First let me say that Fire Station 69 is NOT CLOSING.
However there will be cut backs. They are cutting the manpower for our second engine.
The engine will stay at Station 69 and on Red Flag days will be manned, but on other days it will not.
In exchange we will be getting a second ambulance.
On Thursday, May 12 Councilman Rosendahl and LAFD Chief Peaks or one of his top deputies will be speaking at the PPCC meeting from 7 to 9 p.m. at the Palisades Library. You are welcome to attend.
In the meantime, tell us how you feel about this, and we will pass your comments along to City and Fire officials. Just click on the "comments" link immediately below this post.
Thanks,
Janet Turner
Chair
6 comments:
I think we need to have the truck manned at all times. Just today we had a structure fire in the lower Marquez and it took all three engines (2 from 69 and 1 from 23) plus the ladder truck plus the 2 ambulances. Pacific Palisades is in an incredibly high fire zone and we cannot risk losing our entire town!
My family has lived in the Palisades for over 60 years. It is difficult to believe that the amount of property taxes paid by Palisadians is not enough to maintain a full service fire station. I think it's a well-known fact that our Police services have been short-changed for years!
I have lived in the Pacific Palisades over 50 years, for all of my life. Our town is geographically isolated from the greater part of Los Angeles. If we have flooding or a landslide involving the PCH or Sunset Boulevard, and then in addition, have an issue where we need help with a major brushfire, our safety will be compromised without a full service fire station to help us. These are basic services that should not be a part of budget cuts.
The L.A. City Council apparently thinks it's more important to bankroll private rooms for breast-feeding city employees than to fully fund the fire department. They claim we can't afford the 2nd engine in Firehouse 69, yet, per City Controller Wendy Gruel, they don't bother to collect outstanding traffic tickets, fines and ambulance charges, to the tune of $260 million. We live in a high fire area, and the idea that we won't have a 2nd engine manned at all times is insane.
It is time for the Mayor and City Council to make the real difficult politically hot choices. Cut pensions, city pay, personnel, 4 day work week. NOT our first responders caring for our health, safety and welfare. Keep our Fire stations fully manned!
What are we getting from the City of LA for our tax dollars?
We in the Palisades pay a lot of property taxes that go to fund the city’s budget. As the deputy mayor said at the meeting 5/12, 70% of that budget is devoted to essential police and fire & safety services.
As they seek to balance their budget, they are permanently wiping out 50% of the Palisades fire & safety resources. While other communities are experiencing NO reduction in essential services.
An unmanned fire engine does us no good. No, as the fire chief’s admitted we are not getting an additional ambulance dedicated to the Palisades, instead, they are assigning one that may be called to any part of the city. Yes, we will have a second set of jaws of life, but it will be locked in an inaccessible fire station and NOT available for any timely use.
In the Palisades, due to the nature of our residents and our amount of private security, we use disproportionately little of the city’s police resources relative to our tax dollars going to fund the city and such resources.
Our one need from the city of LA is fire & safety.
Further, our need for dedicated local services is unique due to our isolated location with limited access and our proximity to brush fires.
At the meeting, I pointed out our circumstances as stated above and asked the deputy mayor if we as tax payers are not entitled to an even remotely fair share of the city’s resources specific to our one need for essential services relative to the taxes we contribute to their budget. Even after he avoided my question and Janet clarified and restated it to him, the deputy mayor refused to answer my question!
It is a reality that the more fortunate of us pay taxes to fund our city government to provide services that benefit others who pay little or no taxes. Is it fair that our services be reduced 50% while other districts have no reduction? Are we receiving any reasonable proportion of the essential city service our tax dollars fund?
It seems that any such fairness to Palisades residents, even with respect to essential services and at the risk of our safety, is not of interest to our city government.
Post a Comment