Springfield Council Weighs Funding Models for Consolidated Fire Department

Springfield city leaders on Nov. 10 examined two primary paths to fund and govern the joint Eugene and Springfield fire department that has operated with merged crews since 2010 but retains separate budgets and oversight. Fire Chief Mike Caven outlined forming or annexing to a fire district, an option that would allow a district to levy property taxes, and creating an intergovernmental entity that would fund operations by charging fees without a taxing authority. Council members heard projected revenue examples and a review of tradeoffs between the models.

At stake is a $1 million shortfall tied to ambulance services, a persistent funding gap that city managers and the department say must be closed to sustain response capacity and financial stability. A fire district could raise revenue through property tax levies, which would shift the burden to property owners and be subject to Oregon laws on tax compression and levy limits. An intergovernmental entity would instead set service fees, raising questions about who would set and regulate those fees and how they would affect households and businesses.

Council discussion focused on governance and oversight, and how accountability would be structured under each model. Under a fire district residents would elect a board with taxing authority, offering a direct form of local control. An intergovernmental entity could centralize governance among participating jurisdictions, but would require clear agreements about fee setting, service levels, and dispute resolution. Councilors also examined impacts to property owners, including potential changes in tax liabilities, and the administrative complexity of transitioning existing budgets and contracts into a new legal framework.

The presentations included revenue scenario examples intended to illustrate how each model could cover operational costs and the ambulance shortfall. Officials noted tradeoffs beyond revenue, including legal constraints on tax rates, the predictability of fee based income, and the potential need for additional oversight mechanisms to preserve public trust. The consolidated operations that began in 2010 have delivered joint staffing and shared responses, but separating financial oversight has left the cities seeking a unified funding mechanism that matches the operational reality.

The timetable for a formal recommendation is imminent. Eugene city management is expected to deliver a recommendation on Dec. 10 and Springfield city management is expected to present its recommendation in January. Those recommendations will guide subsequent council votes and the public engagement process, which officials say will be needed before any structural change.

For Lane County residents the debate is more than technical budgeting. The choice will determine how emergency medical and fire services are paid for, who has a direct say in governance, and how costs are distributed across the community. Municipalities around the world face similar decisions balancing taxation and user fees while trying to preserve equitable access to essential services. Springfield and Eugene now must weigh those competing values while meeting the immediate fiscal need posed by the ambulance funding gap.