Split Opinions On Montclair's Fire Department Deal With Glen Ridge

MONTCLAIR, NJ — Montclair’s mayor says that a potential agreement to provide fire department services for Glen Ridge is a winner for the township. But two council members disagree, and they say the town should put the brakes on the deal.

Glen Ridge’s 10-year contract with Montclair for fire suppression services and the use of George Washington Field is nearing an end. Glen Ridge has since released a request for proposals for a new fire contract to take effect at the end of the year, also reaching out to Montclair’s neighbor, Bloomfield.

Bids between the two towns were “extremely close” when the previous contract was hammered out in 2012, Glen Ridge officials said. Read More: Glen Ridge Asks Montclair, Bloomfield For Fire Contract Proposals

Montclair submitted a bid for a new contract on Aug. 17, which has been authorized by their peers in Glen Ridge. That bid doesn’t include a proposal for use of recreational facilities and field.

A resolution authorizing a shared services agreement with Glen Ridge for “fire suppression services” is on the agenda for the Sept. 28 meeting of the Montclair Township Council.

Article continues below

The reaction from town officials in Montclair has been split on the potential deal with Glen Ridge.

Montclair Mayor Sean Spiller supported the deal in an op-ed posted to Baristanet, calling it a win-win situation. He wrote:

“After working with Glen Ridge for a number of years, we know exactly what our annual costs are to provide fire service and protection. By engaging in a shared services agreement, Montclair receives dollars that far exceed our incremental cost associated with providing fire services to Glen Ridge. Our lone costs are fuel, maintenance, and vehicle depreciation; not one additional firefighter is employed to service Glen Ridge. Therefore, the net gain for Montclair taxpayers is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, every single year of our agreement. This revenue reduces costs to Montclair residents, promotes public safety and enhances the long-term financial sustainability of our township.”

But Councilman Peter Yacobellis said the proposal is a bad deal for Montclair taxpayers.

“We can’t afford to subsidize fire services for Glen Ridge anymore,” he said last week. “They need to pay their fair share.”

“If enacted, we would be ignoring the guidance of our own financial experts and locking ourselves into a 10 or possibly 15-year contract (this gives Glen Ridge an option to renew for five years), where we are drastically underpaid for the services that we provide,” Yacobellis said.

“Given inflation, contracted wage increases, major investments we’ll need in equipment in the coming years and the physical capacity and condition of two of our three fire houses, I think it would be irresponsible both in the short term and especially in the long term, to enter into this agreement,” the councilman added.

Yacobellis continued:

“The prevailing thought now is that receiving any money from Glen Ridge is a good thing because it doesn’t really cost us much to provide the service to them. That is factually incorrect. We know exactly how much it costs us. I respect that some of my colleagues are alarmed by the possibility of losing the revenue that we do get. But the contract was always going to expire at the end of this year, and I’m confident that we have contingencies for that scenario. Spending more money than we should to subsidize these services for Glen Ridge for a decade or more into the future is a much more significant financial burden. In my opinion, it’s already been a financial burden to us. At its inception decades ago, this agreement may have been a good deal. But the fact that we are, almost to the dollar, getting the same amount of money from Glen Ridge in 2022 as we did in 2009 should speak volumes. Is there much in your life that costs you less now than it did in 2009?”

The councilman added:

“According to our own finance team, our total annual costs for fire services for Montclair and Glen Ridge is approximately $17M (“M” = Million Dollars) counting both operating and capital costs. We also know that Glen Ridge represents approximately 10% of our fire department’s service calls. If you wanted to look at this as just a straight proportion, their share would be $1.7M. You could also look at it in terms of population served – how much do fire services cost per resident. The two towns combined have approximately 49,000 people. Glen Ridge’s share of that is about 16% or 7,800 people. Sixteen percent of our total budget would be approximately $2.7M. Or you could look at it in terms of the number of taxable properties. The two towns combined have approximately 13,450 taxable properties with Glen Ridge having a 17% share of those or 2,350. Seventeen percent of our total budget would be approximately $3M. Our baseline for talks should be $1.7M. But instead, we’re offering them a ten-year deal that starts at $850,000 in 2023 ($76,000 less than they paid this year) and graduates to only $1.4M by 2032. And sometimes it’s easy to just look at next year or the year after that and say it’s not that big of a deal. But what about the cumulative loss over a decade or longer? What have we already accumulated in missed revenue for decades? This is real money.”

Councilman Bob Russo also put out a statement about the proposed deal, calling for a review of the shared services agreement and asking his colleagues to delay the approval of the contract.

Russo, a former mayor and deputy mayor in Montclair, said that New Jersey Department of Community Affairs “Shared Services Czars” have offered to take a look at the proposal, but must be officially asked through a request from the mayor or council.

Russo pointed out that there were doubts about the previous contract with Glen Ridge when it was greenlighted in 2012.

“We understandably had to win the council approval of Glen Ridge to continue a contract which I, as mayor, had helped negotiate without any bidding competition in 2003,” Russo wrote. “When the contract I negotiated in a positive relationship with Glen Ridge ended in 2012, we were being compensated at the rate of nearly $1 million. That dropped to hundreds of thousands lower under the new contract bid in competing with Bloomfield.”

Russo said he “believes strongly” in the concept of shared services, intergovernmental agreements and regionalization as a way to save taxpayer dollars and provide more efficient services.

But the most recent deal with Glen Ridge hasn’t panned out, he added.

“The Glen Ridge Fire Services agreement was a good contact 20 years ago when I served one term as mayor,” Russo said. “I do not believe it was a good deal for Montclair during the past 10 years, as ‘negotiated’ through bidding in early 2012.”

Send local news tips and correction requests to eric.kiefer@patch.com. Learn more about advertising on Patch here. Find out how to post announcements or events to your local Patch site. Don’t forget to visit the Patch Montclair Facebook page.