Mediator gives Brighton fire recommendations

BRIGHTON — A mediator in an ongoing dispute between the city of Brighton, its volunteer fire department, and area townships and cities covered by the service, gave his recommendations to the parties at a public meeting Tuesday night.

The monthslong disagreement involves the department’s funding, and non-city residents’ input for a fire protection 28E agreement, a document that regulates efforts shared between different levels of government.

Patrick Callahan, who the city hired to help negotiate the dispute and defuse tensions between the parties, said everyone involved had the right intentions, but struggled to work together.

"You are all well-motivated, you’re in it because you want to help this community,“ he said. ”You might have differences of opinion in how you do it, or how it’s funded, but (fire protection) is everybody’s common goal.“

Callahan made his own proposals in an effort to compromise between the parties’ sticking points on a possible new fire protection agreement. The government bodies at the meeting took no action on those proposals, however. Callahan said they should think on it.

“This is going to be a lot to absorb,” he said. “What I’m asking you to do is take it and think about it, and ponder it … and then get together as a group and say, ‘OK, does this make sense?’”

While disputing parties haven’t commented on Callahan’s proposal yet, several of its differences from both the status quo and a 28E proposed by the townships were immediately clear.

A pivotal part of a 28E proposed by township trustees was the establishment of a fire advisory board, which would guide city decisions on the subject and have power to settle funding disputes between the department and the city. The move was backed by County Attorney John Gish, who represents the townships, and said he believed it was legal. Representatives from the fire department had also endorsed the trustees’ offer.

The mediator’s suggestion would still create such a body, but Callahan recommended against delegating any budgetary authority. He said doing so might be illegal, or if nothing else, unlikely for a city council.

“The responsibility for the money still fall on the council, who are elected by the taxpayers, so I did not put anything in there that gave the advisory board that much power,” he said. “The board’s going to have all kinds of political power … if the council chooses to ignore you, next November, they’ve got to face the voters. It might be an issue in the next election.

“I’ll put it to you this way. If I were on that council, I would not do that. I was elected with a job to do, and now my hands are tied for doing that job. So if that’s a deal breaker, I’m not sure where you go from here.”

The recommendation from Callahan would have the city establish an advisory board by resolution, rather than embedding it in a 28E agreement. He said the approach would allow changes down the road. Additionally, a resolution could pass without the wait of a legal process associated with 28E changes.

“They may operate for six or 12 months and say, ‘You know what, we ought to tweak it this way or this way,’” Callahan said. “That board will come together and talk to the council about whether or not that resolution needs to be modified.”

Another of Callahan’s recommendations involves the fire fund. While costs associated with the department are currently split between its budget and the city general fund, he said consolidation would help prevent bookkeeping mistakes and misunderstandings.

"I think to have a big picture of what all those costs are, all that expense comes out of the fire fund,“ he said. ”But all payments go to the fire fund too. Including all the township payments, all the city payments. You do the math, figure out what the insurance costs, that could be put in the same fund. Nothing changes in terms of total dollars in and out, it’s just how you do it.“

In a departure from both the current and proposed 28Es, Callahan proposed that the city write up a fire protection agreement with each protected entity individually. While those agreements would be almost identical, he said the bilateral documents would prevent administrative headaches.

"What if one township says, ‘You know what, we’re going to scale back on the amount of territory that you’re covering,’ or maybe you want to add the territory,“ Callahan said. ”Now, you’ve got to go back and rewrite the agreement and come up with a new Exhibit A, and get everybody’s signatures.“

In terms of relationship-repairing efforts, Callahan proposed a memorandum of understanding, which would state intentions to communicate between the city, department and townships.

“Once a year, you should all sit down at one meeting, as a joint meeting, and all share ideas, any thoughts, any concerns,” he said. “I’m also going to (ask) the fire department to give an annual report to the city … I’m hoping that if you adopt this memorandum of understanding that there will be improved transparency, improved honesty between everyone.”

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com