found that the State Fire Marshal's Office (SFMO) cannot maintain adequate levels of response and service without adequate and sustained funding. It reports that approximately 97% of the SFMO's policy level budget requests over the last 10 years failed to receive funding, and that local fire departments pay 35% to 55% more than the SFMO for equivalent positions. The recommendations include a roadmap workgroup to study an independent SFMO agency, a legislative liaison, a Fire Service Advisory Committee, wage parity, and funding for the SFMO's unfunded mandates.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
Cite this document
“Fire Service Delivery Report — Department of Commerce (December 1, 2023).”
Original at app.leg.wa.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2023-fire-service-delivery-reportfinal-5f09d0a7-09bb-47d0-b858-5ec19b031e8f/
, SHA-256 5ea60c5b6627a661e99fdf875d3edb904ad85d7bd6bfdf9b0b6d4ea1b7e55215.Full text
Fire Service Delivery
Report
Pursuant to Chapter 475, Laws of 2023 (SB 5187)
December 1, 2023
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES Report to the Legislature
Director Mike Fong
v3.4
Acknowledgments For people with disabilities, this report is available on
request in other formats. To submit a request, please
call 360-725-4000 (TTY 360-586-0772)
Fire Service Delivery Workgroup Members
Dennis Lawson, President, Washington State
Council of Firefighters
Bud Sizemore, Legislative Liaison, Washington
State Council of Firefighters
Andrew Schaffran, Legislative Chairman,
Washington State fire Firefighters' Association
Roger Ferris, Executive Director, Washington Fire
Commissioners Association
Ryan Spiller, Lobbyist, Washington Fire
Commissioners Association
Steve Wright, Executive Director, Washington Fire
Chiefs
Dylan Doty, President, Doty & Associates,
Washington Fire Chiefs
Kathleen Harmon, Office Manager, Washington Fire
Chiefs
Washington State Department of Commerce
Alice Zillah, Managing Director, Research and
Development Services
Kate Fernald, Research Analyst, Research and
Development Services
Washington State Department of Commerce
Alice Zillah, Managing Director, Research and
Development Services
(360) 725-5035
Alice.Zillah@commerce.wa.gov
Local Government Division
1011 Plum St. SE
P.O. Box 42525
Olympia, WA 98504-2525
www.commerce.wa.gov
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 2
2.0
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 9
Findings .................................................................................................................................................... 14
Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................... 24
Conclusions............................................................................................................................................... 27
Appendix A: (086) Fire Service Training Account ........................................................................................ 28
Appendix B: Budget requests ..................................................................................................................... 29
Appendix C: Regional Direct Delivery Program, 2023-25 Decision Package ................................................. 31
Appendix D: SFMO cost estimates for Recommendations D, F, G, and H ...................................................... 36
Appendix E: Fire Insurance Premium Tax distributions, 2014-2023 ............................................................. 38
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 3
Executive Summary
Overview
The Washington State Fire Marshal's Office (SFMO) plays a vital role in public safety. Nested within the
Washington State Patrol, the SFMO provides premiere, live-fire training to volunteer, recruit and career
firefighters at the Firefighter Training Academy, assuring that Washington's firefighters are well prepared when
responding to emergency life-and-death situations. The SFMO also coordinates and oversees the statewide
response when substantial natural disasters overwhelm local resources such as wildfires, global pandemics,
hazardous liquid and gas pipeline accidents, energy and stored energy explosions, large-scale earthquakes,
flooding and other natural disasters.
The SFMO has a broad responsibility to ensure fire and life safety for people in Washington including:
Mobilizing the statewide response to significant emergency events that exhaust local resources
Training basic to advanced firefighters to nationally recognized standards
Providing hazmat training to all first responders statewide
Conducting fire and life safety inspections in childcare, health care, and residential care facilities
Issuing licenses and certifications for industries including fireworks, cigarettes and fire sprinkler systems
Collecting and appropriately transmitting fire report information such as fire fatalities to the National Fire
Incident Reporting System, and
Investigating fires that are criminal, suspected, or undetermined cause fires
The 2023-25 State Operating Budget (Chapter 475, Laws of 2023 (SB 5187, Section 133(3)) established the
Fire Service Delivery Workgroup (Workgroup) and required the following members:
Executive Director of the Washington Fire Chiefs as chair the workgroup;
President of the Washington State Council of Firefighters;
Executive Director of the Washington Fire Commissioners Association; and
President of the Washington State Fire Fighters' Association.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) was required to staff the workgroup, which was directed to
evaluate existing funding and service delivery models of fire service functions.
Key findings
When a fire starts, people in Washington trust that fire service professionals will have the resources they need
to keep residents safe. However, the Workgroup's evaluation found that the SFMO cannot maintain adequate
levels of response and service to Washington's communities without adequate and sustained funding for fire
services.
To evaluate fire service funding and delivery, the Workgroup conducted outreach to partner organizations
statewide. This effort included convening seven work sessions, multiple meetings with numerous agencies,
and one statewide stakeholder meeting that included the SFMO. Through this collaboration, the workgroup
identified six significant challenges to fire service funding and delivery:
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 4
The SFMO and its fire services have been underfunded. Approximately 97% of its policy level budget
requests 1 over the last 10 years failed to receive funding. This dynamic jeopardizes the sustainability of fire
services and the integrity of the existing fire service delivery model.
Local fire departments pay 35% to 55% more than the SFMO for equivalent positions 2 resulting in multiple,
long-term staff vacancies in the SFMO.
Rural and economically vulnerable firefighters experience disproportionate barriers to accessing
firefighting training, increasing risk of disproportionate negative impacts to the communities, firefighters
and the natural environment in those areas.
The All-Risk Mobilization Program does not have adequate staffing for the mobilization mission for
statewide emergency response.
The SFMO does not provide four statutory mandates because they are not funded:
• fire investigation services,
• hazmat preparedness,
• inspections, and
• smoke detector enforcement.
The SFMO's outdated technology results in unnecessary time and labor-intensive processes and
procedures, which compounds with the current staff vacancy rate. The SFMO received $408,000 to
complete a technology modernization feasibility study in 2024, which would inform budget requests for the
identified improvements.
Recommendations
The recommendations that follow aim to stabilize SFMO's activities in both the short-term, through adequate
funding for the staff, training and all statutory functions, and in the long-term through an intentional agency
structure. The Workgroup believes that the SFMO must be well-positioned to compete for scarce resources as
an independent peer agency, not within a state agency that has a separate critical mission.
A) Creating a roadmap workgroup to study and define the necessary steps for an independent SFMO agency.
B) Creating a new legislative liaison position solely dedicated to representing fire service stakeholders and the
SFMO.
C) Establishing the Fire Service Advisory Committee to work with the legislative liaison, the SFMO,
Washington State Patrol, the Office of Financial Management and the Governor's Office. The committee
will evaluate, educate and advocate for fire service funding and policy needs, and work towards
establishing an independent agency for the SFMO.
D) Sustaining SFMO recruitment and retention by enabling wage parity for employee salaries to be
competitive with local fire jurisdictions’ salaries, 3
E) Revise civilian staff hiring policies at the WSP that narrow the pool of eligible candidates for
noncommissioned SFMO positions.
F) Allocating adequate funding, including additional staff capacity, to six state firefighting training programs.
G) Allocating adequate funding to the All-Risk Mobilization Program for six additional personnel that will
enhance the state's ability to respond to emergencies.
1 A policy level budget requests represent funding requests outside of mandatory caseload and are for expenditures that change
discretionary workload, the nature and scope of services, or alternative strategies and outcomes
2 Washington State Office of Financial Management, “2022 Washington State Employees Compensation Survey Report,” Sept. 27, 2023,
https://ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/shr/CompensationAndJobClasses/Salary%20Surveys/2022WSECS/2022_WSECS_State_
Report_04-2022.pdf
3 RCW 43.43.380 for Washington State Patrol’s Troopers and Sergeants' salaries establishes model salary policy.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 5
H) Providing adequate funding for the SFMO's four unfunded mandates including fire investigations.
I) Consider the SFMO's technology modernization study’s recommendations for improvement.
Table 1 provides a summary of the Workgroup's findings, recommendations and anticipated outcomes to
improve the future of fire service funding and delivery. Appendix D includes the SFMO's budget estimates for
recommendations D, F, G and H. If adopted, the workgroup believes the SFMO will have the resources they
need to address all hazards that threaten Washington's people and environment.
Figure 1: Fire Service Delivery Workgroup Recommendations
B./C. State-Level Advocacy D. Wage Parity
Establish the Fire Service Revise SFMO’s salary
Advisory Committee and a and hiring policies to
new legislative liaison solely achieve wage parity
dedicated to the SFMO with local fire agencies
A. Roadmap
Create a roadmap E. Hiring policy
workgroup to study and Revise WSP staff
define the necessary hiring policies that
steps for standing up narrow the pool of
an independent SFMO
agency
2024 noncommissioned
SFMO positions.
Fire Service
Goals
I. Technology F. Firefighter
Consider the Training
technology Enable sustainable
modernization firefighter training
study’s programs, including
recommendations additional staff
for improvement capacity, to provide
(2024) equitable access and
H. Mandates meet firefighter
Fund the
G. Mobilization Staffing training demand
Enable six new mobilization
SFMO's
positions to adequately
unfunded
staff statewide emergency
statutory
response
requirements
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 6
Table 1: Fire service funding and delivery findings, recommendations and outcomes
Findings Recommendations Anticipated outcomes
A. While responsible for protecting life and A. Washington should work toward A. Bolster the future of people's life and
property from fire and hazardous establishing an independent agency for the safety services by creating a roadmap to
materials, the structure of the State Fire State Fire Marshal’s Office (SFMO) to stand up an independent agency for the
Marshal’s Office does not allow the direct provide the autonomy and flexibility SFMO.
decision-making necessary to prioritize fire required to meet their responsibilities, and
services. Over the last 10 years, only 3.4% the expectations Washington residents
of the SFMO's policy level budget requests have for fire service. This may be achieved
were funded, while the Fire Service by creating a roadmap workgroup to study
Training Account's year-end balance and define the steps necessary for
declined $6.2 million over the last 12 years standing up an independent SFMO agency.
due to insufficient funding 4.
B. The State Fire Marshal’s Office does not B. Establish and allocate necessary B. Increase legislative attention and
have a legislative liaison responsible for funding from the operating budget for a support for state fire service budget
developing, advancing and advocating for legislative liaison dedicated solely to requests and policy changes.
fire service legislative priorities. representing the needs of fire services.
C. Fire service providers’ ability to meet C. Establish the Fire Service Advisory C. Provide the opportunity for statewide
and discuss fire service needs is critical to Committee to evaluate, educate and fire service stakeholders to meet, discuss
evaluating, educating and advocating for advocate for fire service needs. and advise a SFMO’s legislative liaison, the
fire service funding and policy changes. State Fire Marshal’s Office and
Monitor if fire service funding and policy Washington State Patrol about fire service
needs are addressed by identifying funding and policy needs.
timelines in which to accomplish key
funding and policy deliverables. Continuously work toward establishing an
independent agency for the State Fire
Marshal’s Office.
D. Local fire departments pay 35% to 55% D. Increase the SFMO employee salaries to D. Address pay competitiveness, reduce
more than the SFMO for equivalent be competitive with local fire jurisdictions’ staff vacancies, and achieve salary parity
positions 5 and require less invasive salaries for equivalent positions. Model with local fire jurisdictions.
background checks. Consequently, the salary policy was recently established in
SFMO struggles to recruit and retain RCW 43.43.380 for Washington State
employees. SFMO reports 83% of part-time Patrol’s troopers and sergeants. The
Fire Training positions, 20% of full-time Fire recommendation is to establish a similar
Training positions, and 17% of full-time statute for those within the SFMO.
Prevention positions are vacant as of
October 2023. Appendix D, Table 9 provides the SFMO's
cost estimate for all Deputy State Fire
Marshals' wage parity.
E. The SFMO is housed under the WSP. E. Identify and enact appropriate policy to E. Increase the SFMO ability to fully staff
Consequently, noncommissioned SFMO align background checks for their programs by removing overly
employees, including trainers, training noncommissioned SFMO employees with stringent barriers for noncommissioned
support, and maintenance supervisors, go the background checks used by local fire SFMO positions.
through more stringent background checks jurisdictions.
than local fire jurisdictions’ employees.
This significantly hinders the SFMO’s
ability to recruit and retain
noncommissioned staff. With reduced
staff, the SFMO must offer a reduced
number of firefighter trainings.
4 Washington State Patrol's Budget Management Office's data is included in Appendix A and Appendix B of this report.
5 Washington State Office of Financial Management, “2022 Washington State Employees Compensation Survey Report,” Sept. 27, 2023,
https://ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/shr/CompensationAndJobClasses/Salary%20Surveys/2022WSECS/2022_WSECS_State_
Report_04-2022.pdf
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 7
Findings Recommendations Anticipated outcomes
From January to September 2023, WSP
reports they lost 1,900+ applicants for
civilian positions solely for using marijuana
within the past 12 months. More people
may not apply because they see the
marijuana standard and self-screen out.
F. Inadequate funding for firefighter F. Enable sustainable firefighter training F. Create equitable access to firefighter
training creates unequal access to training programs, including additional staff training opportunities and reduce risk of
opportunities, risking disproportionate capacity, for all state firefighting training disproportionate negative impacts to rural
negative impacts in rural and economically programs. This includes: Firefighter 1 and and economically vulnerable communities.
vulnerable areas that experience 2 Training, Hazardous Materials Training,
disproportionate barriers to accessing Regional Direct Delivery Training, the
firefighter training. 6 The Washington State Firefighter Apprenticeship Program,
Fire Fighter Joint Apprenticeship and Firefighter Professional Development
Training Committee currently has 19 fire Certifications, and Firefighter Training
departments representing an estimated Reimbursement.
450 new apprentices per year that are on a
waiting list because they are unable to Appendix D, Table 10 provides the SFMO's
participate in the state program due to lack cost estimate to fully fund all SFMO
of funding. training programs.
Appendix C illustrates a recent and related
request.
G. One FTE is dedicated to mobilization G. Allocate funding to the All-Risk G. Ensure that the state is adequately
(MOBE). One part-time position manages Mobilization Program for six additional prepared to respond to a disaster of
training. Due to critically understaffing the personnel: one Chief Deputy State Fire unprecedented size and destruction, or a
All-Risk Mobilization Program, people's Marshal, three Deputy State Fire Marshals, significant emergency event such as a
safety and the natural environment’s health one Information Technology Applications pandemic, wildfire, earthquake or tsunami.
is in jeopardy during significant, year-round Development – Journey Level, and one
emergency events such as hazardous gas Fiscal Technician 3.
pipeline accidents, substantial wildfires or
large-scale earthquakes. 7 Appendix D, Table 12 provides the SFMO's
cost estimate for six mobilization
personnel.
H. The SFMO does not provide four H. Fund the SFMO's unfunded statutory H. Investigate fires, identify hazards,
statutory mandates because they are not requirements including: pinpoint dangerous practices and prevent
funded, including fire investigations. The - fire investigation services (RCW future fires by providing regular
unfunded responsibilities compromise 43.44.050) investigations, inspections and
preventative efforts to reduce fire - hazmat accidents (RCW 43.44.130) enforcement.
occurrences and fire impacts, ultimately - enforcing smoke detectors (RCW
compromising community and 43.44.110)
environmental safety. - inspecting and enforcing building code
requirements (RCW 19.27.730)
Appendix D, Table 11 provides the SFMO's
cost estimate to provide investigations.
I. The SFMO’s technology modernization I. When completed, consider opportunities I. Improve efficiency, reduce costs, expand
feasibility study is currently underway. The to implement and support the technology training, and strengthen cybersecurity and
SFMO’s current processes are out-of-date, modernization feasibility study’s data protection.
not within best practices, are heavily reliant recommendations.
on paper, require in-person instruction, and
do not maximize resources.
6 The SFMO reports one person staffs the Regional Direct Delivery training. They train firefighters that are unable travel to North Bend.
7 Mobilization reports their allocated staff decreased to 1.5 FTEs 14 years ago due to a General Fund – State reduction that was never
restored. The 1.5 FTEs assigned to the program has not changed even as the program’s average number of incidents per year has
tripled from 5.2 incidents to 17.1 incidents per fire season, and the average duration of each incident has increased by 148%.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 8
Introduction
Authorizing legislation
The Fire Service Delivery Workgroup (Workgroup) was established by Chapter 475, Laws of 2023 (SB 5187).
The workgroup was directed to evaluate existing funding and service delivery models for fire services provided
by the State Fire Marshal's Office:
Sec. 916. (1) The fire service delivery work group is established.
(2) The executive director of the Washington fire chiefs or their designee must chair the work group. The work group
is composed of the following additional members who serve without compensation or reimbursement for expenses:
(a) The president of the Washington state council of firefighters or the president's designee;
(b) The executive director of the Washington fire commissioners association or the director's designee;
(c) The president of the Washington state fire fighters' association or the president's designee.
(3) Staff support for the work group must be provided by the department of commerce.
(4) The work group must evaluate existing funding and service delivery models of fire service functions including, but
not limited to:
(a) Fire service training and certifications;
(b) Apprenticeships;
(c) Risk mobilization;
(d) Fire prevention;
(e) Inspections and plan review;
(f) Data collection;
(g) Building codes and fire sprinkler and monitoring systems; and
(h) Fireworks and fire safe cigarettes.
(5) The work group must report its findings and recommendations for the future delivery of these functions to the
legislature and the governor by December 1, 2023. The work group may also convene a fire service summit to
accomplish the goals of this section.
The Workgroup conducted seven work sessions, worked with multiple agencies to get fire service data, and
hosted one statewide stakeholder meeting to prepare this report and meet the requirements of the proviso.
The workgroup collaborated with Commerce to conduct the meetings, research, evaluations and
recommendations.
Subject matter experts
The workgroup and Commerce collaborated with subject matter experts to gather necessary data that would
allow the workgroup to evaluate fire service funding and delivery models.
Table 2: Subject matter experts consulted
Name Title
Jason Ashley Captain, Human Resource Division of Washington State Patrol
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 9
Name Title
John Batiste Chief, Washington State Patrol
Daniel Berlant California State Fire Marshal, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Candice Bock Director of Government Relations, Association of Washington Cities
Mario Buono Budget Manager, Washington State Patrol
Lonnie Click Chief, Benton County Fire Protection District #1
Chad Cross Washington State Fire Marshal, Washington State Fire Marshal's Office
David Kokot Executive, Washington State Association of Fire Marshals
Matt Doumit HR & Labor Relations Policy Analyst, Association of Washington Cities
Yvonne Ellison Budget Management Analyst, Washington State Patrol
Sheila Gall General Counsel, Association of Washington Cities
Melissa Gannie Assistant State Fire Marshal, Washington State Fire Marshal's Office
Deion Glover Commander of Government and Media Relations, Washington State Patrol
Debbie Groff Child Care Licensing Area Administrator, Early Learning and Childcare Offices
Erik Hansen Senior Budget Advisor, Washington State Department of Transportation
Travis Hansen Regional Administrator, Washington State Department of Early Learning
Mike Harris Fire Chief, Franklin County Fire District #3
Leonard Johnson Fire Chief, McLane Black Lake Fire Department
Ray Lamoureux Deputy Fire Chief, East Valley Fire Department
Suzanne Mayr Director, Fire Sprinkler Advisory Board of Puget Sound
Bryan McConaughy Government Relations Specialist, BMcConsulting
Kelly Merz Division Commander, Fire Training Commander
Nancy Morris Fiscal Analyst, Washington State Office of the State Treasurer
Troy Nichols Lobbyist, The Nichols Group
Scott Peterson Field Representative, UA Sprinkler Fitters Local 699
Katie Rasmussen Assistant Division Commander, Fire Training Academy
Mariana Ruiz-Temple Oregon State Fire Marshal, Oregon State Fire Marshal's Office
Even Sent Senior Researcher, Department of Retirement Systems
Barbara Serrano Public Safety Senior Policy Advisor, Washington State Office of the Governor
William Slosson Chief Deputy State Fire Marshal, Washington State Fire Marshal's Office
Jason Trout Regional Manager, TNT Fireworks
Stacey Warick Chief Financial Officer, Washington State Office of the Insurance Commissioner
Tiff West Budget Advisor to the Governor, Transportation, Office of Financial Management
Gary West Chief Deputy, National Association of State Fire Marshals
Marina Yee Statewide Accountant, Washington State Office of Financial Management
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 10
Background
The State Fire Marshal's Office (SFMO) was moved from the Department of Community, Trade and Economic
Development (now Commerce) into the Washington State Patrol in 1995. Washington State Patrol is organized
into six bureaus, one of which is the Fire Protection Bureau. The Fire Protection Bureau is the home of the
State Fire Marshal's Office (SFMO).
Figure 2: 2021 Washington State Patrol Organizational Chart
Source: Washington State Fire Marshal's Office
The SFMO is divided into two divisions, the Fire Training Division and the Fire Prevention Division. The Fire
Training Division's mission is, "Training those who serve through facilitation, innovation, education and
motivation. 8 The Fire Prevention Division's mission is, "To be the best in fire and life safety and preparedness
services. 9 The SFMO reports that their values include investment in people, public safety, teamwork and
collaboration, trust and accountability, and continuous improvement.
Responsibilities
The SFMO is directed by statute to provide:
Fire service training and certifications (RCW 43.43.934, RCW 70.136.030 and RCW 43.44.130)
Apprenticeships (RCW 43.43.944)
Risk mobilization (RCW 43.43.960)
Prevention data collection and reporting (RCW 43.44.060)
Building code, fire sprinkler and monitoring system reviews and inspections (RCW 19.27, RCW 18.160, RCW
18.270 and RCW 43.44.130)
Regulation of fireworks and fire safe cigarettes (RCW 70.77 and RCW 19.305)
Fire investigations (RCW 43.44.050)
Inspections and plan reviews for:
• Schools (RCW 43.44.030)
8 Reported via email by the SFMO's Washington State Fire Training Academy reported their mission.
9 Reported via email by the SFMO's Washington State Fire Prevention Division.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 11
• Assisted Living Facilities (RCW 18.20.130)
• Residential Treatment Facilities and other facilities (RCW 71.12.485)
Interagency Agreements for:
• Care of Children, Expectant Mothers, Persons with Developmental Disabilities (RCW 74.15.050)
• Child Care Centers (RCW 43.216.250 and 43.216.265)
• Enhanced Services Facilities (RCW 70.97.210)
• Hospitals licensed by Department of Health (RCW 71.12.485)
Funding
The SFMO is funded by several sources including: 20% of the annual Fire Insurance Premium Tax, General
Fund appropriations, hazardous substance tax, hazardous waste clean-up recoveries, federal grants, licenses,
permits, fees, fines, forfeits, penalties, charges and miscellaneous revenue.
According to Table 3 below, the largest contributor to the SFMO's budget is the Fire Service Training Account.
The Fire Service Training Account is funded by:
20% of the Fire Insurance Premium Tax,
Grants,
Bequests, and
Training fees.
Although 20% of the Fire Insurance Premium Tax revenue is deposited into the Fire Service Training Account
(Training Account), Washington State Patrol's Budget Management Office explains that the Legislative
appropriation from the Fire Service Training Account is not directly related to the Fire Insurance Premium Tax
deposits.
The SFMO's portion of the Fire Insurance Premium Tax proceeds is deposited into the Training Account, but
this account is subject to appropriation, which means that the SFMO's funding from the account has to be
legislatively appropriated. The current Training Account budget is based upon the SFMO's legislatively
approved activities that are appropriate for the account.
For the existing activities of the SFMO that are funded by the Training Account, compensation changes are
made automatically as part of the legislative budget process, but any changes in workload or new activities
that the SFMO wants to fund from the account must be requested through a decision package or legislative bill
and approved by the Legislature.
Therefore, the SFMO's budget is based on their legislatively approved activities, not directly on the revenue to
the Training Account.
The Budget Management Office also noted that revenue is important when it comes to the Training Account
balance. If the Training Account does not have a sufficient fund balance to support the SFMO's current
activities, the SFMO either must reduce their costs (stop doing something) or the Legislature has to provide
funding from another source.
For new requests, if the funding is not sufficient to support it, the Legislature will either not approve it, or have
to provide funding from another source.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 12
The Fire Service Training Account is the SFMO's largest budget, but the bureau operates from a total of 10
accounts: General Fund - State (011), General Fund - State (012), Fire Service Trust Account (086), Disaster
Response Account (05H-1B0(P)), the Fire Service Training Account (086), Fire Service Training Account K-12
(086-1e0/310), Firefighter Apprenticeship Program (086-1D0(P)) the Reduced Cigarette Ignition Propensity
Account (14W-964(N/A)), the Model Toxics Control Operating Account (173/23P- 290), and the Fire Protection
Contractor License Account (210 - 970).
Washington State Patrol's Budget Management Office provided a Total Bureau Budget chart that includes each
funding source and the corresponding RCW fund authority. The chart compares the SFMO's budget in the
2013-2015 biennium to the budget in the 2021-2023 biennium.
Table 3: SFMO funding comparison, 2013-2023
Funds Fund authority 2021-2023 2013-2015 Difference
011 - 011 General Fund - State RCW 43.79.010 $1,583,233 $1,215,985 $367,248
012 - 012 General Fund - State $1,716,236 $1,009,170 $707,066
03P - 250 Fire Service Trust Account State RCW 43.43.946 $131,000 $131,000 $ -
05H - 1B0(P)-Fire Service Mobilization RCW 38.52.105 (proviso) $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $ -
086 - 1e0/310 Fire Service Training Acct - K-12 (was proviso until FY 2020) $293,362 $200,000 $93,362
086 - 1d0(P) Firefighter Apprenticeship Program (proviso) $700,000 $700,000 $ -
086 - 310 Fire Service Training Acct RCW 43.43.944 $10,924,534 $8,323,120 $2,601,414
14W - 964 (N/A) Red Cigarette Ignition Prop RCW 19.305.080 $195,000 $172,000 $23,000
RCW 70A.305.180 (formerly
173/23P - 290 Model Toxics Control Operating Acct $589,000 $513,000 $76,000
RCW 70.105D.190)
210 - 970 Fire Protection Contractor License RCW 18.160.050 $1,678,400 $1,422,400 $256,000
Totals: $25,810,765 $21,686,675 $4,124,090
The Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator indicates that $1.00 in 2013 is
equivalent to $1.34 in September of 2023. If that is accepted as true, then the total 2013-15 biennial budget
today would be equivalent to $29,060,144.50 ($21,686,675 x $1.34). The SFMO's total budget in 2021-2023 is
approximately $3.3 million less than 2013-2015's total budget equivalent.
The SFMO's budget comparison in Table 3 above supports the Workgroup's concerns that over the last 10
years or more, the SFMO's funding and policy needs have not kept pace with Washington's population growth,
the increased number of wildfires at the wildland urban interface, the increased frequency and duration of All-
Risk Mobilization events, nor the requisite need for more firefighters to be trained. The SFMO reports that they
are responsible for marshaling resources during expansive fires such as the Gray fire or the Oregon Road fire,
but the SFMO is not provided additional staffing nor additional funding to adequately meet the increased
demand for fire services.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 13
Findings
Funding and fire service delivery challenges
During the Fire Service Delivery Statewide Stakeholder Meeting in September 2023, workgroup participants and
statewide stakeholders agreed that the State Fire Marshal's Office has been significantly deprioritized and
underfunded for the last 10 years or longer. The lack of state-level advocacy, insufficient wages and
insufficient funding were reported as key barriers that threaten fire service delivery. Between the statewide
stakeholders and the SFMO, the most commonly reported challenges for fire service funding and delivery were:
The State Fire Marshal’s Office (SFMO) does not report directly to the Governor, does not have a legislative
liaison to provide state-level advocacy, and does not have the opportunity to regularly meet with fire service
stakeholders to discuss and collectively determine fire service needs, according to the SFMO.
The SFMO is experiencing significant staff vacancies and is challenged to retain employees. 10
Local fire departments pay 35% to 55% more than the SFMO for equivalent positions and require less
invasive background checks, making it difficult for the SFMO to fill their numerous staff vacancies.11
Inadequate funding for firefighter training creates unequal access to training opportunities, especially in
rural and economically vulnerable areas that cannot afford to travel to the Training Academy. Inaccessible
firefighter training risks the safety of historically marginalized communities, their firefighters and the
natural environments. 12
Lack of funding prevents the SFMO's mobilization program from expanding their staff to appropriate
levels. 13
Four statutorily required services are not provided by the SFMO, including fire investigations, because they
are not funded, as reported by the SFMO.
The SFMO states their Information Technology is outdated, inefficient and time-intensive.
Underrepresented state-level advocacy
One legislative liaison represents the six bureaus housed in the Washington State Patrol. According to WSP's
website, "the legislative liaison is responsible for coordinating agency legislation with legislators, committees,
and other state agencies." 14 Being one of six bureaus, the SFMO does not have a dedicated legislative liaison
to advocate solely for fire service needs at the state level. The Workgroup feels that the missing state-level
representation is related to the SFMO's funding challenges and subsequent impacts.
Over the last 10 years, just 3.4% of the SFMO's policy level budget requests were funded.15 Additionally,
legislative attempts to increase funding for the Fire Service Training Account, such as SB 5520 (2023), did not
pass the Legislature. The SFMO and WSP's Budget Management reported the various impacts resulting from
years of insufficient funding:
10 SFMO reports 83% of part-time Fire Training positions, 20% of full-time Fire Training positions, and 17% of full-time Prevention
positions are vacant as of October 2023.
11 Washington State Office of Financial Management, “2022 Washington State Employees Compensation Survey Report,” Sept. 27,
2023,
https://ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/shr/CompensationAndJobClasses/Salary%20Surveys/2022WSECS/2022_WSECS_State_
Report_04-2022.pdf
12 SFMO reports one person staffs the Regional Direct Delivery (RDD) training, which trains firefighters unable to travel to North Bend.
13 The SFMO's 2023-2025 Budget Request includes a request for additional staff, software and reimbursements for the All-Risk
Mobilization Program.
14 Washington State Patrol, "Office of the Chief," October 18, 2023, https://www.wsp.wa.gov/about-us/bureaus/
15 The SFMO's 2013-2023 Budget Requests are included in Appendix B of this report.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 14
The Fire Service Training Account's year-end balance declined by almost 80% over the last 12 years. 16
The SFMO offered 26% fewer Hazardous Materials Training courses and trained almost 50% fewer
students in 2023 compared to 2016.
The SFMO delivered almost 70% fewer fireworks trainings in 2023 compared to 2015.
Table 4: Hazardous materials training data
Year Courses Trainees
2016 42 923
2017 50 1,978
2018 36 712
2019 33 1,744
2020 N/A N/A
2021 22 1,740
2022 50 900
2023 31 519
Table 5: Fireworks training data
Year Trainees
2015 175
2016 114
2017 26
2018 0
2019 75
2020 0
2021 0
2022 0
2023 0
WSP's Budget Management Office reports that each year the SFMO submits a Budget Request to the Office of
Financial Management. WSP's Budget Management Office provided the SFMO's 2013-2023 Budget Requests,
which are included in Appendix A. Two budget request items from the 2013 - 2023 Budget Requests had to be
funded: the annual mobilization reimbursements (which reimburse local jurisdictions for their expenses
incurred during each mobilization) and 2021's emergency Fire Training Academy maintenance appropriation (a
severe winter storm significantly damaged the academy requiring emergency repairs). When mobilization and
the one-time appropriation for Fire Training Academy maintenance costs are set aside, the SFMO Budget
Request analysis reveals that just 3.4% of the SFMO budget requests were funded in the last 10 years.
16 Appendices A and B include Washington State Patrol's Budget Management Office's data.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 15
Figure 3: 2013-2023 percentage of funded and unfunded SFMO's budget requests 17
3.4%
96.6%
Requested Funded
Source: Washington State Patrol's Budget Office
Missing opportunities to collaborate
During the Workgroup's evaluation process, the group hosted a hybrid statewide stakeholder meeting for fire
service delivery stakeholders. The meeting included a broad swath of fire service stakeholders including all
named members of the workgroup, the State Fire Marshal's Office, Washington State Association of Fire
Marshals, state licensing stakeholders, childcare facility owners, and industry representatives from fire
sprinkler fitters to fireworks representatives. At the end of meeting, all stakeholders in the room agreed that
the opportunity to come together as fire service stakeholders was educational, beneficial and appreciated.
Experiencing the value of a statewide stakeholder meeting highlighted the communication and engagement
gap amongst various fire service providers. It became apparent that the SFMO, statewide fire service
stakeholders and WSP do not have an opportunity to meet to discuss state fire service needs, negating WSP's
chance to learn about critical issues in state fire service. Meeting attendees noted that the lack of
communication and collaboration reduces fire service stakeholders' ability to collectively determine key
priorities and then jointly advocate for those priorities at the state level.
Recruitment and retention
As of October 2023, the SFMO reported 83% of their part-time Fire Training positions were vacant, 20% of their
full-time Fire Training positions were vacant, and 17% of their full-time Prevention positions were vacant.
The SFMO shared that they struggle to recruit qualified applicants to fill the necessary roles within the Bureau.
Although they have successfully recruited and developed existing employees to advance within the office,
those advancements have primarily been in the prevention and inspection industry.
Wage disparities
Other positions, primarily within the Training Division, require requisite experience prior to hire. These
individuals ideally would be hired out of the Washington State Fire Service, but local fire departments pay 35%
17 This illustration only includes non-obligatory, policy level requests. It does not include obligatory mobilization and emergency
maintenance allocations, or the 2015 Deputy State Fire Marshal position that the Office of Financial Management eliminated and
restored the same year.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 16
to 55% more than the SFMO for equivalent positions 18, according to the Office of Financial Management's
2022 Compensation Survey Report. Consequently, the SFMO struggles to recruit and retain employees.
The SFMO communicated that turnover for existing SFMO employees has been another issue impacting the
staff vacancies. Local fire agencies hire personnel at competitive industry wages and often offer Law
Enforcement Officer and Fire Fighter 2 (LEOFF 2) retirement plans. The SFMO's significantly lower wages and
Public Employee Retirement Plan cannot compete with local agencies' offerings, increasing the SFMO's
turnover rates. Although the SFMO successfully pursued pay increases to reduce the compensation gap, the
Office of Financial Management's 2022 Compensation Survey Report highlights that pay increases clearly have
not been enough to match what local fire jurisdictions are offering.
Hiring requirements
WSP has a hiring policy which automatically disqualifies any individual who exceeds a lifetime limit of five
instances of usage of both illegal drugs and prescription drugs used recreationally. According to WSP's Human
Resources Division, past usage of Adderall has often been a problem, due to its popularity among college-age
students. Regardless of the number of years that may have passed since the applicants used a drug more than
five times, they are automatically ineligible for hire, including those in noncommissioned positions.
WSP's hiring policy up through September 2023 automatically disqualified any applicant who had used
marijuana within the past 12 months - even noncommissioned staff (staff who do not carry a weapon) such as
administrative assistants, maintenance supervisors and event coordinators. WSP's Human Resources
reported WSP lost almost 2,000 applicants for civilian positions in 2023 solely for using marijuana within the
past 12 months. More people may not have applied because they saw the marijuana standard and self-
screened out. However, WSP amended this hiring policy in the end of 2023. WSP no longer disqualifies a
civilian-position applicant for using marijuana within the past 12 months.
Staff vacancies and recruitment barriers significantly affect Washington's firefighter trainings. With 83% of
part-time training positions vacant, and 20% of full-time training positions vacant, the need to address both the
wage disparities and recruitment barriers is critical. Until the SFMO fills their firefighter-training vacancies,
fewer firefighters will receive training, leaving our communities at serious risk of significant adverse impacts
during public emergency events.
Firefighter training is in jeopardy
The State Fire Marshal's Office reported that it may have to cancel Washington's training courses vital to
volunteer and career firefighters due to insufficient funding for the Fire Service Training Account. They provide
six training programs, and they are in jeopardy due to declining funding.
Table 6: State Fire Marshal's Office training programs
Fire Prevention Division’s firefighter trainings Fire Training Academy’s firefighter trainings
Firefighter Professional Development Certifications (offers 21 Basic Firefighter 1 and 2 Training
certifications)
18 Washington State Office of Financial Management, “2022 Washington State Employees Compensation Survey Report,” Sep. 27, 2023,
https://ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/shr/CompensationAndJobClasses/Salary%20Surveys/2022WSECS/2022_WSECS_State_
Report_04-2022.pdf
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 17
Fire Prevention Division’s firefighter trainings Fire Training Academy’s firefighter trainings
Hazardous Materials Training Regional Direct Delivery
Basic Firefighter Training Reimbursement Joint Apprenticeship and Training
The Fire Service Training Account is funded primarily through a 20% share of the Fire Insurance Premium Tax.
The Washington State Department of Revenue explains that Fire Insurance Premium Tax is a tax that insurers
pay based on the premiums they receive from their policyholders. Insurance companies file tax returns by
March 1, reporting premiums received during the previous calendar year.19The Office of the Insurance
Commissioner shared that the total Fire Insurance Premium Tax they collect by the end of the calendar year is
distributed to the appropriate accounts in May of the next year. For example, total fire tax collected from Jan 1,
2022 through December 31, 2022 is distributed in May 2023.
Distributions of Fire Insurance Premium Tax Revenues20:
• 15% to the state's General Fund
• 40% to the Volunteer Firemen's Relief and Pension Fund;
• 25% to cities' Firemen's Pension Funds; and
• 20% to the Fire Service Training Account
The SFMO reports that the Fire Training Academy (FTA) funding has steeply declined for more than 10 years,
impacting firefighter training and maintenance of the Fire Training Academy. Additionally, funding availability
for other training entities, such as the Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee (JATC), is also reduced,
preventing the expansion of this imperative training organization dedicated to career firefighter development.
19 Washington State Department of Revenue, "Insurance Premium Tax," October 19, 2023, https://dor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-
02/13_Insurance_Premiums.pdf
20 Appendix E includes all Fire Insurance Premium Tax Distributions from 2014-2023.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 18
Figure 4: Firefighter Training Account (086) funding, 2012-2023
$10
Millions
$9 086 Ending
Balance
$8
$7
$6
$5 6-month
$4 Working
Capital
$3 $3,199250
$2
$1 2-month
$0 Working
Capital
**2009
2004 2005 2006 2007 *2008 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2023
***2022
$1,066,417
FIscal Year
*FY 2008 balance includes $250,000 GF-S transfer in to establish Joint Firefighter Apprenticeship Program.
** FY2009 balance includes $1,462,719.77 in Debt Service received for Dormitory Construction.
***FY2022 balance includes $7,094,005.86 in Debt Service received for Burn Building Replacement Construction.
Source: Washington State Patrol's Budget Office
The SFMO reports that without increasing the Fire Service Training Account's portion of the Fire Insurance
Premium Tax revenue or providing additional allocations, the funding to support the Washington State Fire
Service will continue to fall short of the needs, resulting in both short-term and long-term impacts. The SFMO
anticipates a reduction in basic fire service training and potential elimination of advanced and specialty
training without additional funding.
Training is vital to responder safety and the protection of community members and the environment, as noted
by the Workgroup. The declining Fire Service Training Account (in Figure 4 above) is unable to sustain
firefighter training at the Fire Training Academy, Regional Direct Delivery trainings (which provide onsite
trainings to fire departments that cannot travel to the FTA), and Joint Apprenticeship Training (which provides
accredited recruit academy training, hazardous materials training, Emergency Medical Technician training, on
the job training and academic instruction).
According to the WSP's Biennial Budget Decision Package for Regional Direct Delivery (RDD) cited in Appendix
C, rural and economically vulnerable firefighters are already experiencing disproportionate barriers to
accessing firefighting training because only one staff person currently provides the statewide RDD trainings.
The SFMO's RDD budget request was unfunded in 2023, 21 which may risk increasing the disproportionate
negative impacts to the communities, firefighters and the natural environment in those areas.
Without these vital training programs, volunteer and career firefighters will experience a reduction in training
opportunities and career development across the state, which may compromise the safety of Washington's
communities.
21 Appendix B includes the SFMO's 2013-2023 Budget Requests.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 19
Mobilization program
The SFMO is responsible for providing the state's All-Risk Mobilization Program (RCW 43.43.962). In a
September 2023 meeting for the Fire Service Delivery Report between Commerce and the SFMO, the SFMO
reported the following: the Mobilization Program is a year-round, all-risk program, designed to support any
large-scale incident that any fire department may need statewide assistance to mitigate. Originally, the
Mobilization Program provided wildfire, and only wildfire, mobilization assistance. However, it became the All-
Risk Mobilization Program within the last 10 years, requiring year-round staffing and oversight.
The Mobilization Program provided the following information:
The Mobilization Program is different from Department of Natural Resources' (DNR) response. DNR’s authority
in RCW 76.04 is solely for wildfires on forested lands under DNR's protection. The SFMO pointed out that the
vast majority of the lower Columbia Basin, including Benton, Franklin, Adams and Walla Walla Counties have
thousands of acres with no DNR protection.
If a non-wildfire incident, such as a hazardous materials incident, occurred on lands protected by DNR (but
within a fire district), the incident would not get a DNR response; it would get a fire department response. If
that incident expanded to need more resources, up to Mobilization, the DNR still would not be the lead agency,
and would only coordinate those resources in accordance with the Washington State Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan.
The state's Mobilization Program leads the coordinated statewide response when an emergency event such as
a catastrophic earthquake exhausts local resources. All cities, fire districts, and regional fire authorities are
eligible to request Mobilization assistance, and are not required to have a contract or agreement with WSP
prior to their request.
Once demobilization occurs, the SFMO must process payments affiliated with the authorized mobilizations,
maintain the Washington State Fire Services Resource Mobilization Plan, and work closely with local
stakeholder groups continuously to improve the program and response to evolving All Hazard emergencies. In
the last 10 years, the Mobilization program reported they processed more than 50,000 reimbursement claims.
Figure 5: Number of mobilization incidents from 1994 through 2022
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Source: Washington State Fire Service's Mobilization Program
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 20
Importantly, Mobilization's $8 million biennial appropriation has not increased in approximately 20 years,
although services expanded and the number of incidents continue to grow. The program’s average number of
incidents per year has tripled from 5.2 incidents to 17.1 incidents per fire season, and the average amount of
time each incident required increased 148%. The average biennium fire costs currently exceed $21 million.
Figure 6: Biennial mobilization costs 2005 - 2025 compared to $8M allocated funding
$50
Millions
$45 $44
$40
$35
$29
$30
$24
$25
$21 $21 $20
$20
$16
$12
$15 $12
$10 $7
$5
$-
2005-07 2007-09 2009-11 2011-13 2013-15 2015-17 2017-19 2019-21 2021-23 2023-25**
** Estimated cost total
Source: Washington State Fire Service's Mobilization Program
Additionally, mobilization has fewer staff today than it did 20 years ago, even though incidents tripled and the
duration of each incident increased significantly. Currently, one FTE is dedicated to mobilization, and one part-
time position manages training. Fourteen years ago mobilization's number of dedicated staff decreased from
2.5 FTE to 1.5 FTE due to a General Fund – State reduction that was not restored.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 21
Figure 7: Number of mobilization incidents compared to number of mobilization staff
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Number of incidents Number of Staff
Source: Washington State Fire Service's Mobilization Program
According to the SFMO, the most significant impact resulting from the understaffed Mobilization Program is
two-fold: there are not enough SFMO personnel to staff the number of incidents, and not enough staff to
process payments to the fire service in a timely manner.
Elaborating on the impacts of understaffing, the Mobilization Program provided the following information:
In 2023, there were periods where multiple fire incidents were occurring simultaneously in different counties
throughout the state, forcing the Mobilization Program to leave incidents without SFMO staff to accurately
track costs/resources, and exposing incident personnel to inadequate support to accomplish the mission.
Personnel impacts to an understaffed SFMO include three periods in 2023 where mobilization deployed staff
for more than two continuous weeks, staffing multiple fires at once. When deployment assignments were over,
there were no mandatory days off. Staff went right back to work, and when it was busy, right back to another
fire in a couple of days. Mobilization has lost employees because of this, and had candidates turn down job
offers when they realized the full weight of the job and the complete absence of work/life balance from June
to October.
Mobilization's understaffing also causes a significant delay in getting payments made to volunteer firefighters,
fire departments, and contractors and vendors, well outside of what is specified in the agreements with both
the fire agencies and the vendors.
Volunteer firefighters wait more than 60 days to be paid. Fire departments often must wait well past that, 90-
120 days or more. That is well outside the guidance provided to pay bills in the Office of Financial
Management's State Agency Accounting Manual.
Local fire agencies that cannot afford to wait for reimbursement may not participate in the mobilization effort,
reducing the help available to communities and the natural environment experiencing an emergency.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 22
Because the All-Risk Mobilization Program is critically understaffed, people's safety and the natural
environment’s health is in jeopardy during a significant emergency event such as a substantial wildfire,
hazardous gas pipeline accident or large-scale earthquake.
Unfunded statutory requirements
The SFMO does not provide four statutorily required mandates because they are not funded, including fire
investigations. The unfunded obligations compromise preventative efforts to reduce fire occurrences and fire
impacts. The four unfunded mandates include:
Fire investigation services (RCW 43.44.050);
Preparing for hazmat accidents (RCW 43.44.130);
Enforcing smoke detection devices (RCW 43.44.110); and
Inspecting and enforcing building code requirements (RCW 19.27.730).
The SFMO is mandated to investigate fires of a criminal, suspected, or undetermined caused when local
jurisdiction requests assistance. Prior to the SFMO being moved to the WSP, funding was eliminated for this
program and has not been re-appropriated. The SFMO receives requests for fire investigation services, and
refers requestors to the federal Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) or other entities who have
some capacity to fill this role.
In recent months, the SFMO stated they received feedback from ATF agents that there is dissatisfaction that
the SFMO no longer provides this service, and that this action is impacting local and federal agencies. The
Washington State Fire Service is limited from fully understanding and preventing impacts of arson across the
state when they cannot properly investigate fires due to lack of resources available to respond.
Technology modernization feasibility study
The SFMO reported that their current processes are out-of-date, not within best practices, are heavily reliant on
paper, require in-person instruction, and do not maximize information technology resources. In an effort to
address the problem, the SFMO received funding to complete a technology modernization study that will
assess all SFMO services and provide recommendations for technology funding. After the study is completed
in late 2024, decision packages will be submitted that seek funding for the identified enhancements.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 23
Recommendations
To ensure Washington is prepared to meet statewide fire defense needs, the Workgroup recommends both
short-term and long-term strategies. In the long-term, the Workgroup recommends enhanced state-level
representation, improvements to recruitment and retention, and consideration of the recommendations from
the technology modernization study that is in progress. In the short-term, the Workgroup recommends
adequate funding for firefighter training, mobilization, and all statutory functions.
State-level representation
The Workgroup recommends that the Legislature take steps toward establishing an independent agency for
the SFMO by establishing a roadmap workgroup.
A. Roadmap workgroup
The Legislature should convene a two-year workgroup to study the elements required to establish an
independent agency for the SFMO including a timeline for each step of the process. All requisite personnel,
records, office and equipment needs should be itemized with approximate cost estimates. The workgroup
should also outline a plan for the transfer of the WSP Fire Protection Bureau/State Fire Marshal’s Office from
the WSP to an independent SFMO agency.
B. Legislative liaison
Until the agency is formed, the Workgroup also recommends establishing a legislative liaison position
dedicated exclusively to representing fire service stakeholders and the SFMO.
C. Fire service advisory committee
To foster communication, collaboration and united advocacy efforts at the state level, the Workgroup
recommends establishing a Fire Service Advisory Committee with a low-cost board structure 22 to be housed
under WSP. The state should provide personnel services to assist the advisory committee within the limits of
available funds.
The committee members should include the five following members, as well as two at-large positions: the
Executive Director of Washington Fire Chiefs (as committee chair); the President of the Washington State
Council of Firefighters; the Executive Director of the Washington Fire Commissioners Association; the
President of the Washington State Fire Fighters' Association; and the President of the Washington State
Association of Fire Marshals. The committee would encourage and accept the State Fire Marshal to attend
meetings as a non-voting member. The workgroup would like the State Fire Marshal to be responsive to the
advisory committee.
Regular committee meetings would provide the opportunity for statewide fire service stakeholders to meet,
discuss and determine essential fire service needs. The committee would work with the SFMO's legislative
liaison, the SFMO, WSP and others to educate and advocate for fire service funding and policy needs.
Recruitment and retention
Staff salaries and hiring policies must achieve parity with local fire jurisdictions to address the SFMO's
recruitment and retention issues.
22 Model policy for compensating part-time committee participants detailed in RCW 43.03.220.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 24
D. Wage parity
For staff salaries, the Workgroup recommends following the model salary policy recently established in
RCW 43.43.380 for WSP's Troopers and Sergeants. In short, the SFMO minimum monthly salaries must be
competitive with local fire service agencies within the boundaries of Washington, guided by the results of a
survey undertaken in the collective bargaining process during each biennium.
RCW 43.43.380 clarifies how comparative salary levels should be calculated. Adapting the language to apply to
fire service would suggest that comparisons for determining competitiveness with local fire agencies' salary
levels should be guided by the average compensation paid to the corresponding rank from the Seattle Fire
Department, King County Fire Districts, South King County Fire and Rescue, Tacoma Fire Department,
Snohomish Regional Fire and Rescue, Spokane Fire Department, and Vancouver Fire Department.
Compensation should be calculated using base salary, premium pay (a pay received by more than a majority of
employees), education pay, longevity pay and an inflation-based multiplier.
E. Hiring practices
WSP changed their hiring policy in 2023 so that job applicants will no longer be disqualified for the use of
marijuana in the past 12 months. However, WSP continues to prohibit noncommissioned staff from using
cannabis when off-the-job and away from the workplace. The workgroup recommends that WSP prohibit
marijuana use during working hours, and prohibit civilian employees being under the influence of marijuana in
the workplace.
Enable adequate funding for training, mobilization and statutory functions
The Workgroup recommends adequate funding for training firefighters to keep all people in Washington safe,
to enhance the SFMO's ability to mobilize and respond to emergencies and to provide all its statutorily required
functions.
F. Firefighter training
The Workgroup recommends adequate funding for all firefighting training programs provided by the SFMO.
SFMO's firefighter training programs ensure firefighters have proper mastery over operational procedures to
manage fire environments and large-scale emergencies safely.
If additional funding were allocated for firefighter training, the SFMO anticipates the following outcomes:
• The SFMO will be able to expand training across the state, including for new apprentices currently on
the waiting list.
• Statewide support for all of Washington's tribal, regional, county and city governments, including
outreach to underserved communities to provide training tailored to the needs of the fire agencies.
• The Fire Training Academy (FTA) will have the funding necessary to complete the projects outlined in
the current FTA Master Plan within the 20-year outlook, which includes capital projects.
• Once fully implemented, The Master Plan will serve as a statewide resource for emergency responders.
• Increased funding will enable the FTA to utilize the Fire Service Training Account to continue capital
improvement projects without affecting the overall health of the account.
G. Mobilization program
The Workgroup recommends that the state allocate sufficient funding to the All-Risk Mobilization Program for
their staffing needs. The mobilization program reports needing six additional personnel: one Chief Deputy
State Fire Marshal, three Deputy State Fire Marshals, one Information Technology Applications Development –
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 25
Journey Level, and one Fiscal Technician 3. Policies should ensure that staff or position increases will not
reduce the funding available for the WSP or the SFMO.
Community safety will be prioritized when the mobilization program receives the funding necessary to increase
the number of people participating in the emergency response effort. As staff vacancy rates increase,
workload increases. This dynamic requires technology improvements to increase efficiency and there is nexus
with recommendation I and the forthcoming Technology Modernization Feasibility Study.
H. Unfunded statutory requirements
The workgroup recommends funding all of the SFMO's unfunded mandates including: fire investigation
services (RCW 43.44.050); preparing for hazmat accidents (RCW 43.44.130); enforcing smoke detection
devices (RCW 43.44.110); and inspecting and enforcing building code requirements (RCW 19.27.730).
If unfunded responsibilities are adequately funded, the SFMO will be able to identify hazards, pinpoint
dangerous practices and prevent future fires by providing regular investigations, inspections and enforcement.
I. Technology Modernization Feasibility Study
The Workgroup recommends the state implement and fully fund the technology modernization feasibility
study’s recommendations. They are expected to be complete by the end of 2024.
Technology updates will potentially create virtual training opportunities and they will improve efficiency with
processing reimbursement claims, license applications and renewals, and fee payments. Thanks to the
technology's efficiency, SFMO's costs could be reduced over the long-term, cybersecurity will be improved, and
data protection practices will be advanced, ideal outcomes for all.
Recommendations out of scope
While evaluating fire service funding and delivery, issues came up that were out of scope but are important
nonetheless. In recognition of these important issues, the Workgroup makes the following recommendations:
Identify and implement the policy changes necessary to ensure all local jurisdictions that employed LEOFF
1 firefighters receive their proportionate share of the Fire Insurance Premium Tax. Currently, 13% of LEOFF
1 firefighters reside in jurisdictions that do not receive the Fire Insurance Premium Tax.
Establish a future legislative study examining Fire Insurance Premium Tax Distributions with the goal of
recommending a new distribution formula. The study could investigate actuarial evaluations of all
accounts receiving the tax, identify the number of pre-LEOFF 1 firefighters in local jurisdictions, and analyze
the potential inequities resulting from Firefighter Pension Levies that cities are only allowed to run - without
voter approval - if they established a Firefighter Pension Fund prior to the establishment of LEOFF 1.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 26
Conclusions
Washington's State Patrol and State Fire Marshal's Office have seen significant changes since they were
integrated in the 1990's. The state's population, demographics, public safety expectations and risk of hazards
have substantially grown, diversified and evolved. This is an opportunity to adapt to the changing needs of
people in Washington and begin working towards short-term and long-term improvements for the State Fire
Marshal's Office (SFMO).
Establishing an independent SFMO agency could likely address the Workgroup's primary findings and the
Workgroup feels this long-term pursuit is needed. With sufficient funding, revised policies, adequate staffing
and updated technology, the SFMO will be well prepared to deliver their meaningful statewide safety programs.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 27
Appendix A: (086) Fire Service Training Account
Table 7: Fire Service Training Account (086) 2012-2023 Ending Balance Changes
Fiscal Year 086 Account Starting Balance 086 Account Ending Balance Change in Fund Balance
FY 2012 $7,991,094 $8,783,470 $792,375
FY 2013 $8,783,470 $7,927,184 ($856,285.31)
FY 2014 $7,927,184 $7,590,238 ($336,946.99)
FY 2015 $7,590,238 $7,031,558 ($558,679.30)
FY 2016 $7,031,558 $7,080,984 $49,426
FY 2017 $7,080,984 $5,726,772 ($1,354,212)
FY 2018 $5,726,772 $4,570,788 ($1,155,983.89)
FY 2019 $4,570,788 $4,937,598 $366,809
FY 2020 $4,937,598 $1,545,492 ($3,392,105)
FY 2021 $1,545,492 $1,498,702 ($46,789)
FY 2022 $1,498,702 $6,419,824 $4,921,121
FY 2023 $6,419,824 $1,813,326 ($4,606,497)
Total Change in Fund Balance ($6,177,767)
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 28
Appendix B: Budget requests
Table 8: Budge requests for the State Fire Marshal's Office, 2013-2023
Session Budget items Requested Funded Difference
2013 Legislative Session
M2-EC Fire Mobilizations - 2013 Supplemental
$11,859,006 $9,668,000 ($2,191,006)
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
2015 Legislative Session
M2-EA Fire Mobilizations - 2015 Supplemental
$14,298,000 $13,292,000 ($1,006,000)
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
PL-A2 Reduce Deputy State Fire Marshals (OFM
($446,000) $ - $446,000
Directed DP)
PL-P2 Restore Deputy State Fire Marshals (OFM
$446,000 $ - ($446,000)
Directed DP)
2016 Legislative Session
M2-MG Fire Mobilizations - 2016 Supplemental
$23,645,000 $34,365,000 $10,720,000
Budget -PLACEHOLDER
2017 Legislative Session
M2-MB Fire Mobilizations - 2017 Supplemental
$2,000,000 $14,500,000 $12,500,000
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
PL-PI Fire Training Academy Regional Direct
$977,000 $ - ($977,000)
Delivery Program Staffing
2018 Legislative Session
M2-UB Fire Mobilizations - 2018 Supplemental
$10,950,000 $7,050,000 ($3,900,000)
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
2019 Legislative Session
M2-UB Fire Mobilizations - 2019 Supplemental
$4,975,000 $4,975,000 $ -
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
2020 Legislative Session
ML-M4 Fire and Life Safety Inspection Staff $66,000 $66,000 $ -
2021 Legislative Session
M2-UB Fire Mobilizations - 2021 Supplemental
$8,030,000 $10,470,000 $2,440,000
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
ML-A7 Fire Training Academy Maintenance $928,000 $928,000 $ -
2022 Legislative Session
M2-UB Fire Mobilizations - 2022 Supplemental
$12,000,000 $4,000,000 ($8,000,000)
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
2023 Legislative Session
M2-UB Fire Mobilizations - 2023 Supplemental
$10,315,000 $16,130,000 $5,815,000
Budget - PLACEHOLDER
PL-D3 Fire Protection Records Modernization
$408,000 $408,000 $ -
Feasibility Study
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 29
Session Budget items Requested Funded Difference
PL-K1 MOBE and NFIRS Program Support $9,662,000 $ - ($9,662,000)
PL-K2 Regional Direct Delivery Support $1,111,000 $ - ($1,111,000)
Total $111,224,006 $115,852,000 $4,627,994
Source: Washington State Department of Revenue 2007 Tax Reference Manual
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 30
Appendix C: Regional Direct Delivery Program, 2023-25
Decision Package
2023-25 BIENNIAL BUDGET DECISION PACKAGE23
Agency: 2250 – Washington State Patrol
DP Code-Title: K2 – Regional Direct Delivery Program Support
Budget Period: 2023-25 Biennial
Budget Level: Policy
Contact Name: Kelly Merz
Contact Phone: (425) 453-3000
Contact Email: kelly.merz@wsp.wa.gov
Agency Recommendation Summary (RecSum):
The Washington State Patrol (WSP) requests funding in our State Fire Marshal’s Office (SFMO) for additional staff and
training resources for the Regional Direct Delivery Program (RDDP).
Fiscal Detail
(Dollars in thousands)
Operating Expenditures FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027
Fund 001-01* $600 $511 $511 $511
Total Expenditures $600 $511 $511 $511
Biennial Totals $1,111 $1,022
Staffing FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027
FTEs 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Average Annual 2.0 2.0
Object of Expenditure FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027
Object A - Salaries $157 $157 $157 $157
Object B - Benefits $60 $60 $60 $60
Object C - Professional Srvc. Contracts $100 $100 $100 $100
Object E - Goods and Services $52 $50 $50 $50
Object G - Travel $5 $5 $5 $5
Object J - Capital Outlays $106 $20 $20 $20
Object T - Indirect Costs $120 $119 $119 $119
23 Note: The decision package was obtained from the Office of Financial Management's Agency Budget Requests System
(https://abr.ofm.wa.gov/) and adapted into this report without substantive edit.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 31
Package Description
What is the problem, opportunity, or priority you are addressing with the request?
Our SFMO manages two firefighter basic training programs that support and help offset the financial costs to
local fire districts; the Basic Firefighter Reimbursement Program (BFFRP) and the RDDP. These programs
ensure both volunteer and career firefighters have access to training that will increase the health and safety
within the fire service to better serve our communities. Per RCW 43.43.934, the funding for these programs is
currently linked in such a way that increasing resources for the RDDP will also require increasing the
reimbursement rates of the BFFRP. This creates a conflict of interest between the programs because, as more
students are trained through RDDP, the reimbursement rates for the BFFRP also increase, reducing the funding
available to expand the RDDP.
The RDDP provides training to rural volunteer fire districts that lack the resources to utilize the BFFRP and
there is a clear need to expand the program to better fill this need. However, the current reimbursement
structure for the BFFRP directly reduces the resources available for the RDDP, and risks de-incentivizing
districts that would be better served utilizing the RDDP by making BFFRP reimbursements more attractive.
What is your proposal?
Our proposal to address this issue is twofold. We are separately requesting a language revision in RCW
43.43.934(1)(B)(ii)(A) to separate the two programs so that each one is its own standalone program, and in
this proposal we request funding for additional staff and training resources to expand the RDDP. Many rural
fire agencies do not have the staff needed to provide basic firefighter training for their volunteers and rely on
the RDDP. The RDDP has proven to be a huge asset to the state fire services, but has been hindered by a lack
of funding and resources.
What are you purchasing and how does it solve the problem?
This request is for two Deputy State Fire Marshal (DSFM) FTEs and related support costs, including certified
contract instructors to provide direct instruction, and the training materials necessary to allow us to meet the
growing needs of the RDDP.
The funding source requested for this proposal is General Fund-State because of current fund balance
concerns for the Fire Service Training Account (086), but we have submitted a legislative request for a
distribution change of the Fire Insurance Premium Tax that would resolve this issue. If approved, the Fire
Service Training Account is an appropriate funding source for this request.
What alternatives did you explore and why was this option chosen?
Since the two programs are tied together and compete for the same funding, one program suffers for the
other, and previously that has been the RDDP. If we do not receive additional funding, we will be limited to
maintaining the current level of service, which does not adequately meet the current need for the RDDP.
One individual currently manages the RDDP, and through the program, over 1,000 firefighters are trained each
year, but this level of staffing cannot support any growth of the program. By adding two DSFM FTEs, the
program can far exceed what has been previously accomplished.
Performance Measures
Performance Outcomes
With more staff, we will be able to train more firefighters and further develop the program rather than just
maintain it. The RDDP will collect data such as; cost per class, cost per student, materials required to run the
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 32
program, hours of travel, miles traveled, and mobile prop use. We will use this data to measure the program’s
success and cost of delivering training across the state in comparison to previous years.
Assumptions and Calculations
Expansion, reduction, elimination or alteration of a current program or service
This request adds two DSFM FTEs to the RDDP, increasing the total staffing to three. The historical
expenditures of the program are as follows:
RDDP Expenditure FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022
A – Salaries $42,005 $80,523 $91,660 $101,490
B – Benefits $16,448 $27,181 $30,832 $29,696
C – Professional Service Contracts $22,363 $69,188 $2,360 $90,428
E – Goods & Services $2,943 $10,786 $14,645 $11,631
G – Travel $809 $668 $361 $2,926
J – Capital Outlays $2,000 $3,147 $0 $0
TOTAL $86,568 $191,493 $139,858 $236,171
Detailed assumptions and calculations
See Attachment 1: Budget Estimator.
Workforce assumptions
Cost estimate is based on two DSFMs based on the job class salary at Step L as of July 1, 2022. Benefits are
based on current fiscal year 2023 rates. Expected one-time costs of $88,000 include vehicles, workstations,
computers and software, and phones for each FTE.
Estimates for goods and services, equipment, and travel are based on our agency rule-of-thumb costs per FTE,
which are derived from historical expenditures and adjusted for unit specific costs. Estimates for contract
instructors and consumable training supplies are based on past averages for the RDDP.
We base our estimate for agency indirect costs (Object T) on the approved federal indirect cost rate of 31.88%.
We apply this indirect cost rate percentage to all categories of expenditures with only two exceptions: capital
equipment and the portion of each professional contract in excess of $25,000. Indirect costs include, but are
not limited to, computer and telecommunications support, payroll processing, vendor payments, general
accounting, procurement administration, inventory control, and human resource management.
Strategic and Performance Outcomes
Strategic framework
Governor’s Results Washington Goals
GOAL: Healthy and Safe Communities
GOAL: Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 33
Washington State Patrol 2022-2024 Strategic Plan Outcomes
OUTCOME TO ACHIEVE: Effective Disaster Response
Long-term objectives:
We want to develop fire, law enforcement, and emergency management community partnerships ... So that we
can enhance and expand incident management and response capabilities.
Equity Impacts
How is your proposal impacting equity in the state?
The primary mission of the Washington State Patrol Fire Training Academy is to provide basic firefighter
training to underserved fire agencies throughout the state. Volunteer agencies are the top priority and will
greatly benefit from separating these two programs and adding two DSFMs to the RDDP.
Target Populations or Communities
Which target populations or communities benefits from this proposal? How will the population/community
benefit? Include the demographic and geographic communities.
The primary mission of the Washington State Patrol Fire Training Academy is to provide basic firefighter
training to underserved fire agencies throughout the state. We anticipate that all communities will benefit from
this proposal, but volunteer agencies are the top priority and will greatly benefit from separating the BFFRP and
RDDP programs, and adding two DSFMs to the RDDP.
Community Outreach and Engagement
Describe how your agency conducted community outreach and engagement by relationally partnering with
communities and populations who have historically been excluded and marginalized by governmental budget
decisions. How did your agency revise this proposal based upon the feedback provided through your
community outreach and engagement?
We are actively involved in community outreach efforts through our Government and Media Relations (GMR)
division as part of this request and our requested language revisions to RCW 43.43.934 – Concerning the
director of fire protection, and RCW 43.43.944 – Concerning the fire service training account.
Disproportional Impact Considerations
Which target populations or communities are not included, would be marginalized, or disproportionately
impacted by this proposal? Explain why and how these equity impacts will be addressed.
We do not expect any communities to be marginalized or disproportionately impacted by this proposal.
Other Collateral Connections
Intergovernmental
This proposal provides support to all tribal, regional, county, and city governments in the state by ensuring that
all fire service personnel are able to receive needed training. There are no anticipated negative impacts to any
group.
Stakeholder impacts
This proposal benefits all citizens of the state through improved training for fire service personnel. There is no
expected opposition.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 34
Legal or administrative mandates
N/A
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 35
Appendix D: SFMO cost estimates for
Recommendations D, F, G, and H
Table 9: Cost estimates for Recommendation D: DSFM Wage Parity Reclassification
(2023-2025)
Cost area SFY 2024 SFY 2025 2023-25 biennium Subsequent biennia
Salaries $0 $594,468 $594,468 $1,188,936
Benefits $0 $102,210 $102,210 $204,420
Total $0 $696,678 $696,678 $1,393,356
Table 10: Cost estimates for Recommendation F: fund the SFMO's training programs
(2023-25)
Cost area New FTEs SFY 2024 SFY 2025
Regional Direct Delivery 2 $419,857 $373,265
Fire Training Academy 22 $3,713,195 $3,642,707
Apprenticeship Not applicable24 $2,285,000 $2,285,000
Total 24 $6,418,052 $6,300,972
Table 11: Cost estimates for Recommendation H: establish a Fire Investigation
Division (2023-25)
Cost area SFY 2024 SFY 2025 2023-25 biennium Subsequent biennia
FTE 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
A - Salaries $879,936 $906,372 $1,786,308 $1,812,744
B - Benefits $231,783 $295,907 $527,690 $591,813
C - Contracts $0 $0 $0 $0
E - Goods/Services $164,617 $129,265 $293,881 $258,529
G - Travel $21,600 $21,600 $43,200 $43,200
J - Equipment $276,780 $51,621 $328,401 $103,242
T - Indirect Costs $437,249 $455,693 $892,942 $911,387
Total $2,011,964 $1,860,457 $3,872,422 $3,720,915
24 The Fire Fighter Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee provides local fire departments with financial support for the cost of
firefighter apprenticeship trainings, The three year program includes on-the-job training in conjunction with technical instruction which
meets National Fire Protection Association standards, is accredited, and provides college-level credit.
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 36
Table 12: Cost estimates for Recommendation G: hire six additional Mobilization staff
(2023-25)
Cost area SFY 2024 SFY 2025 2023-25 biennium Subsequent biennia
FTE 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
A - Salaries $513,276 $528,696 $1,041,972 $1,057,392
B - Benefits $146,829 $184,647 $331,475 $369,293
C - Contracts $0 $0 $0 $0
E - Goods/Services $57,192 $36,024 $93,216 $72,048
G - Travel $14,400 $14,400 $28,800 $28,800
J - Equipment $167,760 $31,062 $198,822 $62,124
T - Indirect Costs $246,865 $257,580 $504,445 $515,160
Total $1,146,322 $1,052,408 $2,198,730 $2,104,817
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 37
Appendix E: Fire Insurance Premium Tax distributions,
2014-2023
Statute
Distribution Notes
Fund Code Amount Percentages
$17,707,938 2014 total distributed
086 $3,541,587 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $7,083,175 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $4,426,984 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $2,656,190 15% General Budget
$17,506,438 2015 total distributed
086 $3,501,287 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $7,002,575 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $4,376,609 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $2,625,965 15% General Budget
$18,086,662 2016 total distributed
086 $3,617,332 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $7,234,664 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $4,521,665 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $2,712,998 15% General Budget
$18,613,790 2017 total distributed
086 $3,722,757 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $7,445,515 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $4,653,447 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $2,792,068 15% General Budget
$19,317,392 2018 total distributed
086 $3,863,478 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $7,726,956 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $4,829,347 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $2,897,608 15% General Budget
$20,368,738 2019 total distributed
086 $4,073,747 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $8,147,495 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $5,092,184 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $3,055,311 15% General Budget
$21,740,819 2020 total distributed
086 $4,348,163 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $8,696,327 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $10,870,409 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 38
Statute
Distribution Notes
Fund Code Amount Percentages
001 ($2,174,081) 15% General Budget
$22,660,948 2021 total distributed
086 $4,532,189 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $9,064,379 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $5,665,236 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $3,399,142 15% General Budget
$24,361,984 2022 total distributed
086 $4,872,396 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $9,744,793 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $6,090,496 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $3,654,297 15% General Budget
$26,755,650 2023 total distributed
086 $5,351,129 20% Fire Service Training Account
204 $10,702,259 40% Volunteer Firefighters' and Reserve Officers' Administrative Account
190 $6,688,912 25% Cities, Towns, Fire Districts for Local Pension Funds
001 $4,013,347 15% General Budget
FIRE SERVICE DELIVERY REPORT 39
File and source
- File
- 2023_fire-service-delivery-reportfinal-5f09d0a7-09bb-47d0-b858-5ec19b031e8f.pdf
- Size
- 793,643 bytes
- SHA-256
- 5ea60c5b6627a661e99fdf875d3edb904ad85d7bd6bfdf9b0b6d4ea1b7e55215
- Original
- app.leg.wa.gov