Part 2: Fire Services Debate, Rural Coverage Concerns, and Study Halted — 06/15/2026

This portion focuses on who spoke, how councillors positioned themselves, and where lines formed by ward during the June 15, 2023 Committee of the Whole meeting. While no final service changes were approved, the discussion revealed clear divisions around fire service planning, alongside strong agreement on community impact concerns.

The meeting was chaired by Phil St. Jean, who repeatedly stressed that the Fire Optimization presentation was for information only and that no final decisions would be made at Committee. St. Jean allowed extended questioning, approved early public comments, and later supported a motion to stop further optimization work, signalling caution about moving forward without broader Council and public confidence.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

View the entire PEC Council Meeting; or view our recap.

Support for the Feed the Meter campaign was unanimous. Kate MacNaughton moved the motion to continue the program for the full 2022 to 2026 Council term, with Phil Prinzen seconding it. Councillors across the table spoke in favour, including Mayor Steve Ferguson and Bill Roberts, emphasizing the program’s role in school food security and community wellbeing.

Rural Ward Concerns and Insurance Impacts

When the agenda turned to fire services, several councillors were especially vocal about insurance impacts and service levels. Roy Pennell repeatedly raised concerns about insurance premiums, distance from accredited stations, and the financial burden on residents. Pennell later opposed public consultation methods that relied heavily on digital tools, arguing for in-person engagement to ensure all residents were heard.

Volunteer Firefighter Perspective and Process Concerns

Phil Prinzen, who also serves as a volunteer firefighter, questioned whether presenting optimization scenarios before the full report risked unnecessarily alarming the public. While acknowledging that consultation with firefighters had occurred, Prinzen expressed discomfort with the process and ultimately moved the motion to receive the presentation but discontinue further work on the Fire Optimization Study.

Calls for Public Consultation Before Service Changes

Janice Maynard consistently emphasized the need for public consultation on fire service levels before any restructuring could be considered. She raised questions about growth pressures, costs, timelines, and whether residents had ever been asked what level of fire protection they expect. Maynard did not support advancing optimization work without clear public direction.

South and North Marysburgh Positions

Concerns about response times and coverage were raised clearly during the discussion. John Hirsch highlighted missing response time scenarios and warned that some areas already experience long response times. David Harrison was unequivocal, stating he would not support the closure of a local station under any circumstances, citing insurance impacts and loss of coverage for residents.

Other councillors focused more on process and clarity. Brad Nieman asked about definitions of underperforming facilities and whether the County was being required to act or simply to study risks. Sam Grosso questioned how facilities were evaluated and what standards were being applied. Neither supported immediate change.

Mayor’s Motion on Public Engagement

Mayor Steve Ferguson attempted to steer the discussion toward structured public engagement. He moved a motion directing staff to conduct public consultation and to call a special Committee of the Whole meeting to review the final Fire Optimization report. That motion, seconded by Roberts, was lost, reflecting a lack of consensus on continuing the optimization process at that time.

The motion that ultimately carried set the direction clearly. The presentation by the consultant was formally received, and the work completed to date was to be provided to the municipality. Further work on the Fire Optimization Study and station location mapping was discontinued. This outcome reflected a majority of councillors expressing discomfort with advancing structural fire service changes without stronger public backing, clearer cost-benefit analysis, and greater transparency.

What This Means for Local Residents

The immediate takeaway is stability. No fire stations were closed, and no relocations were approved. Potential insurance impacts remain uncertain rather than immediate.

At the same time, the completed risk assessment work keeps the County aligned with upcoming provincial requirements, while leaving room for future discussions that are slower, more public, and more grounded in community input.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 2:57:53. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.