Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

TACOMA: Public safety vs. burn ban enforcement

Letter by Wilburn Edwards, Spanaway on Dec. 12, 2011 at 12:59 pm with 3 Comments »
December 12, 2011 3:05 pm

Re: “Tighter enforcement of burn bans possible” (TNT, 12-10).

Personally, I agree with much of this article, and I do use a pellet stove. However, what I find interesting is that a few days ago the city of Tacoma announced it will have to lay off a large number of police and firemen because of the budget. Now the city/county wants to hire 63 more people to enforce a burn ban!

While enforcing a burn ban is important, I think having proper staffing of police officers and firefighters should be a higher priority than checking someone’s fireplace or pellet stove.

I realize that the city probably will not pay those 63 burn inspectors the same as police officers or firemen, but the money spent could save some of their jobs and help public safety.

Leave a comment Comments → 3
  1. took14theteam says:

    Um, it is a government job, so I wouldn’t hold your breath about them not getting paid the same as police and firemen.

  2. jimkingjr says:

    The 63 would be hired to work during the ten or so days each winter that there are burn bans, and they’d be hired by the multi-county Clean Air agency. Hardly a drop in the bucket, quite frankly- and the funding wouldn’t keep even one cop.

  3. LarryFine says:

    I don’t believe they will be employed by the city.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0