A Lacombe County man must pay a $3,000 bill to cover firefighter response.
Brandon Williams was burning construction waste in the yard of his home just north of Lacombe last July when someone who believed a building was on fire called the fire department.
Lacombe and Bentley firefighters showed up and discovered there was no structure fire. The smoke spotted by a passerby came from wood waste being burned in a large steel container.
Four Lacombe Fire Department vehicles, including a command vehicle, and a tender from Bentley responded to the fire call.
Blackfalds was dispatched but called off quickly after the fire commander on scene saw that only a small contained fire was involved. Three of the on-scene vehicles were also sent back to the station.
A few weeks later, Williams received bill for $2,995, including $2,370 for Lacombe Fire Department's response and $625 for the Bentley tender and firefighters.
Lacombe County was involved nearly $920 for Blackfalds' fire response as well. Although the truck never left the station, about a dozen firefighters had responded to the call and showed up at the hall.
Given that the Blackfalds firefighters were not needed and called off right away, Lacombe County did not charge Williams the $920.
After Williams unsuccessfully appealed to the City of Lacombe and Lacombe County to have the invoice charges dropped or reduced he went before county council to argue his case two weeks ago.
He requested that he only be billed for the two vehicles that remained on scene to douse his fire, which had been illegal because a fire restriction was in place.
A report to council from county manager Tim Timmons recommended the fire response charges not be waived or reduced further. Besides waiving the Blackfalds charge, the county opted not to fine Williams for the illegal fire.
"Though the number of fire department units that responded to the fire was not warranted for degree of firefighting involved, based on the fire being reported as structure fire the appropriate number of units were in fact dispatched and attended the scene," said Timmons in a report to council.
"Ultimately, if Mr. Williams did not initiate the burn there would have been no need for a fire department response."
Council unanimously rejected the request that the fire response bill be reduced.
In arguing his case, Williams had told council the fire restriction information on the county website was unclear and he did not realize his fire was not allowed.
That argument got some sympathy from Coun. Brenda Knight on Thursday.
While fire bans are well understood by county residents, fire restrictions have some confused about what is allowed and what is prohibited, she said.
"I'm not saying we give leeway here. But many times I've been asked what does a fire restriction mean."
Knight suggested the county just stick to an outright fire ban when needed and do away with fire restrictions.
