The fire service contract between the City of Clearwater, Clearwater Twp. and Lynden Twp. has been a topic of debate for years.

 

Last March, both townships didn’t like the idea of a big spike in their fire service levy that occurred when the department’s budget took a big jump.

 

Last October, Administrator Kevin Kress met with representatives for both townships to look at ways to make the formula more equitable.

 

Currently, one third of the total fire budget is split three ways. The remaining two thirds of the budget is determined by the number of calls averaged over the previous three years.

 

Kress said the townships asked him to look into doing a five-year rolling average instead.

 

That was one of the examples he presented to the city council at the Jan. 14 meeting. Other factors included population, market value and potentially, the number of buildings.

 

“I’m looking for some guidance from the council to see if there’s any desire to change the original contract with the townships,” he said.

 

With no change to the contract, the city’s share of the 2019 $311,861 fire budget would be $143,819.76. Clearwater Twp. would pay $84,720.84 and Lynden Twp. would pay $83,320.40.

 

If the formula was based just on the number of calls, those numbers would change to $165,872.38, $73,779.20 and $72,209.43.

 

The numbers would change dramatically if the formula changed to market value plus a five-year call average. The city would pay $116,236.77. Clearwater Twp. would pay $96,739.08 and Lynden Twp. would pay $98,885.65. 

 

Using the number of structures in each jurisdiction was another variable, but Kress said those numbers were not available for the meeting. But they may play a major role in the formula if Councilman Richard Petty’s idea is embraced.

 

“I don’t like the call method whatsoever,” he said. “We have fire protection based on the fact that you have the ability (to use it). It’s there if you need it.”

He said just because the department answers a call shouldn’t be a factor in determining how much anyone pays.

 

“The fact that we have a service provided for each individual and each house is what you’re paying for,” he said. “So the call method doesn’t necessarily  encompass that. It only encompasses how much you use it, not the fact that you have it.”

 

He said the fairest way is to base the formula on the ability to use the service, not the actual use.

 

His idea is to create a formula using a combination of population and number of structures. He said each structure could be assigned a number value based on size and type (residential, industrial, commercial, accessory...), like buildings are charged by the number of equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) for water and sewer usage.

 

He said once the numbers are assigned, there is no need to try to calculate the number of calls and where they happened each year. New structures can be tracked through the assessor’s office or building permits and population figures are released each year. 

 

The difficult thing will be to try to get an initial list and type of all existing structures.

 

“I think it’s a good time to be looking at this,” said Councilman Kris Crandall.

 

“I think Petty’s method is going to be hard, but I can see where it can be fair.”

Petty suggested having a workshop meeting with the townships first to see if they are on board before doing any leg work on the structures.

“We need to discuss the process, then get the numbers,” he said.

Both townships hold their annual meetings in March where they set their levy for the following year.