Response times, traffic patterns and development on the West side of the city have increased the need for a second fire station for Monroe. Fire Chief Daryl Rausch has made that point well, and the Monroe City Council has taken steps in the past year to move toward building a second facility.
So it was a slight disappointment last week when Rausch announced that the city's tight financial situation essentially has put the project on hold, for now. But we commend Rausch for facing the budget realities, and for not pushing forward what has to be a pet project of his.
"I couldn't in good conscience ask the community to build when the budget is the way it is," Rausch told the Times last week.
The council's Finance and Taxation Committee currently is working to find about $375,000 the city can cut from the proposed budget to bring it comfortably under the state-mandated 2 percent levy increase cap. The cost of constructing a second fire station was put at $700,000 earlier this year, and Rausch had hoped to have the project designed and engineered in 2009 and built in 2010.
There was to be $50,000 included in the 2009 budget for engineering and site work at the 2.3 acres designated for the facility in the Honey Creek Business and Industrial Park. But Rausch said he'll hold off on those projects until closer to construction, so design work remains applicable and isn't derailed by new fire or building codes. He still says the project can go out for bids in 2010.
Rausch said he's keeping his department's budget at the same amount as last year.
"If we move ahead (right now), the community would be a bit upset, and rightfully so, I think," Rausch said. "It's just not right when people are struggling."
Perhaps, but if the need for a second fire station is there - and that appears to be the case - the City Council must not let this delay be anything but temporary. On Monday, we shared our view that economic development must remain a budget priority in city government. So, too, must public safety.
Rausch is probably right that, at least in the short-term, the public wouldn't be too happy to see a new fire building going up amid cuts in other city budgets and services. And he's certainly correct in expressing concern about having the funds available to run the station after it's constructed.
But assuming the city's financial picture doesn't improve in the next 12 months, the council may need to take the question of a second fire station to voters - asking them for additional tax dollars to fund and sustain a project that enhances public safety and, perhaps, west-side economic development. Doing so would force the city to make its case more completely to the public, but it also would remove the project from an increasingly difficult budget process.
So it was a slight disappointment last week when Rausch announced that the city's tight financial situation essentially has put the project on hold, for now. But we commend Rausch for facing the budget realities, and for not pushing forward what has to be a pet project of his.
"I couldn't in good conscience ask the community to build when the budget is the way it is," Rausch told the Times last week.
The council's Finance and Taxation Committee currently is working to find about $375,000 the city can cut from the proposed budget to bring it comfortably under the state-mandated 2 percent levy increase cap. The cost of constructing a second fire station was put at $700,000 earlier this year, and Rausch had hoped to have the project designed and engineered in 2009 and built in 2010.
There was to be $50,000 included in the 2009 budget for engineering and site work at the 2.3 acres designated for the facility in the Honey Creek Business and Industrial Park. But Rausch said he'll hold off on those projects until closer to construction, so design work remains applicable and isn't derailed by new fire or building codes. He still says the project can go out for bids in 2010.
Rausch said he's keeping his department's budget at the same amount as last year.
"If we move ahead (right now), the community would be a bit upset, and rightfully so, I think," Rausch said. "It's just not right when people are struggling."
Perhaps, but if the need for a second fire station is there - and that appears to be the case - the City Council must not let this delay be anything but temporary. On Monday, we shared our view that economic development must remain a budget priority in city government. So, too, must public safety.
Rausch is probably right that, at least in the short-term, the public wouldn't be too happy to see a new fire building going up amid cuts in other city budgets and services. And he's certainly correct in expressing concern about having the funds available to run the station after it's constructed.
But assuming the city's financial picture doesn't improve in the next 12 months, the council may need to take the question of a second fire station to voters - asking them for additional tax dollars to fund and sustain a project that enhances public safety and, perhaps, west-side economic development. Doing so would force the city to make its case more completely to the public, but it also would remove the project from an increasingly difficult budget process.
