A nearly four-hour meeting of the Jackson County Fire District 5 board on Tuesday touched on topics that ranged from concerns over capital projects and a possible payroll shortfall to allegations that a board member stepped outside his role.

An online agenda was not posted for the meeting due to issues with the district website.

Presentations during the meeting included an update from county Fire District 3 Chief Mike Hussey about the ongoing negotiation of an intergovernmental agreement that would have his district provide administrative and other supports to District 5.

Hussey, who attended with District 3 board president Harvey Tonn and Vice President John Dimick, asked for two board members to be appointed to meet with District 3 “so we can scope and narrow down this idea.”

“I hoped to be here tonight to deliver a proposal … and we’re still in the discovery process. There’s a lot of things that continue to unravel and rocks that have been turned over,” Hussey said.

“We remain committed to being part of the rebuilding process. I believe that I have the talent and capacity within the (District 3) organization. We have important support, and we want to be part of the solution. … There’s a lot of priorities in the initial request and, some of them, the timing just isn’t appropriate to dive into. But I think that we can work on a simple IGA where we’re providing some resources.”

The board voted unanimously to authorize Chair Greg Costanzo and Vice Chair John Karns to meet with District 3 to further work toward an agreement.

During a budget update for the district, interim Chief Aaron Bustard said that without additional money — by way of tax revenues, anticipated grant dollars or proceeds from vehicle sales — the district could fail to make payroll in October.

Should that “worst-case scenario” occur, Bustard said he would discuss a one-week payroll delay with union officials.

The district has faced financial struggles for the past year, and the board has discussed former Chief Charles Hanley’s mismanagement of district funds.

Phoenix public safety building

A bone of contention at the meeting was the timeline for District 5 to start staffing a public safety building, called the Phoenix Government and Public Safety Center, that was constructed last year.

Costanzo said Phoenix city officials had not set up a promised meeting or provided needed financial information about the district’s portion of a $3.5-million construction overrun, first reported in the Rogue Valley Times last summer.

Costanzo said Chief Hanley had made arrangements with the city of Phoenix that were outside the scope of his authority to make.

Board member Chris Luz voiced frustration with the fact that the district, which was supposed to occupy the building in April, had still not staffed it.

“If there is no firetruck in that station until next year, the citizens of Phoenix are going to wig out,” Luz said.

Board secretary Derek Volkart made a motion that the board “direct staff to refrain from occupying Station 3″ — which is located inside the public safety building — “until we can sort out the details of the lease agreement.”

Before a vote, Costanzo noted, “I would add to that: I can’t imagine occupying any building without knowing how much it’s going to cost. … I get that the firefighters want to occupy that building. But we’re looking at the future solvency of this district.”

Volkart said, “I don’t know that many people in Phoenix, but I’m pretty sure they would wig out if we didn’t make payroll, as was projected here this next month.”

Volkart, Costanzo and board member Sam Pare-Miller voted “yes” on the motion to refrain from occupying the building. Luz and Karns voted “no.”

Karns, who serves as fire chief of the Medford airport, said that staffing the station and figuring out funding are related but separate issues. He said the “level of public safety protection” provided by the district is important, “knowing that the importance of a reduction of 30 seconds can be absolutely crucial.”

During public comment, Talent Mayor Darby Ayers-Flood addressed the building issue, saying the $3.5-million overrun was “not fair to the constituents of Talent.”

“It seems as though half the overrun is being shouldered by the fire district without any understanding of what or who caused the overrun,” she said.

“It seems like the fire district went from a $1-per-year lease to $100,000 per year for 30 years, plus other costs … without any understanding of how it is this contract never came before the district board for final approval, and why it was never discussed that the voters could weigh in on what is an astronomical cost that the taxpayers from Talent and Ashland would also shoulder.”

Ayers-Flood urged the district to have town halls on the future of the district to allow constituents “to have a voice” in the process.

Contacted Wednesday, Phoenix Mayor Terry Baker said the situation with the unstaffed building was “disheartening.”

He said Phoenix city officials planned to meet with the fire district next week to revisit the project details, but that district officials had been “given financial details throughout the process and that the district had approved and finalized its portion of the (public safety) building during its last budget process.”

“We have held up our end of the bargain. We’re ready to go right now. The only reason there’s an issue is because of all the problems District 5 is now having with their budget. My empathy goes out to them, but this is not our fault. We made a good faith effort and we’re being made out publicly to be the bad guys,” Baker said.

“I’m very frustrated with the whole thing. … We made these agreements in good faith. We have our budget figured out, and we thought Fire District 5 had their budget figured out. Now we’re hearing they’re not gonna occupy the building in the timely fashion they said they would. Very disheartening.”

Inquiry into board member’s actions

After discussion of the public safety building, Volkart raised concerns about communications between board member Luz and “local, regional and state officials” during — and since — a July Phoenix City Council meeting to discuss the project.

Volkart made a motion requesting the board chair and vice chair conduct an inquiry into Luz’s actions, stating, “One director does not have the authority to speak on behalf of the board, and the renegotiation of the contract payments in a case of this size appears to be a board issue.”

The motion passed unanimously with Luz, visibly frustrated, noting, “There’s nothing wrong here … Go for it.”

Possessing fire district property

Board members revisited a previous discussion about former board member Mike Winters being in possession of district property on land he owns on North Valley View Road in Ashland.

Winters’ attorney, Miller & Wagner, LLP, submitted a letter to the fire district voicing concern about district allegations of “potential impropriety” and saying that Winters had never been contacted by the district regarding the property: four 40-foot shipping containers that the district purchased in 2023.

The letter states that interim Chief Bustard and Hanley asked Winters to store the containers “until the district was ready to use them.”

“Not surprisingly, given his history of donating time, service, equipment and materials to the district, Mr. Winters not only agreed to store the four containers, but to do so at no expense to the district,” the letter, dated Aug. 26, states.

“They have remained unused and empty, save for the addition of a 32-gallon plastic bag containing public records related to the district (that) Mr. Winters placed inside one container so they could be readily retrieved by district personnel.”

The letter notes, “given the board’s ‘concerns’ about ‘potential impropriety,’ as reported by Jefferson Public Radio, Mr. Winters is no longer willing to continue storing the district’s containers on his land. Kindly have them removed no later than 30 days from today.”

Executive session on litigation

The meeting also included a lengthy executive session noted under ORS192.660 (2) (h) to “consult with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed.”

No decisions were made after the executive session.