Big Bear Lake fire board approves preliminary FY 2025–26 budget; public raises concerns about tax pass-through and building safety

The Big Bear Lake Fire Protection District board on Nov. 12 voted to approve a preliminary FY 2025–26 budget and authorized staff to begin public noticing of the intent to adopt the budget, the board recorded. The action followed a staff presentation outlining the authority’s proposed $14.3 million budget and public comment from residents raising funding and safety concerns.

An unidentified presenter told the board the total revised budget for the Big Bear Fire Authority is $14,300,000, with roughly $13,240,000 allocated for operations, about $500,000 to cover a deficit in ambulance services, $7,000 for a shortfall in fire-prevention efforts and $540,000 for debt service. Under the joint-powers agreement (JPA) with the Big Bear Community Services District — described in the presentation as a 50/50 cost-share — the district’s net obligation was presented as $6,960,000. The presenter said the district’s available sources and other revenues totaled about $8,600,000 and that the projected net impact to fund balance is $1,600,000. Staff said the final adoption hearing is scheduled for Dec. 10, 2025.

Before the vote board members heard public comments. Patrice Duncan alleged the board had previously voted on Sept. 9 to pass through 100% of the city’s fire-tax revenues to the Big Bear Fire Department and criticized apparent changes in the board’s position. “I’m seriously getting whiplash with your back and forth vote on this issue,” Duncan said, accusing some members of pursuing actions that could lead to staff reductions and service “brownouts.” The transcript records Duncan’s allegations but does not contain a board response to those specific claims during the meeting.

Later in the public-comment period, a speaker identified as Daniel raised concerns about building fire-safety features and occupancy calculations for the meeting venue and other public rooms. He told the board that exit doors should not have magnet locks or multiple locks that could impede egress, and asked for visible windows on doors and annual inspections. “You can’t have 2 locks on it,” he said, arguing that panic hardware and emergency lighting should be reviewed and documented.

The meeting opened with a brief closed session for potential litigation; Mr. Deutsch reported afterward that the board met in closed session but that no reportable action was taken. On the budget motion, the board moved and seconded staff’s recommendation to proceed with public noticing of the intent to adopt the FY 2025–26 budget; the motion was approved on a roll call vote and staff will publish the required notice ahead of the Dec. 10 public hearing.

The board did not take final adoption action on the budget at the Nov. 12 special meeting; rather, members authorized the public-notice step that begins the formal hearing process. Staff representatives said they were available to answer questions and that the item will return for final action at the board’s Dec. 10 meeting.