![]() |
The frontrunner parcel for creation of the long-awaited, new ECFR Station #20, is just south of Hwy 98 on the East Side of Bauer Road. |
It has been too long now, since the closure of ECFR Station #20 by Escambia County several years back.
A lot has happened since the closure in 2018 and today--including very tumultous contract/pay issues with the former sheriff, OLF-8 acquisition, Jail Rebuilding, Hurricane Sally, and the worldwide COVID-19 Pandemic--just to name a few. And as it is with most things government--nothing happens quickly. As an example: The hurculean effort at building a modern fire station in Beulah to replace Station #2 in that community began in earnest in 2014, 9 years ago, with former Commissioner Robertson. I took the torch in 2016 and have championed that project ever since. But it is,was, and has been a long road on that one. Currently, it is under construction, named, and slated for opening in 2024.
But there is a stark difference between Station #20 and staion #2. Which I will explain, in depth, below.
HOW DID STATION 20 CLOSE--AND WHY THE LONG DELAY ON A REPLACEMENT?
Just about one year into my tenure as the District 1 Commissioner, a meeting was requested with me by a former county administrator and a former public safety director to discuss the issues with ECFR station #20. I was told the station needed to be closed due to a lease issue with the property's owner--combined with a lack of need for the small, under-equipped and infrequently utilized facility. (e.g. I was told the station had responded to an average of one structure fire per year in the previous 5 year period). I was also told that an agreement could be made with the Lillian Volunteer Fire Department (just over the Lillian Bridge in Alabama) to provide emergency fire coverage/protection for the area that had up until then been served by ECFR station #20. Being a new commissioner, I took them at their word, did not push back (after all, they were the subject matter experts and in the executive branch--I am in the legislative--so this was their call to make), and the station subsequently closed. That's what happened.
And very little transpired on that specific topic over the subsequent 12 months. But then, just about a year after #20 closed, when we had a new administrator, I started getting angry calls from residents about their property insurance skyrocketing and being "non-renewed" due to their "ISO rating" going up. Adding to the angst--several calls for fire support came in to that geographic area and were not responded to by the Lillian Volunteer Fire Department. They didn't just not get there late--they didn't respond at all. So it was a double whammy I didn't see coming at the time. And looking back in time, to the meeting where I was told that station #20 had to close--I realized that the critically important impact to my constituents in that area---massive property insurance rate hikes and possible non-renewal of some constituent policies due to the ISO rating increasing--was never imparted to me in that meeting with the administrator and public safety director.
Nope, I was not told about the serious, damaging implication the loss of our own fire station would have on the residents in the area via these massive insurance premium increases and subsequent ISO rating increases--which drive the cost increases for insurance. Shame on me for not knowing that, but I did not know that as a first year commissioner. But staff should have been honest with me and told me--because they knew the ISO rating would be implicated but failed to tell me. Had I been told, I would have pushed back and I suspect they know that. Staff has to be honest with the policymakers, and if they know something but fail to tell the legislative that funds such operations for whatever reason (expediency, hesitence to discuss a tough issue, whatever the case may be?)---it is akin to a lie, so far as I am concerned. If you know and don't tell me, you have lied to me, period.
Those two individuals are gone, and there have been multiple administrators and public safety directors since that time. The current staff are very well aware and attentive to this matter--which is why this in now moving ahead. More on that below.
But back to the history. So after a new administrator was brought in in 2019, and a new public safety director as well, I pleaded with them to bring a solution to the station #20 issue. That former administrator's response: "Commissioner-there are lots of houses in the county that are not located within 5 miles of a station." Okay, I understand that and on it's face that is a true statement. The difference here is my constituents had a station, had coverage and a concomittant lower ISO rating, and the county PULLED this resource from them with no plan to replace it. That is the difference. And I feel as though I was deceived in the way it was done due to the important facts left out of that initial meeting's discussion: ISO and Insurance imlications.
So from 2019-2020 I kept bringing the issue up. The flaccid, slow-rolling response from the now former administrator was unnerving and infuriating. It was on the back burner. Heck, it took 8 months of agitation by me to get that administrator to get off the dime and provide necessary mattresses to the volunteer firemen at station 2 who were at that time sleeping on ROCKs as mattresses. Every excuse under the sun about those delays. I fianally had to threaten to take my truck and county credit card to mattress discounters and buy the mattresses myself. Shortly thereafter, as if by magic, the mattresses were delivered to station #2.
So yeah, I pressed that administrator about replacing #20. We could do it at the southwest sports