Residents, volunteers urge assembly to retain Bear Creek Fire mill rate; amendment to cut rate fails

Assemblymember Cindy Eklund introduced an amendment on June 3 to reduce the Bear Creek Fire Service Area mill rate from 3.25 to 3.00 mills for fiscal year 2026. The amendment was debated during the assembly’s consideration of the borough’s mill‑rate resolution and ultimately failed on a recorded tally of 6 no, 2 yes (yes: Eklund, Dunn).

Members of the Bear Creek volunteer force and service‑area board provided public comment before the assembly vote, telling the assembly the proposed reduction would harm training, equipment purchases and the department’s ability to reach parity with neighboring service areas. Testimony included multiple volunteers and elected service‑area board members who said the board had vetted the budget and voted to set the 3.25 mill rate after community input and conservative fiscal assumptions.

Assembly discussion Assembly members who opposed the amendment cited process concerns: multiple assembly members said advisory‑board review and a service‑area board recommendation should be respected and that the board had not been given the opportunity to consider the overnight amendment before it appeared in the assembly agenda. Supporters of the amendment said constituents in the Bear Creek area had asked for a reduction — citing the original mill increase in 2007 was meant primarily for bond debt on a fire station and that property tax growth had reduced the need for the original level.

Public testimony (highlights) - Josh Bennigan, volunteer, Bear Creek Fire Department: urged the assembly to reject the amendment, saying "reducing funding for our volunteer department would negatively impact that service" and expressing concern the amendment had limited public notice. - Jeff Wolf, Bear Creek Fire Service Area Board member and department captain: said the board applied conservative budgeting and that cutting the rate from 3.25 to 3.00 would affect training and parity with neighboring service areas; requested assembly reject the amendment and retain the board’s recommended rate. - Karen Wright and other Seward residents and board members described rapid response times and said reductions would harm community safety.

Outcome A motion to call the question passed earlier in the discussion (7 yes, 1 no). The amendment to reduce the Bear Creek Fire Service Area mill rate failed on a recorded vote of 6 no, 2 yes. The mill‑rate resolution itself was adopted by the assembly later in the meeting.

Provenance (transcript excerpts) - topicintro: "I was just are is your office here in Soldatina..." (questioning PCHS location, leads to later public comment); more relevant: "I was notified today that our budget was gonna be reduced..." (Jeff Wolf testimony beginning 4142.06) - topfinish: "I have 6 no, 2 yes. The yes votes were cast by miss Eklund and mister Dunn. The motion fails." (vote result).

Speakers relevant to this article - Cindy Eklund, Assembly member (mover of the amendment) - Jeff Wolf, Bear Creek Fire Service Area Board member and department captain (public commenter) - Josh Bennigan, Bear Creek volunteer (public commenter) - Karen Wright, Seward resident (public commenter) - Andra (Andrea) Lillard, Bear Creek Fire Service Area Board member (public commenter) - Doyle Bruckner, Bear Creek Fire Service Area Board member (public commenter) - Assemblymember Dunn (voted yes on amendment)

Clarifying details - The amendment would have set the Bear Creek Fire Service Area mill rate at 3.00 mills (reduction from 3.25). - Witnesses said the Bear Creek board had examined the department budget and voted to set the 3.25 mill rate; several speakers said they learned of the amendment on the day of the meeting and asked for more public notice.

Context The debate came during the assembly’s statutory mill‑rate setting process. Borough staff and several assembly members noted advisory‑board recommendations and service area board input normally guide changes to service‑area mill rates. Several assembly members cited fiduciary caution and respect for locally elected service‑area boards in explaining their votes.