By Emily Bonsant • Of the News-Register • 

Fire truck’s hefty price tag growing

Only current online subscribers may access this article and/or our N-R e-editions.

One-day subscriptions available for just $3.

For all subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please

Comments

Bigfootlives

Maybe if they bought a big enough flag the commoners would vote for the levy to buy a new rig.

oldeee

A universal problem to every fire service in the world. There used to 2 manufactures in Hillsboro!!

Angela Flood

The purchase of a new fire truck doesn't require voter approval in Lafayette. The million dollar cap is limited to only a handful of items.

It is unfortunate the city elected does not understand the rules. Especially, when the paragraph is so short...

From the charter:
Section 40. Expenditure of Funds. The City may not disburse, or obligate for expenditure funds in excess of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) on a capital improvement project unless such disbursement or obligation has been first approved by the voters of the City. 'Capital Improvement' shall mean improvement of a facility used for: water supply, treatment and distribution; sewage and wastewater collection, transmission, treatment and disposal; drainage and flood control; transportation; and, parks and recreation.

They should support the fire department with the equipment they need.
It isn't a complicated decision.

scooter

Before the City commits $700,000–$745,000 on a replacement fire engine, we should be asking some basic, data-driven questions.

What has this engine actually cost to maintain over the past five years? How many calls has it gone on, and more importantly, how often has it been utilized on actual incidents?

From what has been discussed publicly, this is a second-out engine in a system that is already struggling with staffing. Lafayette reportedly has only one volunteer living in city limits, and when engines do respond, they often have just one or two personnel. That is not an effective fire suppression force, regardless of how new the apparatus is.

Even more concerning, Lafayette units themselves are reportedly rarely first on scene to incidents within their own city. That raises a much larger question about overall service delivery, one that is not solved by purchasing another engine.

Buying a new engine does not fix that problem. It does not improve response times, increase staffing, or change who is actually arriving first on scene. Without the people to staff it, a new engine risks becoming a very expensive asset that sits in the bay.

We should also be cautious about financial assumptions. As stated by the Chief during the council meeting, there is an expectation the current engine could bring around $100,000. Given that this is a 27 year old, high mileage engine with obsolete parts, that estimate appears optimistic. A more realistic resale value is likely a fraction of that, which directly impacts how much of the City’s reserves will ultimately be replenished after this purchase.

scooter

It’s also fair to ask why Lafayette is looking at spending significantly more when neighboring agencies like Amity, McMinnville, and Yamhill have acquired newer engines in recent years at lower costs. What were their specifications, procurement methods, timelines, and why are we not seeing similar efficiency here? Even when accounting for the inflation rates the Chief referenced in the council meeting, which are real and a valid concern, the gap still warrants a closer look.

Before moving forward, the City should be evaluating real performance metrics:
-Response times (Chief and volunteers)
-Average staffing per call
-First on scene arrival rates
-Actual apparatus utilization on incidents

This isn’t just about replacing a fire engine, it’s about whether the current system is delivering reliable fire service to the community.

If the data shows this engine is critical to supporting response and is regularly staffed and utilized, then replacement may be justified. But if it is rarely staffed, and the department itself is not consistently arriving first on scene, then spending nearly 3/4 of a million dollars does not improve public safety, it just replaces underutilized equipment.

The priority should be building a system that consistently delivers effective response, not making a large capital purchase without first addressing the underlying service gaps.

Hilary Malcomson

Scooter, you share a lot of information that just seems too much to try to unpack on a comment thread.

If you would contact me I'd be interested in hearing more hmalcomson@lafayetteoregon.gov

  • Most viewed
  • Most commented
Web Design and Web Development by Buildable