Would you trade emergency service for 0 tax increase?
I have read two stories in the North Shore News about the shortage of firefighters in our district.
When I attended an event at the Meek last week, I was handed a flyer by one of our local firefighters, informing me what will happen if we have a zero tax increase.

These brave men who risk their lives for us, are fearful of our safety should proposed  budget cuts to emergency service pass in our district.

There is discussion of reducing fire halls in our community from 4 to 3.
In an emergency response time is critical, and our district is spread out, we need more fire halls not less.

There are only two ambulances to cover the north shore; with one in four residents over sixty-five Firemen are often first on the seen in a medical emergency. Why would cuts even be considered to this essential emergency service when seconds count?

I have heard talk of the amalgamation of the police on the north shore to balance our budget I do not want that.
I like that we have our own police who have youth initiatives engaging our teens in a positive manner.
If we amalgamate forces I don’t feel this would continue, I feel our police would become reactive rather than proactive with the youth in our district, and this would lead to increased crime in our community.

In looking at the budget for 2008 if zero tax growth means a drop in important emergency service, I for one would accept a tax increase dedicated to Fire/Police service if that were what it takes to keep our district safe.
What do you think?