SAUBURN -- Citizens raised concerns Thursday while city officials made their case once again over the recent closure of one of the city's three fire houses.
During a special public hearing authorized by city council at its weekly meeting, three Auburn Fire Department advocates questioned the motives and legality behind Tuesday's decision to close the fire house on Frederick Street. But Fire Chief Mike Hammon and City Manager Mark Palesh reiterated that vacating the station will save the city money while improving department services.
The station was built as a bomb shelter in the 1950s and maintained to protect the city's watershed, Hammon said. Closing the fire house followed a recommendation from a comprehensive study of the city's fire department conducted in 2003, he added.
Furthermore, Hammon said response times between the vacated station and the one on Market Street quickly equalize as one moves away from either of them, such as along Grant Avenue. The two are seven-tenths of a mile apart, he said.
"While we all would like a fire truck in our neighborhoods, that comes at a cost," said Hammon, who added that the city's tax base has been shrinking for years.
But Auburn Professional Fire Fighters Local 1446 President Steve Parker said the union feels the city is manipulating the safety of the residents with the decision to close the station.
"This is not in the best interest of safety for the public," Parker read from a prepared statement. "(The closure) will increase important response times ... in what seems to be a knee jerk reaction to recent contract disagreements."
There was a problem over response time just this week, Parker added. With two engines already on a call, it took the third engine six minutes to get from the Clark Street station to Fleming Street, he said.
"To me, that is totally unacceptable," Parker said.
Bill Jacobs, a former councilor, asked city attorney John Rossi to examine whether it is within the city manager's power to close a fire station if the station was built with a council resolution. Jacobs then criticized the council for discussing these matters in executive session.
"I don't think safety is something to talk about behind closed doors," Jacobs said. "I think this whole thing happened illegally."
For the full report, read Friday's edition of The Citizen.
The station was built as a bomb shelter in the 1950s and maintained to protect the city's watershed, Hammon said. Closing the fire house followed a recommendation from a comprehensive study of the city's fire department conducted in 2003, he added.
Furthermore, Hammon said response times between the vacated station and the one on Market Street quickly equalize as one moves away from either of them, such as along Grant Avenue. The two are seven-tenths of a mile apart, he said.
"While we all would like a fire truck in our neighborhoods, that comes at a cost," said Hammon, who added that the city's tax base has been shrinking for years.
But Auburn Professional Fire Fighters Local 1446 President Steve Parker said the union feels the city is manipulating the safety of the residents with the decision to close the station.
"This is not in the best interest of safety for the public," Parker read from a prepared statement. "(The closure) will increase important response times ... in what seems to be a knee jerk reaction to recent contract disagreements."
There was a problem over response time just this week, Parker added. With two engines already on a call, it took the third engine six minutes to get from the Clark Street station to Fleming Street, he said.
"To me, that is totally unacceptable," Parker said.
Bill Jacobs, a former councilor, asked city attorney John Rossi to examine whether it is within the city manager's power to close a fire station if the station was built with a council resolution. Jacobs then criticized the council for discussing these matters in executive session.
"I don't think safety is something to talk about behind closed doors," Jacobs said. "I think this whole thing happened illegally."
For the full report, read Friday's edition of The Citizen.
Citizen
Hot Jobs
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are 4 comment(s)
bear wrote on Apr 4, 2008 9:59 AM:
union wrote on Apr 4, 2008 9:34 AM:
Going back again to the math about running a business like the city. Which it should be run like a business. NOT A GOOD OLD BOYS CLUB! The city population dropped 14.3% from 1985 to 2006. And from 1985 to 2006 the loss of industry and retail business fell 23.2%. The tax base we have now needs to be increased or cut backs in all department have got to be made!
Mr Palesh and the new chief I feel are making changes as a business move to save money. Safety concern is that they got to run a extra 7/10 th of mile. So what is that in time of travel with a truck that has a siren and lights on it. I hope the Mayor, City Council, City Manager and ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT HEADS start running this city like a business. We as tax payers can't take increase in taxes anymore to support a city that is losing population and tax base every day of the week. The area towns are growing in business and population because we have taxed them out from living in the City of Auburn. "
anonymous wrote on Apr 3, 2008 11:40 PM:
EJ001 wrote on Apr 3, 2008 11:28 PM:
I was there at the meeting tonight.
I am surprised (not really) that this article didn't include the rest of what Mr. Sloan said? To me, something he said was extremely relevent.
He said the city has spent over $30,000 dollars so far (1/08 to 4/08) on a vacant assistant chiefs position. He said it was over $2000 a week.
These facts CAN'T be right, and if they are, I really don't understand?
How could the city close a firehouse for $30,000 per YEAR (see above article), when they are paying out that money ($30,000 PER QUARTER?) by NOT hiring another chief?
Isn't that $120,000 per YEAR?
Am I missing something?
Is there a reason they aren't making somebody a chief? If there is, its really a costly one.
I sure would like to know why they continue to pay overtime for this. Can't the council can see that this is way too much money to spend? The chief asked for more firefighters to kill the amount of overtime being paid, but why don't they do something about this chief's position?
Again - what am I missing?
"