Cheatham County officials weigh contract increases for fire services and two fire-tax funding options

Cheatham County officials discussed proposals to increase payments to municipal and volunteer fire departments and two options for funding those increases during a workshop March 10.

The discussion centered on rising costs and a long-standing shortage of volunteer personnel, county officials said. The mayor presented contract proposals for Ashland City, Pegram (Pilgrim), Kingston Springs and the Pleasant View Volunteer Fire Department that would raise county payments to those providers over a four-year period; officials outlined two funding approaches: year-by-year increases tied to contract adjustments, or a single, larger fire-tax rate to pre-fund the multi-year increase.

County Mayor (title on record) told commissioners the proposals aim to keep existing coverage while addressing manpower shortfalls. He said the county could either accept annual increases that would require periodic tax-rate adjustments, or “lock in” a single higher rate to cover the four-year package. The locked-in option presented in the workshop material was a $17.75-per-$100 assessed-value fire tax rate; staff said that figure would cover the proposed four-year package without additional increases during the contract term. The mayor asked commissioners for guidance before finalizing negotiations with the cities and departments.

Officials described the manpower problem as the principal driver of higher costs. Ashland City’s current contract payment cited in the presentation was about $240,463.87, plus roughly $100,760 the county pays to cover rural-area service tied to that contract. Pleasant View’s current county payment shown in the packet was $529,005.55 plus roughly $200,000 of county-funded manpower support; workshop materials said Pleasant View had been supplementing county funds from its own sources to maintain staffing. Pilgrim/Pegram and Kingston Springs have separate contract totals and manpower allocations discussed in the presentation.

Chief Stewart of the Pegram department and Edwin (county staff present at the meeting) contributed operational context about recruiting challenges and how hourly pay rates in some departments have risen above what the county’s prior manpower assumptions provided. Edwin noted the county coordinates equipment and training support for the departments and that manpower—not capital equipment—was the recurring cost pressure.

Commissioners pressed for clarification on how proposed contract amounts translate into on-the-ground staffing and emergency response. Commissioners and the mayor discussed automatic mutual aid among departments and the role of county-funded rural stations in maintaining favorable insurance ratings for properties.

No final contract approvals or tax-rate votes were taken at the workshop. The mayor said he would take commissioners’ input back to city officials and to the departments and bring formal contract language and a funding recommendation back to the commission for action.

The county solicitor noted that contracts can include termination clauses and that parties could renegotiate or cancel under extraordinary circumstances, but the presentations assumed four-year agreements to provide stability for planning and staffing.

Commissioners asked staff to provide more detail on projected budget impacts and on how growth in the tax base could affect the estimated fire-tax rate before any formal vote.

Ending: County staff and the mayor will continue negotiations with the municipal and volunteer providers and return to the commission with contract drafts and a clear funding recommendation for a formal vote.