Fayette County Commission approves draft MOU to fund three fire engines, asks counsel to negotiate building purchase

FAYETTE COUNTY, W.Va. — The Fayette County Commission on an up-or-down vote approved a draft memorandum of understanding that outlines how the county will apply up to $800,000 from excess fire-levy funds toward three new fire engines and set rules for how those engines will be handled when retired or sold.

The agreement, presented by the commission’s attorney as an MOU draft, says the county will “promptly pay” invoices for engine purchases up to $200,000 per department per year, for a total county contribution not to exceed $800,000. Commissioners also voted to authorize county counsel to enter negotiations with the seller of a building the county is considering purchasing.

The MOU’s purpose, the attorney said, is twofold: to confirm the county’s commitment of excess levy funds for new apparatus and to establish a mechanism that gives other county fire departments first opportunity to receive equipment if a department retires a vehicle. “The county has, you know, agreed to set aside $800,000, which is essentially $200,000 per year per buyer department that’s receiving the engine totaling up to $800,000,” the commission’s attorney said during the presentation.

Nut graf: Commissioners said the MOU is intended to protect countywide taxpayers who pay the excess fire levy while recognizing that the municipal or volunteer department will hold title to engines it receives. The draft requires departments that decide to retire an engine purchased in part with county funds to notify the commission and allow other county departments the opportunity to accept the vehicle before an out-of-county sale.

Under terms discussed at the meeting, if a department sells an engine out of county the county would be reimbursed a prorated share — up to the county’s contribution — and those proceeds would be returned to the excess fire-levy fund to help offset future purchases. The attorney described that reimbursement as “prorated” so the county recovers the portion of the sale price corresponding to its original contribution, not the entire sale proceeds.

Discussion at the commission meeting centered on two recurring concerns from municipal fire departments: the county’s insistence on long‑term fiscal flexibility and the legal effect of asking municipalities to agree to conditions governing property they own. Representatives of several departments questioned whether agreeing to the MOU would constrain how a municipality may later dispose of equipment it owns.

Several fire chiefs and municipal representatives asked the commission to consider paying a larger upfront share to reduce financing costs and to provide concrete numbers from vendors showing the discount or financing savings from larger down payments. A chief asked for “figures on that” so the commission could weigh whether paying more now would reduce long-term interest and purchase costs.

Commission staff said the fund currently contains several million dollars and that the MOU language includes a limited fiscal-flexibility clause to protect the county in the event of an extraordinary, catastrophic drawdown of levy funds. The attorney said the clause is standard in government funding agreements and intended only to preserve the commission’s ability to respond to unforeseen emergencies.

The commission approved the MOU draft “in its current form plus the sentence” the attorney added to clarify the replacement procedure, and then voted to authorize counsel to negotiate the potential building purchase referenced on the agenda. Motions on both items passed with the vote recorded as “Aye.”

Ending: Commissioners and fire-department leaders agreed to continue working through language with their attorneys before the MOU is finalized, and the commission asked departments to provide vendor cost and financing scenarios so officials can evaluate whether larger upfront payments would reduce total program costs.