JW's curiosity is worthy of being satisfied. Here is an idea. JW, why don't you ask the cities of Olympia and Tumwater "how recently updated the database the calculator pulls from is"? Then you can see if it is consistent with your "experience".
Also ask them about your thinking whether this won't leave "a giant hole in the budget". But do get the documentation (with numbers) to substantiate what they say. Also remember that there is just as great a possibility that they are "over" counting in which case the hole is not in their budget but rather it will be in our family budgets.
Either way, over- and under-charges, even if they net out to zero through off-setting errors, reflects poorly on the entire RFA effort.
Finally, you say you are perplexed "...that people expect something of this enormity to be perfect right out of the gate". You are correct it is an enormous proposal. Knowing that, how can you be perplexed that people would expect the single most important municipal function of fire and emergency medical services be designed and implemented well?
Why would anyone want to unnecessarily risk their lives and property to a half-baked, poorly understood (even by the advocates) and carelessly implemented plan? Especially when Tumwater and Olympia FDs are the BEST performing fire jurisdictions in the county and Olympia is second to none for a city its size in the State of Washington?
If the RFA passes and then we find it has made mistakes in the way it assesses revenues, we could be in the West Thurston fire district situation where we will have to close fire stations and layoff firefighters and emergency responders -- that is not just a money problem that sending a refund check fixes. If that happens response times will skyrocket and real people are at risk to suffer injury or death and loss of property while the bugs are worked out.
So, voters, why take the risk that the revenues will fall short due to the RFA not being able to count very well and/or from bad formulas in their programming? And even if the RFA revenue projection turns out to be on target due to the budgeteer's patron saint of offsetting errors, a lawsuit is likely from those who overpaid. This situation was noted by the RFA consultants and their on-loan-from-Olympia attorney and they said it would mean revenues would be put on hold or it will require a second election to set the fees correctly. And how would you fund an RFA while you wait for the outcome of the second election?
I end with the prediction by the recently retired Tumwater City Manager, John Doan,
"I'll be honest though, it is going, because it has to stand up as an organization. It is going to be a bumpy three or four or five years initially for the organization. There is not a whole lot we can do about that other than you know, raising the benefit charge to numbers that are that would probably be scary...". Hear him say it here: https://www.saveourfd.org/risky
I urge you and others who now have the information to make an informed, data driven decision and vote NO on Prop. 1.
Best wishes to all and the polls close at 8:00 pm next Tuesday.
Please explain the inappropriate content below.
