ATHABASCA – Three months after Athabasca County councillors last discussed potential cost recovery plans for their fire departments, the policy will be going back for further changes to limit the costs of non-human-caused fires for county residents.
During the Aug. 19 committee of the whole meeting, Athabasca County councillors weighed in on a presentation from county fire chief Travis Shalapay; they’d last discussed the topic in May, when they directed him to bring back a proposal with a $20,000 cost cap.
“We also received a lot of feedback with regards to that day and that conversation; when we listened to that feedback it was very loud and clear that non-human caused fires should not be capped at $20,000, they shouldn’t be charged at all,” said Reeve Tracy Holland.
Whether or not the municipality should be charging residents for fires that weren’t their fault has been one sticking point for councillors; some, like Holland and Gary Cromwell, have argued against the practice, while others, including Brian Hall and Ashtin Anderson, have said subsidizing fire responses encourages residents to not insure their properties for fire responses, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars.
“The human element, saying that we’re going to recover (costs) just because we can, I think is completely out of line. I would not be able to support that,” said Cromwell.
According to Shalapay, there isn’t an industry standard when it comes to cost recovery. Certain municipalities don’t charge at all for fire response, instead relying on heavy fines for rule breakers, while others may only bill if the individual has the means to pay the invoice.
“A lot of municipalities will bill to a cap, but it really is at the will and the respect of councils,” said Shalapay.
“It’s a very mixed bag; in some places it's discretionary to administration, which really puts us in an awkward position to be judge, jury, and executioner, which, to be honest, really isn’t fair to us.”
Anderson said the ratepayers she had been able to discuss the topic with felt there had to be some point where insurance was responsible for reimbursing the broader taxpayer pool that response costs come out of.
“It’s not saying that every single cost is going to be covered; sitting around this table we all know that we’d never be able to factor in the cost of all the things that go into having the response available and bill for that. I wouldn’t be able to sleep at night if we ever increased it to do a full cost recovery there,” said Anderson.
“At what point should insurance have to kick in and reimburse the taxpayer for those costs? I think there should be a cap, I just don’t know what it is yet.”
One change proposed by councillors that was widely agreed on would be to add a section for natural, non-human caused fires – such as a lightning strike – that would exempt the responses from cost recovery.
Councillors voted 4-3 in favour of bringing the policy back to the next council meeting. Holland and councillors Kelly Chamzuk, Rob Minns, and Camille Wallach were in favour, while Cromwell, Hall and Anderson were opposed.
