Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Fire topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lisbon Falls council debates cuts to fire per‑diem shifts as town clarifies EMS role
Summary
At a June budget workshop, Lisbon Falls councilors and staff debated a proposed $168,654 reduction in the fire budget — largely via cuts to per‑diem firefighter shifts — while clarifying that the fire department will continue to provide on‑scene medical care but not patient transport. Staff will return with models showing service impacts at 25% and 50% staffing reductions.
Chair opened the workshop and asked staff to summarize FY27 budget changes and service expectations for public safety. Jim, a town staff member, told the council an accounting correction produced substantial savings in water/wastewater lines and outlined a recommended fire staffing model built around four full‑time firefighters supplemented by per‑diem shifts.
Why it matters: Councilors must choose between reducing costs to avoid a larger tax increase and preserving a level of fire response that meets OSHA and insurance standards. The chief warned deep cuts in per‑diem staffing would leave the town unable to put a full effective response force on scene for many incidents.
Jim presented the fiscal case and options. He said a roughly $168,654 reduction would most likely come from the per‑diem staffing line (about $200,000 in the budget), noting that filling vacant full‑time shifts with overtime would cost at least an estimated $108,000 per year. He asked the council whether it wanted staff to model the exact service‑level tradeoffs for the proposed reduction and for alternatives (25% and 50% reductions in second‑person availability).
The fire chief described operational constraints tied to staffing and regulation, saying firefighters cannot safely enter buildings without minimum crew levels and that substantial reductions could force crews to ‘stand outside’ until mutual aid arrives. "We don't go into any building without two people," the Fire Chief said, stressing the OSHA 2‑in/2‑out requirement. The chief also cited a past response that, he said, limited damage to a major employer because personnel were available.
Several councilors and residents pushed back on large cuts. One resident told the council, "We do not have a fire department right now as far as I'm concerned," saying recent staffing shortages had reduced the town's capacity. Others said the town's tax base limits how much additional public safety the municipality can sustainably fund and urged staff to show what the $168,654 reduction would mean for day‑to‑day coverage.
What happens next: Council directed staff to return with service‑level scenarios (25% and 50% reductions for the second‑person/peak coverage) and a clear mapping of what each option would mean operationally and for mutual‑aid reliance. No final budget decision on the fire staffing lines was recorded at this meeting.
Ending: The council paused action to get more data and to weigh the public‑safety tradeoffs, with staff promising detailed recommendations at the next workshop.
