MV Fire Meets with Commissioners EMS Contract Discussion
Meadows Valley Rural Fire District’s Board of Commissioners monthly meeting hosted a few extra participants this month. The first agenda item for discussion and possible action included the proposed contract between the Fire District and Adams County. Fire Commissioners (FCs) Amanda Branstetter, Tracy Peterson, and Keith Westengard along with Fire Chief Doug Buys, were joined by County Commissioners (CCs) Joe Iveson, Viki Purdy, and Daren Ward.
The commissioners jumped straight into contract terms and a request by the FCs to consider striking automatic renewal and change to an annual review of the contract. Both parties agreed.
Attorneys for both Fire and County were on hand and quickly involved in the discussion. A line in the proposed contract stating, “the Fire District shall operate an ambulance and EMS for the residents within the Ambulance District” had Fire Department attorney Bill Punkony add to the discussion citing a fire case in Shoshone. He said the CCs should consider standards of service and ensure the contract does not over promise considering local weather, breakdowns, and unforeseen complications. Chief Buys added that having a document that says we will always have an ambulance available is setting a standard of care that we can not promise. County Prosecuting Attorney Peter Donovan interjected they could modify the contract language to include contingencies and find language we can all be happy with. Punkony agreed they could work through the language together.
Westengard clarified that they strive to provide 24/7 care, but don’t want to be locked into something that could make them liable in case of service impediments.
The majority of the conversation revolved around a contract term regarding ownership of equipment and property related to EMS services. The proposal said all equipment and property purchased by the Fire District would remain with the Fire District regardless of fund source to purchase said supplies. The next line stated, “However, at least 33% of the total operating costs provided by the Ambulance District under this Agreement shall henceforth be allocated toward the purchase of assets that will be owned by the Ambulance District.” Chief Buys asked where the percentage came from and Iveson and Purdy said it was basically a number to start negotiations from.
The conversation that followed involved frank statements about the history of the ambulance district and the county’s involvement and contributions versus those of the fire district. A main concern of the CCs was the possibility of dissolution of the agreement and both parties had concern for ill intentions. Iveson said, “We’re only asking for this clause to protect the people who paid the taxes”. Chief Buys said “We don’t want to break the contract anywhere. Our top concern when Brundage entered the conversation was the time and money to take care of ambulance runs up there.” Punkony added, “we have to be really careful about how we allocate our resources because driving that ambulance up the hill…it means during that time the people of New Meadows, that ambulance is unavailable to them.” Purdy said the concern is “no matter what your boundaries are, you’re required to service the people in that area and if you can’t do that for a reason (if there’s a wreck somewhere else) that’s fine, but we can’t just refuse service.” She said the County has to provide Ambulance service and if Meadows Valley Fire decided to step out at any time, the county would have to figure out ambulance coverage from scratch.
The conversation continued to discuss long term plans and Westengard brought up the FCs plan in 5-10 years to have a full time 24/7 department.
Iveson conceded he was fine with removing the 33% clause but said he wanted to include something to protect ”the assets of the people” specifically MV ambulance equipment. Punkoney said, “I understand that the commissioners have some skin in the game because they’re the ones that set the levy and so they should have some oversight.” He added since the CCs set the budget and levy, that gives them some oversight already.
All parties agreed they were willing or happy to strike the clause. Chief Buys affirmed, “We want 10 years from now to say this is a good contract, everybody’s covered.” Iveson said his concern is for “all these people out there, that this equipment goes with them, the community.” Punkoney wondered if all parties were concerned about losing their investments and asked what could be put into the agreement to provide security for both sides.
Punkoney continued that he thought both parties had reached an understanding of motives and intent. He recommended that they create a working group to discuss an agreement proposal and present to both boards in fiscal year 2026. All parties were in agreement that this would put them on a good track and satisfy what they were looking for. Purdy also offered help with writing grants. Ward said greater communication in the future would help a lot and that “a working group sounds like a good stepping stone of having more communication and letting us know what the needs are for the ambulance district…I think that would help all of us stay on track.
Westengard made a motion to reject the proposed contract and continue with the old contract for now. He included a proposal to move forward with a working group to put together potential contract plans for the future and present those at a future joint meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
