Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fire Truck Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill sponsors aim to shift fire truck funding, phase out supplemental purchase program under SB 2402
Summary
Senate staff and the Insurance Department described proposals to phase out the supplemental fire truck fund, use the annual fire fund for need‑based matching grants, and carry language in Senate Bill 2402 to reorganize fire truck and rural EMS funding.
Senate staff and Insurance Department officials told the Appropriations Subcommittee they want to change how the state helps rural districts acquire fire apparatus, replacing a long‑standing supplemental purchase program with a needs‑based approach funded from the annual fire fund.
Kim Causey, who the committee identified as working on the legislation, said Senate Bill 2402 collects and updates fire‑code sections related to apparatus funding and would phase out the old supplemental fund because “$50,000 would go a long way” 30 years ago but no longer covers modern apparatus costs. Causey said the department proposes using existing annual fire fund dollars — revenues the department receives through the non‑admitted policy fee distribution — to create a matching program or sliding scale so poorer districts can acquire usable firefighting equipment.
Commissioner Cheney told the committee the department would rather stop buying trucks centrally and move funds to counties and fire districts that need them. He said smaller and poorer counties frequently receive much smaller awards under the current system while wealthier counties get larger checks for appearances rather than for suppression capability.
Why it matters: Causey and Cheney said current award levels do not match contemporary apparatus prices and that the state needs to prioritize equipment that “will suppress fires and save lives” rather than occasional parade trucks. The department voiced concern that House proposals to reroute some of the fire rebate money to ground‑transport ambulances could complicate funding for rural EMS and firefighting.
Legal and legislative posture: Committee members and staff said related code sections have been dropped on the House and Senate sides and that the sponsors plan to keep the Senate code section active to negotiate language. Cheney warned that changes to contract terms in some proposals could raise constitutional issues and possibly litigation; the committee was urged to coordinate with the chairs of relevant insurance and appropriations panels as bill language develops.
No formal vote took place. Committee members asked officials to provide a concrete proposal with cost estimates and said they would continue inter‑chamber discussions before final action.
