Opinion: Governor’s cuts to fire safety in Tahoe don’t make sense
By Ted Gaines
As we near the fifth anniversary of the devastating Angora Fire that ravaged the Lake Tahoe area, leaving destruction in its wake, I am baffled by the governor’s decision to put lives and property in even more danger by cutting fire protection funding for the region.
The governor’s proposed budget eliminates the entire $2.3 million general fund money for Lake Tahoe Basin fire protection, and leaves only one forester and four part-time seasonal forestry aids to provide fire prevention services such as defensible space inspections and enforcement.
Ted Gaines
Residents will continue to have some fire protection services through local fire districts. If these cuts are implemented, however, resources could be stretched thin and emergency response times could be delayed. As witnessed with the Angora Fire, every second counts in containing potential wildfires.
Lake Tahoe fire safety officials also expressed concern with the lack of funding and vowed to work with me on the issue.
“We are equally troubled by this latest cut to the vital fire protection services we provide the community and will do all we can to reverse this budget decision,” North Tahoe Fire District Chief Duane Whitelaw.
I intend to follow up on this matter until funding for the safety and protection of the residents of Lake Tahoe is fully restored.
I encourage people to contact the governor’s office to express their discontent with his proposed cuts.
One of the essential services government should provide its citizens is public safety. We need to seriously evaluate things when we’ve reached a point where we can’t even provide that peace of mind to residents. If you are as upset about this budget decision as I am, I urge you to call Gov. Brown and ask him for reconsideration. The governor can be reached at (916) 445.2841.
Ted Gaines represents the 1st Senate District, which includes all or parts of Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Lassen, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento and Sierra counties.
Good luck, Mr. Gaines.
Does Mr. Gains realize what Mr. O’Rouke has done to fire protection in the City South Lake Tahoe? The city is more at risk then the county. Wake up citizens of South Lake Tahoe!
Didn’t the state just add a fee to us “rural” Californians’ property tax bill specifically to address fire protection? How can they charge us extra and then take service away?
Dogwoman, good point, I believe it was $150 per parcel, and should show up on our property tax bill.
Dogwoman, Well said!
Dogwoman, Cal Fire has entered into an exchange of acres with the US Forest Service. So for those of us in the County we have the USFS providing the services that Cal Fire should be providing. And somewhere else, Cal Fire is providing services that USFS should be providing. On its face that seems like good planning. But the part that chaps Chief Whitelaw’s bottom is the service provided by the USFS is fundamentally different from the service provided by Cal Fire. Drive by a USFS fire department at 6PM on a Friday night. Cal Fire is 24/7 all risk. So basically we pay $150 for really not much.
What Mr. Gaines fails to point out is that these cuts are unavoidable given the Republican mantra to cut cut cut with no means of increasing revenue. Mr. Gains can not have it both ways… To insist on cuts and no tax increases at the same time he asks for programs to be maintained. I applaud Governor Brown for having the guts to call for massive cuts across the board unless new taxes are approved. If the Republicans want cuts they will get plenty of them and will then need to explain to their respective constituents how they are going to operate with many necessary services. Mr. Gaines is saying to not cut this necessary program at the same time that his party is dancing the cuts cuts cuts two step. If a Democrat made this suggestion the Republicans would immediately ask for the funding source.
Mr. Gains, what should we use as a funding source for this necessary program? What other necessary program should be cut to save this program and at who’s expense?
We need a balanced budget from equal measures of revenue reductions (cuts) and revenue increase (taxes).
-LocalYokle
But Yokel, that is my point. The governor did give us property owners a tax increase! Only he called it a “fee” which means the money is specifically supposed to be allocated to the cause of fire suppression and prevention. What don’t you get about that? just too anxious to blame Republicans for failures when Democrats are in the majority in this state. . .
hey dogwoman, reaganomics, supply side economics, the shrub tax cuts, the imbecilic call for austerity… these are Huge failures… what don’t you get about that?
On what basis do you call them failures? Because YOU didn’t get any of the money?
Tell me one good reason why I should pay more taxes to the Federal Government. God only asks for 10%. Why do the Feds want 30%?
Proof positive that an education doesn’t guarantee intelligence.