The Saco Fire Department made a request last week for a $100,000 fire/rescue boat. That’s a rather shocking figure to consider, particularly given the economic realities of the day, and we can’t imagine Saco taxpayers would be supportive of such a purchase.
We were glad to see the council was not very receptive to the fire boat proposal, and we agree with Councilor David Tripp that an appropriate boat could be purchased for $50,000 ”“ probably less.
It’s telling that fire department officials brought such a proposal to the council ”“ for a top-of-the-line, brand-new Multi Mission Response rescue boat ”“ without presenting any other, more reasonable options.
It certainly makes them seem out of touch, considering the fiscal news of the day. With a significant revenue loss expected from the state budget process, this is no time to be asking for such an exorbitant expenditure, especially after Saco voters took an 18 percent tax increase this year and struggled to agree on a school budget.
Saco residents are already up in arms about their taxes, with the formation of Saco Citizens for Sensible Taxes late last year, and we were glad to see the city council has heard their cries. For the fire department, however, making such a proposition is fuel for the taxpayers’ fire.
Everyone wants the best equipment for their job, regardless of what it is, and public safety expenditures usually receive priority, as they should, because they are used in life or death situations. With the Marine Patrol and Coast Guard already assigned to provide emergency coverage to the coast, however, the City of Saco does not need to invest $100,000 in its own equipment. A patrol boat should be good enough for the city, as it is for other coastal municipalities in the area. Other entities are the ones responsible for coastal rescues, and a patrol boat is enough for city personnel to monitor the area and bring immediate aid to a boater in the river or along the coast until more help arrives. Beyond that is not their job, which is why we have the Marine Patrol and Coast Guard. The commercial SeaTow service is also available for boaters who run out of gas or have engine trouble.
A suitable boat for the city to provide assistance to boaters could be purchased new for much less than six figures, and the city should also look into surplus boats and other options for a better deal. Its last boat was a surplus Coast Guard vessel, and was given to the city at no cost. That avenue should be pursued again.
In Wells, the town was gifted a boat by Carmen Carbone, owner of Surfside Boats in East Rochester, N.H., in 2011 for use by the harbormaster; and previously, in 2009, the town got two military surplus boats to patrol their coastline ”“ at no charge. Saco should look into such options as well.
Fire department personnel have said maintenance costs on a used boat would be too much, but we can’t see how they are prohibitive at $11,000 per year ”“ it would take nine years of that just to reach the purchase price of the boat they’re proposing to buy ”“ and it’s worth noting that any boat is going to have maintenance costs, new or used.
It’s also concerning that the previous boat, which the city got for free as surplus, sank in June because its bilge pump failed. The city ended up with $15,000 in insurance money for the vessel, which was deemed to be totaled by the water damage.
We’d like to see more responsibility for this taxpayer-funded boat in the future, i.e. multiple bilge pumps, systems testing ”“ particularly before storms, shoring it up in preparation for weather events, and checking on it regularly during heavy rain and wind.
With the fire department staffed 24/7, there is no reason why this boat should have sunk. Frankly, such negligence should give Saco voters pause when they consider a request for the next boat, whatever its price, and safety check policies should be followed to ensure the new one doesn’t go under.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Kristen by calling 282-1535, Ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
