Four of Five Enfield Fire Districts Considering 2027 Merger
 |
| The sample assessed value is based on my Southwood Acres home assessment. I live in the Hazardville Fire District. I'm using it for illustrative purposes. Take these figures with a large grain of salt. This estimate was taken from the minutes of meeting and any proposal has a long way to go before it makes to a voter referendum. But they do give an idea of what might happen. |
This is an update to my previous post. I didn’t have the Consolidation Committee minutes at the time, but they provide necessary context. The minutes confirm that only four of the five districts are working on a merger. Enfield Fire District 1 is not part of this effort.
This is new: The estimated combined tax rate for the four districts is 4.66 mills.
The Fire District Consolidation Committee estimates that the four districts would receive $11.4 million in income at a mill rate of 4.66. (See Feb. 12, 2025 minutes) Enfield 1 is holding out. The minutes note: "If Enfield [District 1] decided to join the consolidation, the mill rate would drop." Potential savings come from multiple areas, including consolidating insurance, aligning pension plans, and combining administration and governance, according to the minutes.
Yesterday, I estimated a blended tax rate for all five districts at about 4 mills, based on a simple average of the current rates. That included Enfield 1. This committee estimate is more precise for the four districts moving ahead.
It’s a financial argument for keeping separate districts, but it also raises a broader question.
Enfield 1’s effectiveness — and the effectiveness of all of Enfield’s fire districts — depends on a coordinated emergency response system that protects everyone, no matter where they live. If homeowners in one part of town pay less for fire protection but still benefit from mutual aid, they’re getting full service without paying the full cost.
The real question is whether separate tax rates for a coordinated system are fair — or whether it’s time to share the costs evenly across town. That’s the economic ‘free rider’ problem in action: people benefit from a shared service but don’t pay their fair share to support it.
That’s the issue Enfield 1 — and every voter — must weigh if this goes to a referendum. The strength of our emergency services depends on everyone sharing the cost, just as they share the response.
Yesterday, I estimated a blended tax rate for all five districts at about 4 mills, based on a simple average of the current rates. That included Enfield 1. This committee estimate is more precise for the four districts moving ahead.
This is new: Expected timeline
A voter referendum would be held by November 2026. If approved, the combined fire district would start in July 2027, the beginning of the fiscal year. This is all tentative. (See April 9, 2025 minutes)Reality check: This information is preliminary
Please note that there is no formal consolidation proposal yet, and the Town Council has not yet taken it up. This information is from minute notes, so its subject to change.Why is Enfield FD 1 opposing consolidation?
In a letter dated Dec. 24, 2024, to the Enfield Patch, Enfield 1’s commission president, Vincent Grady, argued that it would be a “disservice to Enfield Fire District taxpayers to absorb debt that wasn’t incurred by the district.” He pointed out that their district currently has zero underlying debt, and that consolidation would mean taking on an estimated $6.3 million in debt from the other districts.It’s a financial argument for keeping separate districts, but it also raises a broader question.
Enfield 1’s effectiveness — and the effectiveness of all of Enfield’s fire districts — depends on a coordinated emergency response system that protects everyone, no matter where they live. If homeowners in one part of town pay less for fire protection but still benefit from mutual aid, they’re getting full service without paying the full cost.
The real question is whether separate tax rates for a coordinated system are fair — or whether it’s time to share the costs evenly across town. That’s the economic ‘free rider’ problem in action: people benefit from a shared service but don’t pay their fair share to support it.
That’s the issue Enfield 1 — and every voter — must weigh if this goes to a referendum. The strength of our emergency services depends on everyone sharing the cost, just as they share the response.
Substack sign up for notifications of new posts and occasional noteworthy items not on blog: https://enfieldthings.substack.com/
Comments
Post a Comment