Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fire chief warns of widening budget gap and urges support for proposed levy
Summary
Delhi Township's fire chief told trustees the department faces a nearly $1 million projected shortfall in 2026 without additional levy revenue, citing rising healthcare and equipment costs and the risk of 'brownouts' that would reduce coverage; trustees pledged outreach and asked clarifying questions about levy timing, pension costs and fund use.
The Delhi Township fire chief told the Board of Trustees on April 8 that the department is facing a growing structural shortfall and urged residents to consider a proposed property‑tax levy on the May primary ballot.
The chief said year‑to‑date runs put the department on pace with prior years and reported an average 911‑call‑to‑on‑scene response time of 5 minutes, 34 seconds, but walked trustees through charts showing expenses climbing while revenue remains flat. He said, without additional levies, 2026 could produce a deficit approaching $1 million and noted recent spikes in health‑insurance, workers’ compensation and equipment costs.
Trustees and department leaders framed the levy as a revenue necessity rather than a discretionary request. The chief warned that personnel make up roughly 85% of the fire budget and that cuts to staffing would produce service reductions known as "brownouts," which he said historically led to longer response times and increased fire loss when stations closed in 2005. The chief also emphasized that levy revenue, if approved, would not appear in township coffers until 2027 under the current schedule.
Board members pressed for specifics. The fiscal officer confirmed the department factored pension obligations into compensation projections and said the employee share is 12% while the employer share is 24% as a state mandate. Trustees asked how the millage was sized; staff said the requested rate was calculated to meet projected operational needs and not to provide an excess reserve. Officials repeatedly denied that past capital projects used fire funds and invited residents to review the department’s public financial documents.
The board discussed alternatives and statutory constraints. The chief said townships in Ohio cannot levy an income or sales tax, leaving property‑tax levies as the only local option to raise recurring operating revenue. He described operational adjustments already in place—cross‑staffing, limiting apparatus responses to reduce wear and fuel costs, and seeking longer service contracts when possible—but said those measures could not close the projected gap.
Trustees committed to help get information to residents, urged engagement rather than online speculation, and encouraged anyone with questions to call township staff. The board took no formal vote on the levy during the meeting; the chief said the administration is pursuing a ballot initiative for the primary election.
The department continues to recruit and train personnel, and trustees noted part‑time firefighters are being hired away by neighboring communities, underscoring recruitment and retention pressures tied to compensation and training costs. The next board meeting is scheduled for April 29, when the township will continue routine business and outreach on the levy.
