Due to the major financial impact on Lethbridge taxpayers, city administration is recommending city council not accept the province’s new contract conditions for emergency medical services (EMS), while preserving the right to participate in further negotiations and/or request for proposal processes. During a community issues committee meeting on Thursday, council members voted 5-4 to not accept the proposed conditions. “It’s not an easy task and probably the most difficult I’ve had in my 12 and a half years on council,” said Mayor Blaine Hyggen. On March 13, Emergency Health Services (EHS) Alberta notified the city that before negotiations on a new EMS contract could begin, the city would need to agree in advance to cover any costs above the provincial funding benchmark to continue with an integrated fire-EMS model. Or, if council declines the contract conditions, EHS has indicated they will move to either an open procurement process or a direct delivery model through a outside contract company. “It’s a hard decision both ways,” said Darrell Mathews, chief financial officer at the City of Lethbridge. Lethbridge Fire and Emergency Services (LFES) has provided an integrated fire-EMS model since 1912. In addition to funding from the provincial EMS contract, Lethbridge taxpayers provide $3.5 million each year to maintain an integrated fire-EMS service. But, according to Mathews, the proposed funding changes could result in a $3.7 million in local costs in 2027, a 1.8 per cent tax increase. That cost is expected to grow to $4.2 million in 2028 and $4.6 million by 2029. “The financial impact on taxpayers is something many of us thought is just prohibitive,” said Hyggen. If council chooses to decline the contract conditions, LFES would move to a fire-only service. Mathews says approximately 70 EMS and support staff positions would be lost. “If it got to the point where it was a fire-only model there would be an additional $1.1 million in costs that we would have to increase funding for, which is a 0.5-0.6 per cent tax increase,” explained Mathews, adding there would also be an estimated one-time cost of $600,000 in 2027 to support the transition out of an integrated service. “We are disappointed with how this process has rolled out,” said Hyggen. “This decision will have a tax implication on Lethbridge residents, regardless of what decision council makes. “That is a frustrating position to be in.” But the Lethbridge Firefighters Union says moving away from the integrated fire-EMS service is only going to negatively impact residents. “The system works,” said Brent Nunweiler, Lethbridge Firefighters IAFF Local 237 president. “A move away from this system means less ambulances in Lethbridge, it means less trained practitioners on those ambulances, it means greater gaps in our system and it means lives will be lost.” Nunweiler says council needs to understand and recognize the impact the current model provides the city by continuing to fund integrated fire-EMS. “City council in the past has funded over and above what EHS has provided. I would challenge EHS on what they’re saying their costs are,” he said. “Their overtime is through the roof. They’re shutting down ambulances. We don’t do that in Lethbridge. We don’t shut ambulances down. We don’t downgrade our units. We provide top-notch care. It costs money, but the citizens expect and deserve that, and we’ve been providing it for 114 years. “We’re looking to do that for another hundred years.” Council is expected to make a decision on how to proceed at a special meeting of city council on May 5. It has until May 31 to inform EHS about a decision.
