PHOENIX — Arizona cities and fire districts are sounding the alarm over what they call fire truck manufacturers’ monopolistic control of the market, driving up prices and delaying deliveries.

Seven Arizona cities — Tucson, Phoenix, Tempe, Gilbert, Scottsdale, Mesa, and Peoria — have joined 80 jurisdictions across the country in an antitrust class action lawsuit against fire truck manufacturers and private equity firms. The state’s fire districts, with help from the attorney general, are considering legal action, too.

Fire districts and departments recognize rising costs. But they say standard inflation cannot account for the steep, sudden increases in the cost of essential equipment, from ladder trucks to pumper engines.

And beyond cost, which they say has doubled, wait times now extend for years.

“You can’t get to a call because your apparatus is broken down because it’s old, and you’re only hanging on to it because you can’t afford to buy a new one because of the prices,” said Dan Freiberg, president of the Professional Firefighters of Arizona and a captain for the Goodyear Fire Department.

“Who’s on the other side of that 911 call?” he asked. “It’s not me. It’s a citizen who needs help.”

The city of La Crosse, Wisconsin, first sued Oshkosh Corp., its subsidiary Pierce Manufacturing, REV Group, Rosenbauer and the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers’ Association in August 2025.

Plaintiffs now span at least 14 states. Defendants now include private equity firm American Industrial Partners and fire truck makers Boise Mobile Equipment and Kovatch Mobile Equipment Corp.

The class action, now playing out in federal court before Wisconsin Judge William Griesbach, alleges that American Industrial Partners consolidated nearly a dozen small fire truck manufacturers and used its market control to raise prices.

The firm later combined four of the companies to create REV Group, then shut down two manufacturing plants in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Plaintiffs claim that led to a massive backlog and $4.2 billion in undelivered orders by the end of fiscal year 2024.

The complaint also alleges Pierce Manufacturing, owned by Oshkosh, consolidated with Boise Mobile Equipment to corner production of wildland fire trucks.

That’s all Attorney General Kris Mayes says is behind an investigation she launched last month into alleged anticompetitive—and illegal—conduct.

“Arizona’s firefighters run toward danger to protect the rest of us, and they shouldn’t have to do it with equipment that’s falling apart because corporate greed has priced them out of the repairs and replacements they need,” she said in a prepared statement. “My office will hold accountable any company that puts profits ahead of the safety of our first responders and the communities they serve.”

Attorneys for the manufacturers and the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers’ Association deny any wrongdoing. In a recent motion to dismiss, they argue the price increases and delays stem from a surge in demand brought on by the pandemic.

“Speculation does not state an antitrust claim,” defense attorneys wrote. “But that is all class plaintiffs offer: they simply theorize that post-pandemic price increases and delays for fire trucks are the product of a sprawling conspiracy rather than simple economics.”

But the firefighters say what is happening can’t be attributed to “simple economics.”

The city of Phoenix says a standard pumper truck cost about $613,000 in 2020 and $1.15 million in 2025. An aerial platform truck cost $1.6 million in 2022 and $2.17 million in 2025.

Delivery of a part took about 10 months in 2020, Phoenix says. By 2025, the wait had stretched beyond two years. The city ordered 10 pumpers in 2022 and was promised delivery by June 2025. As of the lawsuit filing, it still hadn’t arrived.

Fire districts face similar delays and price hikes, and they are already at a financial disadvantage, Freiberg said.

Unlike fire departments, fire districts are not tied to a city, town or county. They are special taxing districts that provide emergency services across rural, unincorporated areas or multiple municipalities.

And that creates a different financial issue: Arizona’s 150 fire districts rely solely on property taxes.

That became a problem after voters passed Proposition 117 in 2012. The measure capped annual property value increases at 5%, which in turn limited property tax revenue.

Freiberg said districts have suffered as a result.

“You’re trying to survive in 2026, basically with a 2016 budget,” Freiberg said. “These districts are barely surviving.”

In 2022, fire districts tried to secure another funding stream through the Legislature. State lawmakers placed Proposition 310 on the ballot, asking voters to approve a tenth-of-a-cent state sales tax to fund a new Fire District Safety Fund.

The measure failed, securing only 48% of the vote.

Freiberg said rising truck and parts prices make the problem worse.

“If we’re in old equipment, if we’re in broken-down equipment, if we’re in equipment that’s constantly having to go out for repairs, we’re not able to serve the community the way we all want to,” Freiberg said. “As a firefighter, that’s really, really frustrating because you have the manpower, you got the personnel, you have the training, you have the desire, you have all those things, and then the thing that prohibits you from doing the job is a group of fire apparatus manufacturers.”

With that in mind, the Professional Firefighters of Arizona hopes to bring fire districts into the litigation.

“If there are damages, we want those districts to get a piece of the damages,” Freiberg said.