Arcata Fire District:
Community Risk Assessment – Standards of Cover Deployment Analysis
Report by AP Triton
Dated: July 2025
The “Standards of Cover Deployment Analysis” was commissioned by the City Council in January 2024. The cost of this report is $109,123, with that cost to split equally by the City of Arcata, the Arcata Fire Protection District (AFD), and Cal Poly Humboldt University.
The report was initially expected to be presented in final form on August 1, 2024. The due date for this report was extended — twice. The report was made available to the AFD Board of Directors and the general public in late July, 2025 — about one year late.
The report was intended to be discussed at the City Council / Arcata Fire District study session on July 30, 2025. That meeting was interrupted, and the study session is due to take place on Wednesday, September 10, 2025.
It is the opinion of Arcata1.com that this report is of minimal usefulness. The report does not accomplish its stated goals. In the one-page Excecutive Summary, it states:
“This plan is designed to prevent the fire district from falling behind as the community grows and changes and to facilitate policy and budgeting decisions for elected officials.”
In actuality, the report does none of that. The sum of the 18 recommendations that are included in the report are barely enough to keep with inflation over the next 10, 20, or 30 years. There are no solid resources or funding sources proposed that would serve to expand the Arcata Fire District’s capabilities, as is so greatly needed.
- The Executive Summary
- The Recommendations
- Section on “University Funding”
These paragraphs are pure fluff, and contain absolutely nothing of concrete value. - The full report – 291 pages
1. The Executive Summary
2. The Recommendations
3. “University Funding”
University Funding
Given Cal Poly Humboldt’s expansion plans, AFPD could explore funding mechanisms to ensure the University’s growth does not place undue strain on AFPD’s resources. While the University is exempt from property taxes, AFPD can consider the imposition of impact fees or a renewed service agreement.
Of those two options, it is recommended that AFPD and the University consider a mutually beneficial negotiation of a new service agreement. This agreement should clearly outline the roles, responsibilities, and expectations of both AFPD and the University.
A new service agreement would allow both AFPD and Cal Poly Humboldt to set transparent expectations regarding financial contributions, response times, service availability, and coordination during large-scale events or emergencies. All responsibilities and expectations can be mutually negotiated.
Comment from Arcata1.com:
” AFPD could explore funding mechanisms to ensure the University’s growth does not place undue strain on AFPD’s resources.”
“A new service agreement would allow both AFPD and Cal Poly Humboldt to set transparent expectations regarding financial contributions, response times, service availability, and coordination during large-scale events or emergencies. All responsibilities and expectations can be mutually negotiated.”
Yes, the AFD “could” explore funding mechanisms. As to “mutually negotiated” financial contributions, what happens if the AFD asks for $1.75 million annually and the University offers $50,000?
What is outlined here is not a path foward. It is wishful thinking.
4. The Full Report
291 pages