Comment history

Fire coverage gap filled in wake of Station 6 closure


I agree, it is the "leadership" that needs to get in line and create the funding.

By "leadership" I'm hoping you mean the city council and city manager. The fire chief can only advocate for the funding with factual data. While 8 minutes and increasing response times as well as woefully low staffing - the fire chief appears to be doing just that.

Then again, when The Columbian interviewed fire chief candidates, they all mentioned staffing and response times and funding issues. Not sure how many ways and how many times our council needs to hear it.

May 18, 2011 at 8:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Fire coverage gap filled in wake of Station 6 closure

In my opinion, an 8 plus minute response time at any point in our city is not acceptable service. It also comes nowhere near the national standard for a fire department response time related to a city of our size and population.

The city council has a long way to go on funding public safety staffing and response. And, the answer isn't a "public safety tax".

The public safety issues have ben simmering for the last 6-7 years, long before our economic downturn. The city council (current & past) continues to make decisions that push public safety to the back of the line in favor of other projects and priorities.

The bottom line, the lack of a well staffed, consistently funded and prepared police and fire departments creates poor business and community investments. If a community does not feel safe or protected at a basic and timely level - they don't live or invest in that community.

May 18, 2011 at 7:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Pat Campbell to run for second term on City Council

You're absolutely correct on toilets flushing and roads to be passable but let's take the fire department. Woefully understaffed and underfunded for the last 6-7 years. Past Columbian articles and interviews with both labor and management have affirmed it. Long before the recent economic woes and city shortfalls.

Numerous articles in The Columbian as recent as last year have addressed substandard fire stations that actually put the firefighters at risk in the event of even the most minimal earthquake. That means we as a community are at risk.

You should be encouraged that public safety people will do their part to contain expenses and protect jobs - the Vancouver fire fighters were covered in media as being one of the first in Washington State to forgo a contractual raise and give back to the city and community to the tune of 700k by what was reported.

All that said Pat, in my opinion, our council has made a conscious and willful decisions to underfund public safety. The choices were business, no B&O tax, waterfront expansion and many other projects. All worthwhile, but not before the priority of a safe and protected community and a safe and protected workforce to carry out their critical mission.

The end game is you and I just see it differently. I have no problem voting for a public safety tax increase - none at all. But both current and recent past council members have made decisions on what money they did have to be spent in other areas, with police and fire continually being pushed to the back. The other 3 top cities in Washington State don't seem to share the same philosophy as our council does on police and fire protection as a higher priority and funding that priority.

Really Pat, it never should come down to a public safety tax or additional funding for it. The writing was on the wall years ago and documented very well in the media.

In closing, whether it was a good deal or not, it's always about priorities and timing. The capital money used to purchase or help purchase a new city hall could and should have been redirected to public safety. So now I may be asked to approve a tax increase? That's where we disagree - I see councils priorities as misdirected - current and past.

May 15, 2011 at 12:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Pat Campbell to run for second term on City Council


Like I said, forget the bridge and light rail. Let's talk public safety. Your first hand knowledge of the police and fire under staffing and dismal conditions of fire stations, as you reported on in open council meetings, yet did nothing to correct is shocking. You only voted to to close a station.

My opinion, your a non - finisher on issues. You, and others on the council have left our citizens and business investors at risk by your lack of stable funding for police and fire.

I'm not just "bitching" Pat. I have been watching this dismal performance for years. My vote is my non bitching, and it won't be for you or Smith.

May 14, 2011 at 11:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Two Clark County deputies give CPR to motorcyclist after crash

Great work by CCSO Deputies! Thanks for your help and service.

May 14, 2011 at 9:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Pat Campbell to run for second term on City Council


Not even concerned with your position on the bridge and light rail, you're a non-player in that big game.

However, your position on local public safety and budget cuts is exactly what is going help give you your walking papers.

Nothing will derail the growth of business and housing and a thriving community if it is not protected by a well staffed police and fire department.

Just yesterday, a delayed response to a house fire. And your platform is what? Theft and burglary is skyrocketing on the East side of town. And your platform is what?

Pat, my opinion, you've lost touch and will loose the election.

May 14, 2011 at 9:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

UPDATE: Arson suspected in fire that destroyed Sifton family's home

The spokesperson said the initial fire crew was out of their normal coverage area providing a hydraulic tool for a wreck. That created a delayed response to the fire.

The address of the wreck, NE 32nd street & NE 138th Ave, was where Station 6 should have been responding. That station is closed due to city council approved budget cuts.

That's why a delayed response by crews to the fire and having to leave a key piece of equipment behind.

I'm wondering how often this has been happening on fire and medical calls.

Sounds like a story Columbian.

May 14, 2011 at 9:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Herrera Beutler votes for Gulf oil bill

Shaime is at it again. What a bag of wind.

May 11, 2011 at 9:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

C-Tran board gives in to veto threat

Well Lew,

I wondered when you would loose your "stuff". Now your suggesting we take a community stride in letting C-Tran go broke or hip check them any way our community can financially? Basically, excommunicate them from future financial considerations or funding?

Look, this CRC process has been positioned and strategically delivered to our community about as poor as anything in recent memory. The list of "culprits" is pages long. Then you factor in the political spin, hollow campaign promises; as well as inconsistent council and commissioner behaviors. All worthy of a bad soap opera.

But Lew, you and others play right into that thought process. Your scorched earth rants expand now to C-TRAN and for good measure, lump in labor unions too.

Your emotional and misguided shotgun blast says it all. You and others have lost there perspective on the issues.

May 10, 2011 at 11:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City may veto size of light rail voting pool

Historically, I have not been a Mayor Leavitt fan nor much of a fan of the current city council and their priorities. However, in this case I agree with the Mayor on delaying the vote and waiting until more information is is available.

I fully understand and it's no secret what each of councils public opinions are related to the bridge, light rail and for that matter, many other issues (public safety). But in this case I see no harm in waiting.

I think Commissioner Stuart is playing politics in forcing the spotlight on Leavitt and away from himself. His opinion on the bridge and light rail is no secret either. Stuart just happens to wear poor political posture on his sleeve.

Look, here's the reality, many of you voted Leavitt into office and you're angry and feel screwed - and frankly he wasn't truthful. But he's here, like it or not, and the decisions he/they make are going to continue to present a very crisp divide on public opinion. Those of us who vote will have a chance in November to start to take this and many other issues in another direction, should the majority choose to.

The bridge/light rail may happen or not happen - I think it will. But this has always been much larger than "one issue" If the voters want to truly make a change - then change the landscape of the council. It took years getting here and it will take 4-5 years changing the council personnel. But it's not going to happen in 1-2 years. That we all have to admit.

That's life. But in this case - I think he and the other two on the board are correct in the delay.

May 10, 2011 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )