Merging fire services is tricky business

In January, the state started handing out money to local governments as incentives to consolidate public services with neighbors. Fire protection sharing figured prominently in the first round of 27 grants totaling $4.3 million.

But it's the lack of money, rather than the prospect of more, that should force more communities to look at service mergers, says a fire protection consultant.

"There is quite a bit of room for improvement," said Ray Riggs, former assistant fire chief for West Bloomfield Township in Oakland County and a consultant on public safety to the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments.

Riggs isn't a fan of consolidating police and fire functions -- a move taken or considered in a variety of Michigan communities -- arguing that only certain, smaller, communities are suitable for public safety departments. He notes that many fire departments already cooperate anyway, through mutual aid pacts, joint purchasing and sharing of training expenses.

According to the Michigan Townships Association, 57 percent of the Michigan townships that provide fire services have a joint fire operation with another government unit; as do 74 percent of townships that provide police services -- and 80 percent of those with ambulance services.

Riggs argues local governments could do even more. Communities could save money and boost service by merging multiple authorities into one, closing redundant fire stations and eliminating duplicated equipment such as aerial ladder trucks with their $750,000 price tags. He pegs potential savings at as much as 30 percent.

"I really think that needs to be the future," he said.

All that stands in the way, he argues, are local politics, labor issues and the inherent emotions of any community's debate over fire service.

"Good luck with that," Riggs quipped.

The cities of Lansing and East Lansing and four neighboring townships are now looking at the feasibility of forming a regional fire authority.

Samantha Harkins, a legislative associate with the Michigan Municipal League who happens to live in Lansing, said such an agreement makes sense. She lives near a fire station in Lansing -- and there's another township station less than two miles away.

"Do we really need those two fire stations?" she asked.

Randy Talifarro is Lansing's new fire chief -- and East Lansing's long-standing one. In a rather unusual arrangement, Talifarro is leading both departments as part of the exploration of how best to maximize fire protection dollars.

He concedes the challenges are plentiful.

"It's hard to take entirely different systems and mash them together," he said.

By contrast, price seems to be no object to residents of Leelanau County's Glen Arbor Township when it comes to fire protection. According to Munetrix, the 859 residents in the tony Lake Michigan tourist destination topped the state in per capita spending for fire protection at $817.

Eric Dubord, acting chief of the Glen Lake Fire Department, said few seem to mind. The department covers Glen Arbor and Empire townships, a sparsely settled area with about 2,000 year-round residents. That swells to perhaps 10,000 in summer months.

"We have a lot of high-dollar homes. The community has realized if it pays extra money and staffing, they are getting a better product."

Dubord said residents were glad to chip in to buy a $265,000, 28-foot fire boat that went into service in 2011. It gives the department the ability to fight fires on boats and wildfires near the water, as well as blazes at waterfront homes.

"It was pretty much paid for in three months," he said.

In addition to the boat, the department includes two stations, a full-time chief, three lieutenants and 15 full-time and eight part-time firefighters. Six firefighters are on duty at all times.

Ted Roelofs worked for the Grand Rapids Press for 30 years, where he covered everything from politics to social services to military affairs. He has earned numerous awards, including for work in Albania during the 1999 Kosovo refugee crisis.

Facts matter. Trust matters. Journalism matters.

If you learned something from the story you're reading please consider supporting our work. Your donation allows us to keep our Michigan-focused reporting and analysis free and accessible to all. All donations are voluntary, but for as little as $1 you can become a member of Bridge Club and support freedom of the press in Michigan during a crucial election year.

Pay with VISA Pay with MasterCard Pay with American Express Donate now

Comment Form

Add new comment

Dear Reader: We value your thoughts and criticism on the articles, but insist on civility. Criticizing comments or ideas is welcome, but Bridge won’t tolerate comments that are false or defamatory or that demean, personally attack, spread hate or harmful stereotypes. Violating these standards could result in a ban.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.


Tue, 05/22/2012 - 11:31am
Before talks get serious about consolidation there need to be some expectations on what the consolidation will deliver. Is the consolidation solely for cost saving (efficiencies) or is it about quality of service (effectiveness)? If it is the former simply findout who is doing it for the least amount of money and do what they are doing. Are simply fire all administative people for all but one department and have all other share that service. If it is about effectiveness then what is the desired service has to be defined and planss developed how to deliever that service, with the changes in technology that will likely create greater cost savings. Befor everything else what the purpose of consolidation is to deliver must be described in specific detail and measures must be develped to verify that what is being done is achieving that purpose otherwise a good start will meander into ab porr ending.