Eugene Springfield Fire to split into independent city departments

This is a developing story and will be updated.

After 16 years as a shared department, Eugene Springfield Fire will soon be split between the two cities, officials announced Thursday, July 2, in a joint press release.

The cities said ending the functional consolidation that has bound the two departments will allow “each city to govern, fund, and plan services in ways that best reflect the specific needs of their communities.” 

According to the news release, the organization has outgrown its original design. 

“While the partnership delivered strong service outcomes, the two cities face different infrastructure needs, resource constraints, and long-term priorities,” the news release states. “Rather than directing public funds toward the start-up costs and administrative overhead of a new governmental entity, transitioning to independent departments allows both cities to invest directly in the firefighters, equipment, and fire stations residents depend on.”

The transition to independent departments will happen over the next two years, the news release said, which notes this is the first step “in a carefully managed transition” and that emergency response in Springfield and Eugene will not be disrupted. Specific details of staffing assignments and operations are still to be determined. Regional cooperation and mutual aid agreements will be maintained. 

Fire Chief Mike Caven will lead the joint planning effort with staff from both cities, and the plan will go to each city council for review.

“The shared values that have guided Eugene Springfield Fire remain unchanged,” Caven said in the release. “Our firefighters, paramedics, and emergency responders remain dedicated to protecting our community and will continue serving residents without interruption throughout this process. Our top priority is maintaining services for residents.”

Under their current arrangement, Eugene and Springfield share one department but maintain separate budgets, staff and oversight, leading to inefficiencies and disparities between cities in resources and capacity.

The cities had been working to restructure the department into a stand-alone agency known as an intergovernmental entity (IGE), a single employer for firefighters governed by a board with representation from both cities. 

The Eugene and Springfield city councils voted to begin working out the details to form the new agency in December and January, respectively. Springfield City Manager Nancy Newton said the cities would need to agree on the structure of the governing board, the processes for appointing members and making decisions, and a cost-sharing system. 

Former Eugene City Manager Sarah Medary recommended Eugene issue a required two-year notice for dissolving the current functional consolidation between departments if the cities couldn’t make significant progress on the framework for the new agency, within six months. That date passed earlier this month.

Thursday’s announcement came three days after the Springfield City Council met in executive session to review confidential records under law practitioner-client privilege. The meeting was scheduled during the council’s summer recess. 

According to records released with the joint statement, Eugene City Manager Jenny Haruyama sent a notice to Newton Tuesday, June 30, initiating the formal process for terminating the intergovernmental agreement.

“If the agreement required only two years’ notice, rather than two full fiscal years’ notice, this notification would not be necessary at this time,” Haruyama wrote in the notice. “However, based on the terms of the IGA, the current status of the IGE negotiations, and the direction provided by Eugene’s City Council through its December 12 motion, it is my responsibility to provide formal notice at this time in order to preserve the City’s options under the agreements.”

In her response, Newton wrote that the Springfield City Council “has had thoughtful and detailed discussions regarding governance and is willing to continue discussions with their counterparts in Eugene regarding the appropriate path forward.” 

“Regardless of the future service delivery model, there is significant value in maintaining our strong working relationship and ensuring that residents continue to receive exceptional service through effective coordination and mutual support,” Newton wrote.

A 16-year functional consolidation

The Eugene Fire & EMS and Springfield Fire & Life Safety departments began their three-phase merger in 2010. 

In 2021, the cities formed a department governance review panel with two city councilors from Springfield and two from Eugene. They gave policy direction to city managers, who work with the fire chief on operations. But by phase three, the cities still had not accomplished long-term goals for the department, like a dedicated firefighting budget.

For this reason, members of the firefighters union have advocated to form a fire district, a new government agency with its own independently elected board and property tax funding structure, like a park and recreation district. 

The taxing district would have resulted in lost revenue for Eugene, and generated about $12 million more for fire and emergency services in the city’s general fund — an amount that Medary, the former city manager, said in October would deliver “unclear” impacts, “if any.”

The intergovernmental entity would not have had taxing authority. Rather, Medary said annual payments by Eugene and Springfield, called member fees, would make up most of the entity’s funding. 

But the cities ultimately never finalized details of their agreement like a funding structure.

“We cannot continue to keep doing what we’re doing with both cities pursuing different options for how to address their long term financial stability,” Caven told Lookout in December. “We’re on different budget cycles now … everything makes it really hard to operate a shared service within the city.”

What comes next? 

The governance review panel commissioned a 2024 AP Triton study to review fire department governance options, which recommended forming the intergovernmental entity. 

It also considered continuing the current merger, establishing an agreement allowing one city to provide service to the other, creating a fire district and dissolving the functional merger and returning to individual city departments. 

“Dissolving the functional merger and returning ESF to individual city fire departments may be necessary if none of the other options are palatable for both cities,” the study states.

According to the study, “very few” Eugene Springfield Fire staff desire a separation. 

It lists one advantage of dissolving the existing agreement: administrative functions will be simplified, and each city will administer its own fire department. However, several “disadvantages/challenges” are noted, including:

• Reestablishing some of the administrative and support staffing for both cities to operate as standalone fire departments would require an increase in wages and benefits. (The study recommended Eugene add at least five positions at an estimated $1.1 million and Springfield add a minimum of three positions at a cost of about $800,000.)
• Potential costs related to supplies and equipment after inventories determine the ownership of items and identify any gaps for either city.
• Springfield will need to reestablish office space for administration and warehouse space for supplies, including uniforms.
• Loss of ability to operate as a single fire agency and a decreased capacity for both staffing and emergency response.
• Both cities may experience an increase in emergency call back of off-duty staff during major incidents.
• Springfield may be challenged to manage one single family dwelling fire without mutual aid to assist at the incident or covering the city.

The study provides a plan for each city to reestablish standalone fire departments.