About the Study

Study Methods

To gather information for the study, CGR:

  • Met with the leadership of both fire departments and conducted sit-down interviews covering essential details of current operations, financial and membership conditions, and other strengths and challenges.
  • Met with Town and Village leadership.
  • Reviewed current fire apparatus and forthcoming apparatus needs.
  • Reviewed financial data from each department, along with the Town’s contracts and Town and Village budgetary contributions.
  • Analyzed two years of calls-for-service data from the Livingston County 911 Center to establish patterns and volume of emergency incidents.
  • Projected potential costs over the next decade for a variety of scenarios, including: maintaining the status quo; merging the two departments; maintaining only one department and eliminating the other.
  • Held a "visioning session" for each department, along with Town and Village representatives, to imagine possibilities for the future of fire service.

Highlighted Conclusions

The following conclusions are drawn from the Executive Summary of the final report. For additional context on any conclusion, we recommend reviewing the full report.

The status quo does not appear sustainable in the long term.

  • Both the Leicester Fire Department (“LFD”) and the Cuylerville Volunteer Fire Department (“CVFD”) are currently facing unsustainable cost trends.
    • Both departments have had a pattern of recent budget overages, which have required increasing contributions from the Town and Village, burdening their general funds.
    • Large additional capital expenditures – for instance, for new fire apparatus – will be required for both depts over the next decade. These expenses can run into the millions of dollars, depending on how much apparatus is being replaced and the capabilities of the replacement vehicles.
      • Grants or other funding may cover some of this expense, but likely not all of it, which means local taxpayers must cover the rest.
  • Improvements can be made to both departments.
    • The fire service in Leicester needs to be operating at a level consistent with current state and national standards across the board. This includes not only the performance and preparation of volunteer staff, but also the level of equipment, apparatus and facilities.

There are choices for the future governance of the fire departments, including a Joint Fire District.

  • Currently, LFD is a Village department (i.e., technically controlled by the Village), and CVFD is an independent fire company that contracts with the fire protection district that is controlled by the Town.
  • The Town and Village may keep this governance model, or may choose to shift to a “Joint Fire District”, a semi-independent taxing district that would oversee a combined fire department and would not be under the direct control of either the Town or the Village.

A Joint Fire District changes how local fire protection is controlled, but it is unlikely to reduce the tax costs or expenses of the fire service in the long term without further changes to how the two departments operate, such as through a merger or reductions in equipment.

  • The choice of a Joint Fire District would move fire protection costs from the Town and Village’s municipal budgets into this new taxing district. It will have independent authority to set its own tax rates, which will be collected by the town.
  • Some members of both fire departments believe that switching to a joint fire district would make the fire departments more independent by giving them direct control over their own operations, budgeting and taxation without Town or Village oversight. However, this is not necessarily the case:
    • Under the NYS law authorizing joint fire districts, the district’s board of fire commissioners may either be independently elected or appointed by the Town and Village.
    • In other words, the Town and Village have a means of continuing direct oversight of the new fire district/department, if they so choose.

The most significant choice for the future is the configuration of fire departments.

  • CGR has identified eight possible configuration options, four of which are based on combining the departments (the Joint Fire District approach), and four of which are based on not combining the departments.
    • In some configurations, both departments remain separate; in other configurations, only one of the two remains; in other configurations, both departments are merged into one.
    • The different options are presented in the body of the report.
    • CGR has estimated cost profiles for each of the different options.

    CGR projects that a combined (merged) department would have the most advantages for efficiency and long-term sustainability of the volunteer base.

    • A combined department is possible with or without a Joint Fire District. Whether or not a combined department should be based in a Joint Fire District depends on how the local community would like to handle taxation and budgeting for the department.

    Personal disagreements and personality conflicts are currently the largest barrier to a combined department.

    • The main barriers to enhanced cooperation or merged department appears to be rooted in a history of personal disagreements and ill feeling between some members of the two departments.
      • This is coupled with some potentially valid concerns about different standards, training levels and operating procedures.

    All of these issues and barriers can be overcome with a guided process of establishing new standards for the combined department, paired with a cooperative attitude from all parties that puts the community’s needs ahead of personal egos.

    • Every issue that CGR has identified is solvable with the right attitude and the willingness to cooperatively address it.

    In any configuration and under any governance structure, Town and Village residents will be facing increased costs and fire taxes in the future if they want to have capable, modern fire protection service.

    • Overall cost estimates and property tax estimates for the various options are provided in the body and conclusion of the report.

    Volunteers are the most important resource the community has.

    • Whatever other costs or considerations may be incurred, maintaining an active and capable volunteer base is more affordable to the community than switching to paid/career firefighters. Anything that can be done to enhance volunteer sustainability should be a priority.