Montgomery Township wrestles with move to fuller fire staffing; board declines consultant for now

Montgomery Township on Sept. 22 heard hours of public comment and debate over a proposed expansion of the township fire service before the Board of Supervisors voted not to hire an outside consultant to study the staffing proposal.

Chief Bill Wegman has proposed moving the department toward increased full‑time staffing and 24/7 coverage; the implementation plan discussed by the chief and township staff calls for hiring additional career firefighters and altering shift models. Supporters — including career fire personnel and members of the township public safety committee — said the proposal responds to falling volunteer availability and longer response times and that it would improve firefighter wellness by adopting a 24/72 schedule (2472) rather than a 24/48 model. Andrew Backland, a career captain and president of the professional firefighters union, urged the board to adopt the chief’s recommendations and said the 2472 model “significantly reduces fatigue and stress,” citing occupational‑health research and the department’s overtime projections.

Many residents and volunteer officers urged thorough vetting. Some speakers recommended bringing in a consultant to provide a second set of eyes on call data, staffing models, mutual aid arrangements, phasing and long‑term costs; proponents said a consultant’s financial modeling could identify trade‑offs and possible savings and supply a documented, third‑party validation for budget decisions. Resident Shapna Mukherjee, citing a career in IT that included feasibility studies, said an outside review ‘‘is just another way of looking at things’’ to identify gaps or confirm assumptions.

Opponents said the chief’s materials and internal data already identify the problem and argued a consultant would delay implementation or add unnecessary expense. Some residents objected to the scale and speed of hiring described in chief presentations and pressed for phased approaches that would spread costs. One resident referenced an often‑cited estimate that moving to full staffing could increase the fire levy substantially if implemented quickly.

Board members discussed both fiduciary duty to taxpayers and the need to ensure safe response times. After public comment, a motion was made to not hire a firm to conduct the staffing study; the board voted in favor of that motion at the meeting, with the chair announcing the motion passed. The board did not adopt any formal staffing plan or budget amendment at the meeting; staff reiterated that budget workshops are scheduled in October and November and that any hiring or budget changes would come through the normal budget process.

The chief and multiple residents emphasized the urgency of addressing volunteer decline and response times, while several supervisors said they support a careful, evidence‑based approach and want to ensure assumptions have been stress‑tested before committing to large, recurring budget increases. The board left the door open to revisiting a consultant or alternative vetting during the upcoming budget process but did not authorize outside work that night.

Next steps: the township will continue budget deliberations with a schedule that includes a budget workshop and a proposed 2026 budget presentation in mid‑November, with formal adoption expected in December. The board signaled it will weigh staffing, phasing, and funding options in that timeline.