It's a Portland classic -- burn hundreds of millions on junk, then come begging for a tax increase for essential services. The Sam-Rand Twins are asking city voters to approve in November a property tax boost to pay off $72 million in bonds for the fire bureau. "Legend" Saltzman put on a show about where the money should be spent, but it's now a certainty that the bonds will be on the ballot. Only Nurse Amanda had the guts to vote no.
Will the voters say no, on the ground that the city should find the firefighters money out of its budget for bike paths, streetcars, bioditches, and bloggers? We doubt it -- the basic maneuvers work pretty well with this particular electorate. Go by streetcar!
Comments (30)
Portland's new motto: "The City That's Topsy-Turvy!"
Yeah sure let's bailout every core function neglected by sorry politicians.
Hey why not have another property tax boost to pay off TriMet's $700 million unfunded fringe benefits that is off books and getting not a dime form their budgets. It's only grwon to $50 million per year deficit.
Voters should approve a bond levy for TriMet because of the wonderful job they do.
Funny how Frieman Randy and company while attemopting to get this boost forfire are also among the many politicians who enable the gross fiscal madness at TriMet, PDC and other quagmires.
Why not? Randy saw he could stick us for 30% more for water the last two years after hitting us for 30+ year bump in property taxes for PFDR, so he must think he can get away with anything.
Besides we really need to finish that TriMet bridge so we can watch the Sellwood collapse after attending the soocer game at the new $100M expansion on the stadium after two MLS seasons on the solar powered streetcars.
I think people would be more likely to support a bond for a new fire station than a new school. Who doesn't like firefighters, right? That thing will pass easy.
I saw the Portland Fire and Rescue chief describing the current sorry state of equipment last night on the news. He talked about a 20 year old truck still in use with an 11-page repair history. Why wait till now to pursue this? Why didn't this get addressed year's ago? Why isn't the chief in an uproar about the mismanagement of resources by city administrators, past and present? Why was he so polite?
If the news camera were on me, I would not be able to hold my tongue. This issue is no joke, peoples lives and property are at risk. These cavalier politicians are "playing with fire" with their fiscal irresponsibility. I guess fire fighting equipment isn't as sexy as gigantic, roof top neon roses.
This all started when a Seattle fire truck had mechanical problems. So brain-trust Randy got the idea how he could spend more taxpayers money, look good to his union base, and show us who is boss. It didn't occur to him to phase in new trucks and communication over time in a fiscally responsible way that did not add a burden to ratepayers. It keeps it out of his budget so he can bankrupt the retirement fund and cost shift over to property owners.
No doubt he is cackling today just how stupid we are to buy into something even he doesn't believe. What a dishonest piece of work. And y'all are going to enable him some more.
Especially since the city gets to write the ballot language. They'll hit the usual hot buttons: it's essential for public safety (bad things will happen if we don't get the money), it's only pennies per $1,000 of assessed value, and oh look! An eco-roof on the new fire station! Way cool!
It sounds like there's some necessary stuff to fund in this bond, but I'm with Amanda-it should have been budgeted for out of general revenues in the normal process.
Poor Nick Fish: he plays by the rules and runs polls and holds back his Parks levy. Meanwhile, Randy just charges ahead and does whatever he wants.
People, people: you've overlooked the most important point.
The building would have an eco-roof.
And I have news for Commissioner Leonard: this voter "gets it” very well, and damn well resents being put in the position of having to vote against public safety.
Maybe they could put the Fire Bureau under Trimet, so they can use federal transportation dollars to fund it!
Or even better, the water bureau! Hey, those tankers have to fill up with city water, right?
If there is organized opposition to Sam/Rands stupidity, I will certainly be contributing over $500 dollars. It is time for us naysayers, complainers, not-seeing-the-big-picture, or whatever they want to call us, to put a stop to this insanity.
The $500, if passed, is what in 5 years I'll be contributing to a green fire station in additional taxes. If many of us calculate what we'd be paying extra and use it to defeat this bond, we'd be doing this city a good deed.
Randy could pay for the $72 Million he's asking for by not paying 20 fire fighters who are on disability that play golf every friday and build houses for their friends. I'll be doing this for the real children.
We already know Mr. Leonard believes he can get away with anything. I wish I'd saved the news clipping, but a few years ago he was quoted as saying "Portlanders will pay for anything as long as they know it's the right thing to do". And of course, City Hall always has a handy self-serving study or report from (who?) to make sure we know what's right since we're just stupid customers, er... residents that can't figure it out for ourselves.
His statement and the attitude behind it says a lot.
Here is another golden nugget worth delving into. Why waste anymore money on this when we spent $$$ making a state permitting system that works just fine. We don't need no stinken new permit system.
This isn't a bond for "essential services;" what the heck? The Fire Bureau already has a full fleet of vehicles to continue responding the way they have for years since taking over medical first response. This is to transition from using trucks and engines--in service and available, but designed primarily for firefighting--to more use-specific vehicles that cost much less, are faster to deploy, and can be equipped for a variety of non-fire calls.
There's nothing "essential" about this, site owner. It's an investment in an improved and more efficient department--but if the money is not voted, they can go right on responding as they have been. I support the idea because over the medium and long term it will save the city a lot of money, but it's less essential than remaking the city for transportation in the 21st century and getting away from throwing money down the drain at the car culture.
You are confusing PFRB and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue.
TVRF is in process of testing exactly the kind of equipment you describe.
In Portland, Fireman randy has already declared, without any test or evaluation, that PFRB has no need for any different (note that "different" does not equate with "new") and has no interest in looking at smaller faster vehicles with smaller crew numbers.
PFRB Chief John Klum, who really likes his job, has said nothing abot long term savings by going to smaller faster vehicles and smaller crews. Klum knows how things work under Fireman Randy.
Why didn't you bring this up during the budget process this spring? Always wait until the last minute so you can push something through as an "emergency" or a "just in time" ballot item.
Live within your means for once and phase new things in over time. In "investing" it's like "dollar cost averaging". Maybe take an economics course while you're at it. Site owner and Nonny Mouse get it, why can't you?
I realize the money is probably coming from somewhere else and *dedicated* to a couple of fire museums but how can that kind of spending be justified when there are apparently glaring infrastructure needs which should be addressed first?
Sort of like gold-plating the Titanic as it approaches the 'berg.
TVFR is using some very interesting large 4x 4 vehicles either Suburbans or Toyota FJ Cruisers, for many runs, after having experimented with borrowed Oregon ANG Hummers during the two weeks of snow storms in December 2009 to get to incidents in the Wash Co side of the West Hills when "regular" fire trucks couldn't get through. Gresham at that time (December, 2009) did the same thing.
Port;and, with the same sort of topographical challenges in SW was not interested then, or since, in looking at more maneuverable or smaller units.regular
When pushed hard on the issue, management at PFRB responded thatthe Commissioner wasn't interested in anything that might result in smaller vrews, and that the commissioner wanted more stations with large crews.
Randy never has never stopped being a union shill, regardless of the excess costs often accompanying his shilling for the union.
Certainly not a person who has grown into the role of a Commissioner purporting to represent the best interests of all the residents and taxpayers of PDX.
And now he thinks he'll be Mayor in name as well as in fact...
It may be that as the agenda of adding more density yet comes on, that the issue of fire safety now cannot be ignored and smaller vehicles are needed to get into these tight spots, flag lots, etc. As the code changes into tighter and tighter densities, the smaller vehicles may be required for safety.
Seconds can make a difference between life and death and I am surprised that the whole matter of fire safety in all this infill has not been at the forefront of the density problems. Traffic congestion as well.
The problems are the irresponsible and arrogant actions of Leonard for not bringing it up during the budget process. Once again trying to put the community against the wall because of poor planning. We should not give him the media time he covets so much, and just vote no. Tell him if it's so important put it in the next budget. It can wait while we see the results of other communities.
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 29
At this date last year: 66
Total run in 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (30)
Portland's new motto: "The City That's Topsy-Turvy!"
Posted by Mojo | July 16, 2010 7:48 AM
Go by carousel horse!
Posted by Mojo | July 16, 2010 7:49 AM
Yeah sure let's bailout every core function neglected by sorry politicians.
Hey why not have another property tax boost to pay off TriMet's $700 million unfunded fringe benefits that is off books and getting not a dime form their budgets. It's only grwon to $50 million per year deficit.
Voters should approve a bond levy for TriMet because of the wonderful job they do.
Funny how Frieman Randy and company while attemopting to get this boost forfire are also among the many politicians who enable the gross fiscal madness at TriMet, PDC and other quagmires.
Posted by Ben | July 16, 2010 8:04 AM
Why not? Randy saw he could stick us for 30% more for water the last two years after hitting us for 30+ year bump in property taxes for PFDR, so he must think he can get away with anything.
Besides we really need to finish that TriMet bridge so we can watch the Sellwood collapse after attending the soocer game at the new $100M expansion on the stadium after two MLS seasons on the solar powered streetcars.
Posted by Steve | July 16, 2010 8:19 AM
Nice kids you've got there. It'd be a shame if they caught fire.
Posted by Allan L. | July 16, 2010 9:01 AM
Give me a tax increase or I'll torch this puppy!
Posted by Mister Tee | July 16, 2010 9:14 AM
I think people would be more likely to support a bond for a new fire station than a new school. Who doesn't like firefighters, right? That thing will pass easy.
Posted by dg | July 16, 2010 9:29 AM
I saw the Portland Fire and Rescue chief describing the current sorry state of equipment last night on the news. He talked about a 20 year old truck still in use with an 11-page repair history. Why wait till now to pursue this? Why didn't this get addressed year's ago? Why isn't the chief in an uproar about the mismanagement of resources by city administrators, past and present? Why was he so polite?
If the news camera were on me, I would not be able to hold my tongue. This issue is no joke, peoples lives and property are at risk. These cavalier politicians are "playing with fire" with their fiscal irresponsibility. I guess fire fighting equipment isn't as sexy as gigantic, roof top neon roses.
Posted by SKA | July 16, 2010 9:43 AM
This all started when a Seattle fire truck had mechanical problems. So brain-trust Randy got the idea how he could spend more taxpayers money, look good to his union base, and show us who is boss. It didn't occur to him to phase in new trucks and communication over time in a fiscally responsible way that did not add a burden to ratepayers. It keeps it out of his budget so he can bankrupt the retirement fund and cost shift over to property owners.
No doubt he is cackling today just how stupid we are to buy into something even he doesn't believe. What a dishonest piece of work. And y'all are going to enable him some more.
Posted by Davey Tristen | July 16, 2010 9:43 AM
That thing will pass easy.
Especially since the city gets to write the ballot language. They'll hit the usual hot buttons: it's essential for public safety (bad things will happen if we don't get the money), it's only pennies per $1,000 of assessed value, and oh look! An eco-roof on the new fire station! Way cool!
It sounds like there's some necessary stuff to fund in this bond, but I'm with Amanda-it should have been budgeted for out of general revenues in the normal process.
Poor Nick Fish: he plays by the rules and runs polls and holds back his Parks levy. Meanwhile, Randy just charges ahead and does whatever he wants.
Posted by Eric | July 16, 2010 9:50 AM
Now if we could just get those firemen to ride bikes...
Posted by dman | July 16, 2010 10:11 AM
Right-o, Allan L. --
Fires happen....Things burn....
[The SamRand Bros.]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRm5WcjOikQ
Posted by Mojo | July 16, 2010 10:31 AM
People, people: you've overlooked the most important point.
The building would have an eco-roof.
And I have news for Commissioner Leonard: this voter "gets it” very well, and damn well resents being put in the position of having to vote against public safety.
Posted by ER | July 16, 2010 10:35 AM
Maybe they could put the Fire Bureau under Trimet, so they can use federal transportation dollars to fund it!
Or even better, the water bureau! Hey, those tankers have to fill up with city water, right?
Posted by Jon | July 16, 2010 12:22 PM
I may have to move back just long enough to vote against this.
Posted by pdxmick | July 16, 2010 12:55 PM
This one will go down in a big, spectacular ball of flames. Bring it on, Randy.
Posted by RJBob | July 16, 2010 2:06 PM
If there is organized opposition to Sam/Rands stupidity, I will certainly be contributing over $500 dollars. It is time for us naysayers, complainers, not-seeing-the-big-picture, or whatever they want to call us, to put a stop to this insanity.
The $500, if passed, is what in 5 years I'll be contributing to a green fire station in additional taxes. If many of us calculate what we'd be paying extra and use it to defeat this bond, we'd be doing this city a good deed.
Randy could pay for the $72 Million he's asking for by not paying 20 fire fighters who are on disability that play golf every friday and build houses for their friends. I'll be doing this for the real children.
Posted by lw | July 16, 2010 2:37 PM
There are many people who have not seen the Randy Leonard Mayor Creepy video.
The two of them have replaced the notion of being dignified with humiliating behavior.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMnY5FAKhl4
Posted by Ben | July 16, 2010 3:02 PM
We already know Mr. Leonard believes he can get away with anything. I wish I'd saved the news clipping, but a few years ago he was quoted as saying "Portlanders will pay for anything as long as they know it's the right thing to do". And of course, City Hall always has a handy self-serving study or report from (who?) to make sure we know what's right since we're just stupid customers, er... residents that can't figure it out for ourselves.
His statement and the attitude behind it says a lot.
Posted by JC | July 16, 2010 4:01 PM
Here is another golden nugget worth delving into. Why waste anymore money on this when we spent $$$ making a state permitting system that works just fine. We don't need no stinken new permit system.
http://djcoregon.com/news/2010/07/15/bds-wants-new-electronic-permitting-system/
Posted by Slappy | July 16, 2010 7:30 PM
This could well go down in flames.... I will be working with my friends who will work with their friends and perhaps enough grass roots will kill it.
Posted by LucsAdvo | July 17, 2010 6:26 AM
This isn't a bond for "essential services;" what the heck? The Fire Bureau already has a full fleet of vehicles to continue responding the way they have for years since taking over medical first response. This is to transition from using trucks and engines--in service and available, but designed primarily for firefighting--to more use-specific vehicles that cost much less, are faster to deploy, and can be equipped for a variety of non-fire calls.
There's nothing "essential" about this, site owner. It's an investment in an improved and more efficient department--but if the money is not voted, they can go right on responding as they have been. I support the idea because over the medium and long term it will save the city a lot of money, but it's less essential than remaking the city for transportation in the 21st century and getting away from throwing money down the drain at the car culture.
Posted by whatthe? | July 17, 2010 7:30 AM
Whatthe ? -
You are confusing PFRB and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue.
TVRF is in process of testing exactly the kind of equipment you describe.
In Portland, Fireman randy has already declared, without any test or evaluation, that PFRB has no need for any different (note that "different" does not equate with "new") and has no interest in looking at smaller faster vehicles with smaller crew numbers.
PFRB Chief John Klum, who really likes his job, has said nothing abot long term savings by going to smaller faster vehicles and smaller crews. Klum knows how things work under Fireman Randy.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | July 17, 2010 8:36 AM
Whatthe?/ Randy,
Why didn't you bring this up during the budget process this spring? Always wait until the last minute so you can push something through as an "emergency" or a "just in time" ballot item.
Live within your means for once and phase new things in over time. In "investing" it's like "dollar cost averaging". Maybe take an economics course while you're at it. Site owner and Nonny Mouse get it, why can't you?
Posted by Fred S. | July 17, 2010 9:33 AM
I realize the money is probably coming from somewhere else and *dedicated* to a couple of fire museums but how can that kind of spending be justified when there are apparently glaring infrastructure needs which should be addressed first?
Sort of like gold-plating the Titanic as it approaches the 'berg.
Posted by NW Portlander | July 17, 2010 9:40 AM
Those sure look like newer, smaller vehicles in the picture provided by the Oregonian...
Posted by whatthe? | July 18, 2010 6:47 AM
Whatthe? / randy
Oregonian photo, July 9 at:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/07/portland_city_council_to_ponde.html
Full size engine (pumper to east coast folks) wearing a nice PFRB livery.
Oregonian photo, July 15
http://mobile.oregonlive.com/advorg/db_96618/contentdetail.htm;jsessionid=4D874148BFE55AFC96F9EC42...
Again, full size truck.
TVFR is using some very interesting large 4x 4 vehicles either Suburbans or Toyota FJ Cruisers, for many runs, after having experimented with borrowed Oregon ANG Hummers during the two weeks of snow storms in December 2009 to get to incidents in the Wash Co side of the West Hills when "regular" fire trucks couldn't get through. Gresham at that time (December, 2009) did the same thing.
Port;and, with the same sort of topographical challenges in SW was not interested then, or since, in looking at more maneuverable or smaller units.regular
When pushed hard on the issue, management at PFRB responded thatthe Commissioner wasn't interested in anything that might result in smaller vrews, and that the commissioner wanted more stations with large crews.
Randy never has never stopped being a union shill, regardless of the excess costs often accompanying his shilling for the union.
Certainly not a person who has grown into the role of a Commissioner purporting to represent the best interests of all the residents and taxpayers of PDX.
And now he thinks he'll be Mayor in name as well as in fact...
Posted by Nonny Mouse | July 18, 2010 11:06 AM
It may be that as the agenda of adding more density yet comes on, that the issue of fire safety now cannot be ignored and smaller vehicles are needed to get into these tight spots, flag lots, etc. As the code changes into tighter and tighter densities, the smaller vehicles may be required for safety.
Seconds can make a difference between life and death and I am surprised that the whole matter of fire safety in all this infill has not been at the forefront of the density problems. Traffic congestion as well.
Posted by clinamen | July 18, 2010 11:54 AM
The problems are the irresponsible and arrogant actions of Leonard for not bringing it up during the budget process. Once again trying to put the community against the wall because of poor planning. We should not give him the media time he covets so much, and just vote no. Tell him if it's so important put it in the next budget. It can wait while we see the results of other communities.
Once again Nonny Mouse gets an 'A'.
Posted by Travis D. | July 18, 2010 12:34 PM
Didn't Mayor Potter push thru funding to upgrade all the emergency personnel radios to 900 Mhz?
Posted by Mister Tee | July 19, 2010 7:28 PM