Citing the $27 million state bill for the 2003 fire season, lawmakers said they want to know where - and how - state money was spent on wildfires.
"I would like to have a very detailed, in-depth audit," said Rep. Rick Ripley, R-Wolf Creek. "I believe there are a lot of situations where people are taking advantage of emergencies and disasters."
Pointing to reviews that began in the 1980s, Seacat told lawmakers they have been repeatedly warned about the potential for ballooning fire costs.
"I don't think we need more money to fight fires," Seacat said. "The issue is the surprise. There's no method in place."
The Legislature never sets aside any money for fire costs, nor does Montana have any fire spending policies in place. So when bills roll in at the end of the fire season, the state generally pays them.
While the state does review fire claims on an annual basis, auditors do not routinely examine how the money is spent. That's what this audit will do, legislators said.
"Should we have a firefighting policy in place?" asked Rep. Hal Jacobson, D-Helena. "Apparently, we don't."
Fire costs hit an all-time high last summer. State officials have said that if Montana hadn't received an unexpected $50 million windfall from the federal government this spring, the state would have been hard-pressed to pay this year's $27 million bill.
Legislators want to know what Montana is getting for its money.
Seacat said the audit will plumb the depths of fire spending practices, including the distribution of initial attack crews, coordination among government agencies as well as revenue sources for firefighting.
Lawmakers also want auditors to see how the federal government spends its money on fires, and what part of the federal tab Montana must pay. Lawmakers questioned the "federal waste" they said they see in nationally contracted meals, high-price rental equipment and innumerable crews.
"We should know what we're paying for and what portion of waste we're paying for," said Sen. Jim Elliott, D-Trout Creek.
While auditors will spend months looking into fire spending practices, state officials acknowledge that some fire costs are out of their control.
For example, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has changed the way it helps states pay for fires. While FEMA has declared entire states disaster areas before, like during Montana's devastating fire season of 2000, they rarely do so anymore.
Elliott said the feds have also changed how they fight fires, now preferring to let some burn if they're not threatening structures or property.
Additionally, Montana was hit with bad luck this year when several of the largest and expensive fires burned on land the state was wholly responsible for.
Seacat said the performance audit will take three to four months and other reviews that lawmakers wanted his staff to perform by January 2005 are likely to fall by the wayside. Low-priority audits, such as reviews of the state's public health and environmental labs and vocational rehab programs, may not get done before the 2005 Legislature convenes, he said.
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)