# This another fine mess you have gotten us into.....Stan Laurel



## forensics (May 22, 2011)

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2011/apr/20/fire-truck-gets-ok/

Well here it is the problem played out in a small South Carolina town who can't afford to provide adequate fire protection for a new development and the builder has gotten away with sticking it to every homeowner in the town!

This is a simple case of subsidizing the builders and screwing the existing property owners!


----------



## mark handler (May 22, 2011)

forensics said:
			
		

> This another fine mess you have gotten us into.....Stan Laurel


Oliver Hardy NOT.....Stan Laurel


----------



## forensics (May 22, 2011)

Lets see 600 new homes at an average of 1500 sq ft each

600 x 1500 = 900,000 sq ft

900,000 x 1.61 = 1,450,000

1.5 million (just for a truck and building) or the developer could have just sprinkled the houses

Yep it all about TYCO paying everybody off

Really???

SHEESH


----------



## forensics (May 22, 2011)

what was I thinkin

I STAND CORRECTED

thanks Mark


----------



## Min&Max (May 23, 2011)

If the city could not provide the services they should not have annexed them. It is hardly the fault of the developer or builder that the city acted irresponsibly.


----------



## KZQuixote (May 23, 2011)

Min&Max said:
			
		

> If the city could not provide the services they should not have annexed them. It is hardly the fault of the developer or builder that the city acted irresponsibly.


I agree! Not to mention the jobs and tax revenues that will come with the next 1000 homes?

I just don't see how the builder screwed anybody.

Bill


----------



## Coug Dad (May 23, 2011)

forensics said:
			
		

> Lets see 600 new homes at an average of 1500 sq ft each 600 x 1500 = 900,000 sq ft
> 
> 900,000 x 1.61 = 1,450,000
> 
> ...


So, if I have sprinklered houses, I don't need the fire department????  I do not see the corelation.


----------



## mtlogcabin (May 23, 2011)

> This is a simple case of subsidizing the builders and screwing the existing property owners!


How was the builder subsidized. If he put sprinklers in all the houses he would pass those cost onto the buyers. If the developer was required to give up land and build a fire station he would have passed those cost on by raising the price of the lots. NOTHING is free every required cost is passed onto the end consumer.


----------



## incognito (May 24, 2011)

Well Sheesh, er I mean forensics, it seems you are once again using fire service math regardless of how corrupt, ok lets soften that and go with questionable, it may be. First the $1.61 is widely recognized as being a "low-ball" number that just is not credible. But lets get to a fact in the article that you have ignored. The cost per $200,00.00 of home value for the 1.5 million to construct and equip the new

fire station was $8.00 a year for existing homes in the city as well as the area that was irresponsibly annexed. And lets not forget that the annexed area will also be paying taxes to support the existing fire department which will be an immediate increase in their tax levy. Now on top of that you want the newly annexed area to have sprinklers already installed that would have cost at least $3,000.00. Lets see, if someone had a choice of spending an additional $8.00 a year for the life of their 30 year mortgage($240.00) or $3,000.00 plus the interest over that same 30 years, which do you think they would choose? Oh, and lets not forget that a new public safety facility will be built and staffed anyway. No way are the newly annexed citizens going to tolerate an 8-10 minute wait for EMT's from the current station. So now all you're adding is a fire truck. As most forthright fire service personal will tell you, sprinklers are not ment to be a substitute for personal, bricks and steel. Sprinklers are intended to be an additional(but miniscule) added level of protection.


----------



## Min&Max (May 24, 2011)

Excellent points incognito. Not only would the annexed homes have paid for sprinklers they are paying additional taxes to protect the homes of the community that annexed them and when little Johnnie gets hit by a car when chasing a ball in the street, the rescue squad is 8-10 minutes away. Great deal for the existing city citizens, not so great for the annexed community. Maybe the original city taxpayers can help pay for the sprinklers but at $8.00 per $200,000.00 it looks to be a lot cheaper to just build additional fire stations.


----------



## mtlogcabin (May 24, 2011)

My understanding the $8.00 per $200,000 was the cost to construct a fire station not the yearly cost to equip and man the station which could be 6 to 18 new firefighters depending on existing staff


----------



## Frank (May 24, 2011)

Combination department --proposed staffing is 5 carreer staff  supplimented with volunteers and not manned 24/7

http://www.berkeleyind.com/news/Moncks-Corner-to-consider-new-Foxbank-fire-station


----------



## mtlogcabin (May 24, 2011)

> “The station will not be manned for 24 hours,” he said. “It can’t be done


If it is not manned then you will have a longer response time. Granted the building is the start just don't lead the residents down the path that they will be better protected the day the building is finished


----------



## Min&Max (May 24, 2011)

They will have considerably better protection with a new station, just not as good as 24/7.


----------



## RJJ (May 27, 2011)

I don't agree with Tyco paying everyone off on this one. Poor judgement on the city for sure. You still need fire protection and boots on the ground.


----------

