Ruston Way Fire Station Plans
An article by The News Tribune’s Peter Callaghan raises questions over plans for the Ruston Way fire station. Plans for the currently unused station call for renovation of the building and rebuilding of its piers, along with new construction of an upland apparatus bay. But Callaghan’s article questions the appropriateness of the plans, and according to the article, he’s not alone. According to the article, an uphill neighbor plans to lodge a complaint based on the Waterfront Master Plan, claiming that the proposed use is not “water dependent,” and therefore should not be allowed on the waterfront.
Callaghan goes further, questioning the investment in the fire station at this time of budget strain (to put it mildly). The actual planned renovations of the station will be paid for by federal and City capital funds, neither of which can be redirected to other parts of the City’s budget, including firefighter salaries. The TNT article raises questions of whether the station is a wise investment (although the plans were made and funded some time ago), in light of the challenges of staffing and locating fireboats in an area that is unsheltered from winter storms.
Is there a good reason to continue work to reopen the station? Would anything be gained from stopping the project? Will we always be in “these tough economic times,” or can we foresee a future when funding is less tight, and a fire station with capacity to better protect our waterfront properties is an asset to the City?
Read Callaghan’s story from The News Tribune.
Filed under: public-safety
5 comments
C Christine January 20, 2012
Check the records. That uphill neighbor files complaints one everything! Sun shining? Raining? Too many or too few rollerbladers? She complains. I think it’s her hobby.
D D January 20, 2012
I can’t see how this would be feasible. If the fire department was a privately run business, no one in their right mind would choose such a high dollar location when there’s abundant real estate all
around us sitting vacant that is
far less expensive and
additionally probably much
more centrally located to
service more residents. How
could it be argued that this
location could possibly be
logical on any level? When
the economy went sour all
these government/public sector
people continued to sit around and do nothing (if you’ve ever
stepped foot into any
government office or public
entity and dealt with some
smug bureaucrat who could
care less whether they do
anything to help anyone-just
give them their paycheck,
mandatory breaks, personal
days, vacations, overtime, and
mental health days and leave
them alone!) and acted like business people both big and small were the enemy. I love it, now that they’re loosing their jobs they are finally figuring out that without the American spirit to start and grow businesses, they have no revenue to continue their wasteful, inefficient, loathsome public disservice “jobs”. These people need to take their licks like everyone else, and figure out how to make good decisions in bad times. Wake up and smell the low tide ! I can smell something funky!
J Jenny Jenkins January 20, 2012
Whether you agree with continuing the plans or not, it seems like a bit of a leap to go straight to being gleeful over people losing their jobs.
Also, I’m pretty sure using the phrase “these people” always advances the conversation in a positive direction.
D D January 21, 2012
Yeah not sayin I want them to lose jobs. Make smart decisions. That’s what I’m saying, and treat your job like a business. Also, these people,direct reference to the subject. You must have taken your sensitivity training class recently at your government job.
C Christine January 21, 2012
I think the high dollar location has something to do with the fact that it is hard to dock a boat anywhere other than on the water.