To charge or not to charge

After a contentious debate, County of Barrhead councillors voted 4 to 3 on Dec. 18 to forgive the firefighting bill for a resident who had been fined for starting the fire without a permit.

This was one of three firefighting bills for incidents that occurred between April 13 and July 20 that couny council forgave.

County manager Debbie Oyarzun said under Policy 23.02 (Fire Protection Service Charges) residents have the right to have the bills reviewed and potentially lowered.

“Typically if someone has a concern, I will ask fire dispatch to provide me the report on the incident, look at the activities that they [Barrhead Regional Fire Services] carried out, talk to fire department staff, see if there were any errors, take our bylaw and policy to it and see if there is any flexibility that can be had,” she said.

In the first instance, the firefighting cost was $6,907.64 that the aforementioned policy caps the amount the county charges at $3,000.

“The reason being that historically, the assumption was that [landowner’s] insurance would cover $3,000,” Oyarzun said.

While reviewing the charges, it was found that the county incorrectly included  $731.70 in the bill, including a system error for $145, and damage to firefighting equipment $586.70.

“The real question is does council want to take it off the full bill or the $3,000 that was charged to the landowner,” she said. Council chose to rebate the lesser amount.

The second instance, in which a landowner was charged $675, was not so straightforward.

The charge occurred when the fire department responded to reports of an unpermitted outside fire. In addition to the firefighting fee, the landowner was fined for not getting a permit before burning.

Oyarzun noted the fire department responded with three vehicles, not including the command truck.

“One vehicle and its crew were stood down after 30 minutes, while the other vehicles remained on scene for just over an hour,” she said, adding although they were on scene firefighters didn’t have to action the fire.

Deputy reeve Dennis Nanninga moved that they waive the charges.

Coun. Darrell Troock said he couldn’t support the motion, saying whether or not the firefighters had to action the fire or not wasn’t the issue.

“It’s like car insurance, just because I didn’t use it doesn’t mean I shouldn’t have it. The department still needed to be called out,” he said. “I would be more inclined to waive the fee if it was a permitted fire, but it wasn’t. There has to be some cost for not following the rules.”

Coun. Marvin Schatz said the landowner did receive a penalty, a fine, and if it wasn’t large enough of a deterrent, then council need to decide whether they needed to increase it.

He added if the landowner took out a permit they would in all likelihood not be having this discussion as they wouldn’t have been invoiced in the first place.

Troock interjected, saying the firefighting charges and fines were not mutually exclusive.

“If I run into somebody with my car and get a ticket for driving with undue care and attention ,does that mean I’m off the hook and don’t have to pay for vehicle insurance? That’s not how it works,” he said.

Reeve Doug Drozd added the firefighting costs to the county needs to be recognized.

Nanninga said he would agree with charging the landowner for firefighting if they had done actual ‘work’.

“But they didn’t,” he said.

Drozd disagreed, saying the fact that firefighters responded was work.

“As soon as a firefighter leaves his house or his employment, he is doing work. Whether he is putting the wet stuff on the hot stuff, is irrelevant, it is taking his time in service,” he said.

Coun. Bill Lane, Troock and Drozd voted against the motion.

In the third incident, councillors unanimously waived a $525 charge for a callout returned to a site where the fire department extinguished a fire a month previously, but it had reignited. No action by firefighters was required.