Another of those “only in San Jose” political dramas is unfolding before your eyes this week, with Councilmember Oliverio recently asking the Council to reconsider it’s earlier vote putting proposed Fire Station #37 on the November ballot. It’s not quite Little Saigon, but …

Consider This: WG residents along with the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association are actually lobbying against building a new fire station.

Concerned citizens believe that the City fully intends to close — and sell — Fire Station #6 in order to completely fund the new Station #37. So they’re opposed to a ballot measure that would open the door for a new station at Willows Senior Center, perhaps starting down the slippery slope toward closing Station #6. It remains to be seen whether residents close to the Willows Senior Center want a fire station or not.

This funding shortfall is the result of having spent most of the money approved in a 2002 Fire Station Bond Measure on other facilities prior to building this one, and it seems that some budget sleight-of-hand may have led the Council astray during its June vote. Oliverio Chief of Staff Denelle Fedor says she scours the annual budget with a fine-tooth comb, but there was no line item mentioning the sale of Station #6.

The ballot question was approved at the Council’s June 19 meeting, but Oliverio has requested a redo because “important information was not available for the public discussion regarding the request.”

All of the political maneuvering — including a lengthy online petition — may be moot. The issue can be reconsidered only if one of the original “ayes” from the Council requests it. So if you are really motivated, you’ve got to convince members Reed, Constant, Williams, Liccardo, Campos, Nguyen, Pyle, and Chirco,

Oddly, it’s Judy Chirco’s District 9 that would seem to benefit from the hubbub. Oliverio and SJFD itself say the new station would preferably be located further south, perhaps near the corner of Cherry & Foxworthy, well inside Chirco’s district.

The critical issue of response time — whether from two stations or a consolidated one — is very complicated, and largely hypothetical. On the one hand, fire officials say they need to study response times before eliminating Station 6. On the other hand, dense in-fill development and approaching annexation of County land in multiple pockets along Meridian suggest response time can’t possibly be adequate without Station 6.

In a nutshell, from the WGNA:

In our opinion, the correct action is to locate a new Station 37 at the appropriate location near Cherry at Foxworthy and to keep Station 6 open: serve the underserved [regions] … without compromising existing service. We understand that there may be shortfalls in the construction bond, but we feel it would be a true waste of taxpayers’ money to build the new station at the wrong location where it doesn’t improve the overall coverage and where it would be necessary to construct yet another new station further to the southwest to provide the mandated level of service. Rather than taking this wasteful action, it would be better to wait until the additional funds can be identified so that land can be acquired for the needed Station 37 to be built at the correct location.

Stay tuned.

Recent WGx posts in Fire Stations 6 v 37

Recent WGx posts in WGx Updates