Mayor says ending ‘obsolete’ fire service agreement with county is positive

April 04--A letter has been sent to County Judge-Executive Steve Kelley from Somerset Mayor Eddie Girdler giving a 90-day notice to the end of a 1981 agreement for the city to provide fire protection coverage to the county -- before the official replacement to that agreement has been voted on by Pulaski Fiscal Court.

But whether that letter is merely "a form letter" required by the 35-year-old contract, as the Mayor contends, or a rattling of the cages of county officials who have not signed off on the new agreement due to the wording of it is a burning question for some.

Mayor Girdler's letter, addressed to Kelley, reads: "Even though the City of Somerset does not consider the Contract and Agreement dated 13th of August, 1981, as valid or applicable to current arrangements in reference to the City providing fire protection services outside city limits, this letter is to give a 90 day notice of the termination of said Contract and Agreement. We understand that, due to the services currently available by county fire departments, the services provided by the City may no longer be necessary or efficient.

"We will honor the mutual aid agreements with the respective fire departments and with the Fire Commission. We appreciate all of the hard work and professionalism of the fire departments and will continue to work with the Fire Commission as the county assumes responsibility for all areas outside of the city limits effective July 1, 2017.

"The issue of SRT or whatever is not relevant to this agreement. Placing controls over your need, if any, to have the City provide services outside city limits is not relevant. It is your funds and we hope that you will be successful in providing the quality of service that the City has provided in the past.

"We stand ready to execute the new Agreement as agreed upon but since that is not feasible, we will work with the Commission through mutual aid agreements in the future."

The letter was delivered last week, after a Fiscal Court meeting in which Judge Kelley expressed concern on the wording of part of a new agreement that dictates what the city can do with the $425,000 -- $375,000 paid in a lump sum and $50,000 doled out over the course of quarterly payments -- that the county would be handing over to the city in compensation for coverage from the city's fire department.

The agreement states the money will be used "for the purpose of purchasing fire fighting apparatus and equipment, including but not limited to a Fire Engine/Truck, as needed by the City of Somerset in order to carry out its full duties and responsibilities under this Inter-Local Agreement."

Kelley claims, however, the wording does not reflect accurately what he and the Mayor discussed in a meeting before Somerset Council passed the agreement on their end. Namely, the Judge wants the money to go only towards a fire truck, and nothing else.

"The Mayor passed his version of [the] agreement at his council meeting, which doesn't reflect the intent of what we discussed. He refuses to change," Kelley told the Commonwealth Journal on Monday.

"Our goal is to make sure the money we provide buys a pumper truck, but the mayor just wants the money with no guidelines on how to spend it."

City Attorney Carrie Wiese said that last week's court meeting was the first the city knew about the county's reservations on the agreement.

"The city council already approved the agreement based on prior discussions the mayor had with the county and the fire commission. The city had no idea the county would change their minds and knew nothing of their issues with the agreement's language until after the last fiscal court meeting was held. As you can see, the city has been providing fire service for many decades at a fraction of the actual costs. Everyone agreed that a new contract needed to be entered into. The new agreement slightly increased the annual amount, and allowed for a one time payment to be made for the purchase of a truck and equipment. Everyone seemed pleased and ready to move forward."

For his part, Mayor Girdler said the letter was simply a form letter to end the previous agreement, and that he sees no problem between city and county in terms of coming to an agreement.

"This is not an adversarial type situation. In fact, it's a positive situation," Girdler said.

The letter itself was needed to fulfill a stipulation in the 1981 agreement that says the city must give a 90-day notice to terminate it, and to continue to provide service during that time.

"It was necessary to comply with the old contract that our city attorney considers void, but the contract requires we give 90-day notice," Girdler said.

He continued by saying the letter and the termination of the old contract is meant to give Pulaski County government options. "The letter was sent out to give them the option of doing it themselves," he said. "We're willing to work with the county if they choose to. We're not withdrawing anything."

He said he would be happy to give the protection area back to the county, saying "I'd prefer them to do it."

But the city will continue to help if the county signs the agreement that has been passed by city council, he said.

No official vote or action has been taken on the new interlocal agreement by fiscal court. "We're just waiting on them," Girdler said. "Waiting for them to make a decision. We assume the county will come to an agreement."

As far as the letter's reference to SRT (Pulaski's Special Response Team), Judge Kelley said the statement was based on a second interlocal agreement which was discussed between city and county officials, held during the same meeting as for the fire coverage agreement.

"[A] couple weeks ago in our meeting with the Mayor, [Public Safety Director] Stacy Halcomb, two of the magistrates, [County Treasurer] Joan Isaacs, the mayor's budget director and me, we agreed to two interlocal agreements. One was $375,000 for a truck and the other was to allow SRT to respond to all county calls as needed," said Kelley.

This was intended to iron out a dispute between the city and SRT which began last October. At that time, a memo was given to the Pulaski County 911 Center's dispatch team by Somerset Fire Chief Jasper.

Jasper wrote: "Effective immediately, Somerset-Pulaski Co. dispatch will not act on any requests for fire, hazmat, or extrication resources unless the request specifically originates from a Somerset Fire Department officer or firefighter acting in an officer position."

Kelley indicated he thought the second interlocal agreement was in the works to rectify that policy and allow SRT to be dispatched for any calls within Somerset's service area, but so far, the new SRT policy has not been brought before the city council.

When asked Monday, Girdler said "SRT has nothing to do with providing fire coverage," and that it should not be involved in the discussion with the fire interlocal agreement.

Kelley was quick to say that there will be no risk to county residents no matter what the outcome of the fire agreement.

"We will continue to provide services so safety won't be at risk."

He added that if the two sides cannot come to an agreement: "Insurance premiums would likely increase as ISO ratings drop."

In addition to the question of how the fire protection agreement -- or potential lack thereof -- could affect current coverage, the two sides must work out what happens to four fire trucks that Kelley says are currently in the county government's name.

The 1981 agreement also requires that "upon the termination date, [the city] shall return all fire protection apparatus and equipment to the Party of the Second Part [the county]."

Kelley said, "If he [Mayor Girdler] pulls out of the agreement we would be forced to take them back to continue providing coverage to the areas in question."

Kelley added that his understanding of state rules is that "the State will have to sign off before the City can just quit covering its district. The State is the one who assigns districts. We just agreed to help the city with the equipment needs of covering its district."

___

(c)2017 the Commonwealth Journal (Somerset, Ky.)

Visit the Commonwealth Journal (Somerset, Ky.) at somerset-kentucky.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.