The future of Lethbridge's century-old integrated fire and emergency medical services (EMS) hangs in the balance as city council prepares to vote on a contract extension with Emergency Health Services (EHS) Alberta. The proposed agreement would impose significant additional costs on taxpayers, prompting council to consider rejecting the terms.
Council to vote on costly contract extension
Lethbridge city council is scheduled to decide on Tuesday, May 5, 2026, whether to accept a contract extension with EHS Alberta that would continue the city's unique integrated fire and paramedical service. The current model, which has been in place for over 100 years, combines firefighting and emergency medical response under one roof.
During a committee meeting last Thursday, city administration recommended against accepting the new contract conditions due to the substantial financial burden they would impose on Lethbridge taxpayers. Council members echoed this sentiment, voting 5-4 to recommend turning down the new conditions while preserving the option to engage in further negotiations or request-for-proposal processes.
Financial impact on taxpayers
Currently, Lethbridge taxpayers contribute $3.5 million annually, on top of the provincial EMS contract, to maintain the integrated service model. However, the proposed 2½-year contract extension with EHS would introduce funding changes that could cost taxpayers an additional $3.7 million in 2027, equating to a 1.8 per cent tax increase. This figure would rise to $4.2 million in 2028 and $4.6 million in 2029.
Mayor Blaine Hyggen expressed deep concern over the financial implications. "The financial impact on taxpayers is something that many of us thought was just prohibitive," he said. He noted that some residents were already struggling, with some "within a couple hundred dollars" of needing food bank assistance. "Every bit matters, and we'll try to do our best," Hyggen added.
Potential consequences of rejecting the contract
If council declines the contract extension, EHS has indicated it would initiate an open procurement process or adopt a direct delivery model. In the case of a procurement process, the City of Lethbridge could submit a proposal alongside other potential service providers. However, transitioning to a fire-only service would result in the loss of approximately 70 EMS and support staff positions.
The city also highlighted that the integrated model has generated cost savings through shared expenses such as building maintenance and training. A city news release warned that a fire-only model would still require funding for these shared costs, creating an ongoing tax pressure of roughly $1.1 million per year, or a 0.5 per cent tax increase. Additionally, the transition itself would cost an estimated $600,000.
Mayor highlights complexity of decision
Mayor Hyggen described the decision as one of the most challenging he has faced during his 12½ years on council. "It's not an easy task and probably the most difficult I've had," he said. Negotiations remain ongoing, but the mayor acknowledged that resolving the issue is complex and far from straightforward.
The special council meeting scheduled for Tuesday afternoon will determine the fate of Lethbridge's integrated EMS and fire service, a model that has served the community for over a century.
