City of Havre and Rural Fire District 1 board at impasse over new deal, code enforcement

After a special meeting of the Rural Fire District 1 board Thursday, RFD 1 and the city of Havre are still without an updated fire suppression agreement due to issues concerning code enforcement.

Mayor Tim Solomon and Havre Fire Chief Mel Paulson told RFD 1 board chairman Steve Jamruszka the city wants a new contract put in place. Solomon said the new agreement should include wording about code enforcement.

Solomon said new buildings put up in the district, basically a doughnut-shaped ring around the boundaries of Havre, are not up to code.

Board members said, based on their interpretation of the Montana Code Annotated, the board does not have enforcement power.

“The way I understand it, the enforcement’s already taken care of by the Department of Labor and the fire marshal. I don’t think, personally, that we’re in a position to appoint anybody to do any enforcement whatsoever, I think that’s already taken care of by the Montana Annotated Code,” board member Courtney Tait said.

What’s been done lately?

Jamruszka said in a May 26 letter to Solomon that he wants the current fire suppression agreement reinstated or extended for a year. The extension would be for effective evaluation if dissolution of services is necessary.

If a new agreement or extension is not in place, the resulting impact on residents in RFD 1 would be an increase in fire insurance costs, Tait said during Tuesday’s meeting. The Havre Fire Department would also no longer be obligated to suppress fires in the district. 

“(And) the city’s not going to get any more money out of us,” Tait added.

Solomon and Paulson said, most likely, a response to fires would still occur, but the district would get billed directly.

The county shook up the board after the city sent its letter last year, with several members of the board and new members, including Jamruszka and Tait, appointed. The board held a reorganizational meeting in April.

In the May 26 letter, Jamruszka outlined events since his appointment to the RFD 1 board March 29. 

This includes: three board meetings from March 29 through May 11, an individual meeting with Solomon April 27, an individual meeting with Paulson May 12, a previous letter to Solomon dated May 13 delivered the next day and a previous meeting between all three parties May 19 to try and resolve the matter.

“During this time frame, I have researched the appropriate Montana Code Annotated (MCA) relevant to the issues at hand. While there are many more references to state laws, I offer the following as the most pertinent, some of which are included in their entirety,” Jamruszka wrote in the May 26 letter.

Jamruszka cited sections of the MCA concerning interlocal agreements, powers and duties of department regarding fire prevention and investigation rules, rules promulgated by department and building construction standards.

Jamruszka then wrote it was in the best interest of both the city of Havre and Hill County to continue the agreement from 1993. The city of Havre has already decided to end the agreement, effective July 1 when Havre also transitions to a charter government.

City representatives said in December that they wanted to end the agreement at the end of the fiscal year, June 30, so a new agreement that included who was responsible to ensure fire codes are being followed could be in place, and that they have asked for this issue to be addressed for several years.

In his letter, Jamruszka said the board has not had enough time.

“There is not enough time to separate the two entities with respect to equitable division of assets between Rural Fire District 1 and the city of Havre. Nor is there enough time to evaluate ramifications to the Havre City County Airport, outlying schools, diminished services for both entities and a probable increase in funding for duplicate services which follow the same rules,” Jamruszka wrote.

Jamruszka concluded the letter by writing that these rules include identical building and fire codes and that each entity is answerable to state authorities and bound by the same laws and procedures.

Solomon said this letter did not address his concerns mentioned at the monthly board meeting in May, that no one has been enforcing fire codes and structures are being built within the district. While the city does not have a problem with providing fire suppression, unless the city doesn’t know who will enforce the fire code, he said.

He reiterated that at Tuesday’s meeting.

“We’re asking for a new contract to be presented to us, and it needs to address the enforcement and that is what we’re asking,” Solomon said.

Jamruszka asked if the May 26 letter addressed enforcement.

Solomon said it did not, adding that he’s been trying to work with the RFD 1 board on a new agreement for three years.

Jamruszka said he believes the agreement from 1993 was “very much valid and very much in vogue” in regard to current rules and regulations.

What’s next?

Following a sometimes-heated conversation, Solomon encouraged the board to speak with an attorney.

The board then asked for an extension which Solomon was open to so long as the board meets with an attorney.

An extension would need to be approved by City Council, which is set to meet next Monday, June 6, at 7 p.m. at City Hall. 

As of this writing, nothing concerning an extension has been added to the June 6 agenda, which has not yet been released.

The next monthly RFD 1 board meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 8, at 11 a.m. in the Timmons Room at the Hill County Courthouse.