Hortonville board pauses plan to shift fire costs onto property owners after lengthy review

Village of Hortonville trustees on March 19 debated a proposed fee structure to recover a portion of fire-service costs from property owners and ultimately voted to table action while staff produces more detailed options and legal clarification.

Administrator Nathan presented two principal approaches: a square-footage-based tiered fee (which several Wisconsin municipalities use and which charges based on building footprint) and a flat fee. Nathan said a footprint-based structure avoids tying fees to population and is more defensible in state law challenges. He presented example figures showing that, under one option excluding capital costs, an average single-family homeowner could see a change of about $59 per year in net cost under the proposed scheme.

Board members pressed staff on measurement and equity issues. Trustee questions focused on whether the fee would use first-floor footprint versus total living area, how duplexes or multi-unit properties would be treated, whether industrial and commercial parcels would face disproportionate charges and how school, nonprofit and municipal buildings would be handled. "The whole argument with this structure is that it's based on property," Nathan said, adding the approach tracks a legal rationale used in recent challenges to person-based ambulance fees.

Trustees also discussed whether to include capital and debt in the fee calculation. Staff offered two variants: one that rolls capital projects and debt into the fee (raising bills for larger-footprint properties but reducing levy burden) and one that excludes those items so the fee covers only operating fire costs. Nathan and public-works staff said including capital can be phased in later and can be presented as a separable line item if the board wants to keep debt service on the levy.

Legal and administrative risks were raised: trustees noted flat fees have been subject to legal challenge in Wisconsin, and staff recommended firm legal review if a flat fee were pursued. Several trustees said they wanted spreadsheets showing concrete homeowner and institutional impacts before deciding. One trustee moved to table the item and schedule a workshop; the motion carried by roll call.

Next steps: staff will prepare scenario spreadsheets, clarify the legal footing for flat versus footprint-based approaches, and return with an ordinance draft and recommended public-notice steps before the board takes formal action.