Concerns are emerging about the actual cost to residents in both incorporated and unincorporated areas and whether the financial burden outweighs the promised benefits
As residents in Camas and Washougal prepare to vote on the proposed Proposition 1 Regional Fire Authority (RFA) in a special election on April 22, growing concerns are emerging about the actual cost to residents in both incorporated and unincorporated areas and whether the financial burden outweighs the promised benefits.
City leaders are touting the RFA model as a more “equitable and fair” path to replace the current interlocal agreement that delivers a shared services model to Camas and Washougal. The RFA proposal would create a new taxing district, establishing a new flat property tax levy of $1.05 per $1,000 assessed value in both cities. Both cities are promising a reduction in the general fund property tax levies currently applied to fire services but will keep other recently voter-approved tax levies for ambulance service and new fire station construction in play.
City leaders appear to be downplaying how this tax adds to a collection of taxes residents already pay for fire and emergency medical services (EMS). Gary Perman, Camas resident and city-appointed chair of the opposition committee for Proposition 1, performed a detailed analysis of the proposal, revealing that the average Camas homeowner would likely face an annual increase of $329.29 in property taxes, amounting to a 17.58% jump in fire-related costs in the first year alone.
“The math simply doesn’t add up for residents,” said Perman. “The resident cost of an RFA is significantly more without demonstrating proportional service improvement.”
Some residents are questioning the timing and urgency of the RFA proposal, calling it “a solution in search of a problem.” Recent city surveys show 87% resident satisfaction with the Camas-Washougal Fire Department and 90% approval of emergency response times – ranking among Washington’s best.
The RFA proposal combines Camas and Washougal fire services into a new taxing district. While city officials have promised a general fund property tax levy reduction, this is guaranteed only for the first year.
Current fire-related costs for the average Camas home valued at $731,772 run approximately $156.11 monthly. Under the RFA, that same homeowner would pay $183.55 monthly — a $27.44 increase of nearly $330 annually. “The increase to the annual taxpayer bill is approximately $2,202.63 for Camas homeowners. We’re still getting validation on the numbers for Washougal residents, but it’s looking like the impact will be around a collective 51% increase for fire services,” added Perman.
At recent open house events hosted by each city, residents’ questions centered around specific problems the RFA would solve that couldn’t be addressed through amendments to the current arrangement.
Advocates for the RFA maintain it would create a more sustainable funding structure for fire and emergency services across both communities. Opponents counter that the proposal shifts too much financial burden to homeowners without demonstrating why the current Interlocal agreement couldn’t be modified to address any legitimate concerns.
The proposal includes several other financial considerations that have raised the alarm for some residents. The RFA requires interim “start-up” funding of $4.6 million by the city of Camas. New construction would face impact fees ranging from $0.38 to $0.92 per square foot, potentially affecting development in the growing region. The levy rate supporting the RFA could also increase after the first year without requiring voter approval.
In an open house presentation, local fire chief Cliff Free defended the proposal, citing the need for improved governance and operational efficiencies, including shifting from two-man to three-man crews. However, Free has struggled to articulate specific deficiencies in the current system’s service levels that would justify the additional cost to taxpayers.
Both cities would transfer fire stations and equipment without compensation to the RFA governing body yet would have to pay market value plus improvements to reclaim them – meaning “the RFA owns the assets, Camas and Washougal residents own the debt.” Both the City and the RFA would have authority to raise property taxes, EMS levies, and various fees, creating dual taxing districts that compound residents’ financial burden.
Critics point out that the RFA’s funding structure relies heavily on property tax levies and service fees that will fluctuate yearly. When these revenue sources fall short – as they typically do – RFAs often demand additional funding, creating a cycle of less predictable costs with decreasing local oversight. Camas and Washougal residents already pay the highest property tax rate in Clark County, plus recent increases in sales tax, business license fees, utility taxes, and transportation district assessments.
Small business owners in both communities have expressed concern about the rushed timeline for the proposal and the lack of a detailed third-party analysis comparing the current system’s performance with projected improvements under an RFA. Additionally, both cities’ handling of recent fire station bonds has raised serious concerns about transparency and governance – issues that would be exacerbated by transferring control to a less accountable RFA board.
As the April 22 vote approaches, the citizens’ group “Fiscal Responsibility First” has organized a series of informational sessions focused on analyzing call volume data and the effectiveness of the current Interlocal agreement. Their message is clear: “Let’s keep our critical services under local control without additional taxes.”
Editor’s note: Clark County Today welcomes reader comments on this issue. Send us your thoughts.
Also read:
- Signatures filed for initiatives on parental rights, blocking trans athletes from girls’ sports
Supporters of two initiatives on parental rights and transgender participation in girls’ sports filed signatures Friday, moving the measures closer to consideration by Washington lawmakers. - Vancouver Police investigate shooting
Vancouver Police are investigating a fatal shooting reported early Jan. 3 outside the Off-Ramp Sports Bar on Northeast 112th Avenue. - Vancouver Police release critical incident video from Dec. 28 officer-involved shooting
Vancouver Police Department released a Critical Incident Video related to a December 28 officer-involved shooting while the Office of Independent Investigations continues its review. - Opinion: Transit agencies need accountability not increased state subsidy
Charles Prestrud argues that Washington transit agencies face rising costs and declining ridership due to governance structures that lack public accountability. - Letter: ‘For years, American foreign policy too often felt like a blank check’
Vancouver resident Peter Bracchi argues that the 2025 National Security Strategy marks a long-overdue shift toward clearer priorities, shared responsibility, and interest-based American leadership. - POLL: Are you better off than you were a year ago?
This week’s poll asks readers to reflect on their personal financial situation and whether they feel better off than they were a year ago as economic conditions continue to shift. - Opinion: Does tailgating cause speeding?
Target Zero Manager Doug Dahl examines whether tailgating contributes to speeding and explains why following too closely increases crash risk with little benefit.
We do not need ANOTHER NEW GOVERNMENT TAXING AGENCY. Once established, the taxes ALWAYS go UP. We already paid for new fire houses. And, new EMT costs. NO ! NEVER ! STOP !
No new taxes at this time of economic andvpolitical uncertainty during this national administration. My grocery bill is 15 to 20% higher now and Trump tariffs have yet to kick in.
That’s gonna be a no from me dog
Would someone please tell me what the issue is or issues are that demand the creation of a new taxing agency. What are the administrative costs for the new agency? How is the leadership chosen or replaced? To whom are they accountable? We have a mayor and city council. If there is a problem with the current agreement then do your jobs and fix it. That’s what we pay you for, not to create more buracracy. My vote is “no” until my questions are answered. WJB
The issue is threefold. First, the most expensive option would be to separate into two separate fire departments again who have their own administrative level positions. This would likely result in decreased line personnel staffing. This leads to the second problem, the agreement between the two cities expires at the end of 2026 and there is no plan to continue. The RFA is the continuation plan! There are many reasons why they don’t plan to continue but the simple answer is that it hasn’t been a happy marriage. The third problem is that the CWFD is a grossly underfunded department. Growth in the department has largely been stagnant despite large increases in population growth and community needs. This is due to the limits of the agreement and to an unpredictable funding model. You, as the citizen, may likely have never noticed, but it is not uncommon for your fire department to have zero available resources at multiple points throughout any given day due to the current call volume and staffing levels. Your firefighters have done a wonderful job at making it work for the past 20 years but it’s at a breaking point. Listen to your firefighters!
As far as leadership goes, there will be 6 commissioner positions that will initially be elected officials from the current councils, 3 Washougal and 3 Camas. Those positions will term out and new commissioners will be elected. Using the existing city councilors is only to get it off the ground. It will soon be elected officials who have no other interest other than managing the fire authority. They are elected by and accountable to YOU, the tax payer.and voter.
Currently you, as a resident, have zero control over anything the city does with the fire department with exception to the EMS Levy that needs voter approval for lid lifts. Otherwise, the city decides what kind of fire department you need and what they are giving you is a largely underfunded department. You can tell them to “figure it out,” but the truth is, they don’t have to. So, you elect a new mayor and council and hope they figure it out, but they don’t either. Again, this is a 20 year or more problem that has seen many mayors and many councils.
Look at it this way, wouldn’t you like to know where every dollar of tax that you paid went? Well, currently you don’t. It is given to the city and they decide what to do with it. Forming a regional fire authority would take one thing off of the city’s plate and you would know with 100% certainty that ever dollar you pay to the RFA is being directly used for fire and EMS services.
At the end of the day, RFA’s are becoming more and more popular in WA. There are many cities who have been down this path and there is not one city that went back to managing the fire department after forming an RFA.
Sounds like the problem is the major and city councilors elected are not doing their jobs well. Then we should make them accountable instead of creating new way to get more money from the residents when the same corruption may repeat again in the new system.
When government only guarantees no tax increases for 1 year every one needs to beware. I remember a few years ago property taxes had a one time increase to better fund schools. The increase caused my tax bill to go from $2500 to over $4300. My taxes today are over $5000.
State legislature is presently pushing to change the 1% ceiling on property tax increases to 3%. If this goes through you know more spending projects will surface,
Not a revenue problem but a spending other people’s money problem.