Big Bear Lake board begins process to end JPA, seek county fire services

The Big Bear Lake Fire Protection District voted unanimously April 29 to begin proceedings to terminate the joint powers agreement that created the Big Bear Fire Authority and to pursue a contract with San Bernardino County Fire, a move staff said would improve services and reduce costs for local taxpayers.

In a staff presentation, Eric, the district’s chief executive officer, told the board the agenda packet includes the executed JPA and two resolutions and that staff believes county-provided services could offer a benefit to taxpayers and an improvement to current service levels. Eric said the JPA requires notice by June 30 of the fiscal year to opt out and that, if approved and finalized, services would not transition before July 1, 2027. He asked the board for direction on seeking joint termination with Big Bear City Community Services District and on asking the county to assist with LAFCO proceedings needed for the change.

The move comes after years of budget and staffing pressures. Board member Putz said he has spent 12 years working to support the department and reluctantly concluded small local departments are “an endangered species,” and that county contracting may be the most reliable way to ensure service for residents. “Ultimately though, I think that moving in this direction is going to be better, for our city, for our fire protection district,” Putz said.

Another board member, Rick, argued the city’s taxpayer dollars should prioritize Big Bear Lake residents and said the JPA idea was sound but had not produced the expected results. “If we’re going to have taxpayer dollars from the city of Big Bear Lake go to fire services, I believe that those should be to give services to the people of the city of Big Bear Lake,” he said, adding the district hopes to retain contractual levers over service levels even under a county contract.

Public commenters urged caution. Joyce Christ told the board that residents already pay heavy taxes—stating she sees roughly $7,500 on her tax bill—and warned a county takeover could raise taxes and lead to local job losses. Theodore Trepman urged the board to consider alternatives to dissolution, listing possible options that include a scaled-back department, a smaller funding measure, partial partnerships with the county and temporary funding to bridge to a long-term solution.

The city attorney advised the board that campaign contributions are regulated under state law commonly called the Levine Act and that intergovernmental contracts between agencies are exempt from that law’s restrictions; Putz had disclosed an endorsement and recent contribution from IAFF Local 935 and asked for the attorney’s guidance before participating in the discussion.

After discussion the board moved on the staff recommendations. A member moved to approve staff recommendation 1; it was seconded and the roll call returned Aye votes from Board member Melnick, Vice Chair Hicks, Board member Segovia, Board member Putz and Chair Herrick. The motion passed unanimously. The board then adopted resolution FP202601 and FP202602 in separate roll-call votes, each passing unanimously.

What happens next: staff will continue negotiations with county officials, prepare the LAFCO-related materials requested in the resolution, and return to a public forum with final contract documents and implementation timelines. The board set internal deadlines consistent with the JPA withdrawal provisions and the staff presentation’s projected July 1, 2027 service transition date; the district also advised that parties may jointly agree in writing to terminate the agreement and that termination would require plans to wind up authority affairs and allocate any assets per the JPA.

The board adjourned the special meeting after the votes.