Grand Junction Rural Fire Protection District (GJRFPD) and city staff are preparing to begin negotiations this month over the intergovernmental agreement that provides fire protection to unincorporated areas around Grand Junction. The discussions follow a formal two-year notice issued by Grand Junction city officials in early September, signaling plans to terminate the existing fire protection contract. This affects residents in parts of the Redlands, Orchard Mesa, and the Appleton area, as the city claims the cost of services provided to the rural district far outpaced its contribution to the city’s budget.
City spokespeople, including the city manager and council members, have stated the two-year notice was not intended to jeopardize the 18-year-old partnership. Instead, they said it was meant to establish a firm deadline for resolving financial issues under the current contract. According to Grand Junction Fire Chief Pete Skeris, the city spends $2.1 million more per year providing fire services to the rural district than it receives under the current agreement. Chief Skeris described this as one of several “structural deficits” causing budget challenges for municipal decision-makers this season.
Representatives for the Grand Junction Rural Fire Protection District (GJRFPD) have stated they had no intention of delaying a resolution, and they described the city's formal notice as an unexpected and unsettling escalation. At an October 13 board meeting, GJRFPD board members voiced hesitation about raising their residents’ property taxes, which city officials have requested. However, trustees acknowledged that municipal decision-makers hold considerable leverage going into the talks.
GJRFPD Board Chair Dave Parmley emphasized the significance of the relationship at that same meeting, stating, "This relationship is so invaluable, I shudder at the question of having to look at other options." Parmley also pointed out how integral the rural district is to the city, referring to a map that visually illustrated the interconnectedness. The GJRFPD board has committed to good faith discussions and, if necessary, exploring other ways for rural district residents to continue receiving fire and emergency medical services, according to a prepared statement from the district on September 9. The board further stated that it "must assume the city means what it says" regarding its intent to terminate the contract.
The rural district’s board members appointed Chair Dave Parmley and Treasurer John Mayerik to represent them in closed-door meetings with city officials. These negotiations are expected to commence on October 29.
Looking ahead, the GJRFPD’s 2027 draft budget, which was also discussed at its October 13 board meeting, includes a $75,000 line item. This allocation is for the administrative costs associated with a potential mill levy ballot issue. Such an issue would be necessary if the district were to raise property taxes to align with the city’s requests, a move that would require a vote of approval from the district’s residents and non-resident property owners.
However, the inclusion of this expense in the draft budget does not mean a tax increase is definite. Emily Powell, legal counsel for the GJRFPD board, clarified that "The board is not committed to seeking a mill levy ballot issue and hasn’t decided to do that." Powell added that the district could explore a different type of ballot issue, such as a sales tax, or potentially no ballot issue at all. With the budget not yet finalized and intergovernmental negotiations still pending, the expense for a mill levy election is not yet set in stone, and there is no guarantee such an election will occur. The partnership between the city and the rural district has been in place for 18 years, making the current financial discussions a significant point for the region's fire protection services.