Fairview extends Gresham fire contract for one year amid cost and service review

The Fairview City Council voted May 7 to approve a one‑year extension of the city's fire and emergency services contract with the City of Gresham, a move staff said will add about $600,000 to the city’s near‑term fire budget while giving the city time to evaluate alternatives.

"This extension is, about almost $600,000 more," Mr. George told the council while summarizing staff recommendations and comparative proposals. He said the extension is less costly than an earlier long‑term proposal and would carry the city through June 30 under the revised terms. "This is a 1 year extension," he said, and added the proposed numbers have been included in the city's draft budget for council consideration.

Council members asked about early termination rights and longer‑term alternatives. Councilor Weber asked whether a premature switch to another provider would trigger penalties; staff responded that termination language remains governed by the original contract, specifically paragraph 13B, and that all three cities had counsel review the revisions. "If there were some termination that actually the language here is it remains unchanged," a staff member noted regarding the contract's termination clause.

Councilor Rowan highlighted the budget impact and a possible new revenue proposal: "I think memory tells me that we were paying our old rate was about $1,400,000; with this going into effect it's gonna be just under $2,000,000," he said, and referenced a proposed household public‑safety fee under discussion that could be about $180 per household per year to help close the gap. Staff cautioned that those figures were part of ongoing budget work and that final numbers would be presented with the budget.

Council discussion also noted outreach to Clackamas Fire District 1; staff said they were in conversations about the district as a possible long‑term provider and that Clackamas officials had indicated interest. The extension, supporters said, gives staff and the three‑city consortium additional time to complete studies and cost comparisons. A voice vote approved the resolution. "Motion to approve resolution 12‑2025." The mayor called for ayes; the motion passed by voice vote and the resolution was adopted.

Next steps identified by staff included returning to council with the full cost study and more detailed cost estimates for building‑services and inspections work under a new service arrangement. Councilors noted a timeline constraint: one councilor said the city must notify Gresham of its longer‑term decision by the end of the calendar year.