The authors of the statement against South King Fire and Rescue’s Prop. 1 wrote in the first line, “The safety and security of our families is one of our most basic and universal needs.”

That is what you would expect to read as the opening line in a statement for Prop. 1.

The statement goes on to say that Prop. 1 is about stroking egos, empire building and pensions. I’m unsure how replacing aging fire equipment, outdated breathing apparatus and earthquake proofing our fire stations has anything to do with egos or empires. Since this is a capital bond, it has nothing to do with pensions. It is a capital bond.

Our fire district needs to purchase replacement fire engines and a ladder truck. The district will spend about $500,000 for each fire engine because that is what they cost. In the mid-90s you could buy the same fire engine for about $200,000. In 1985, a new 100-foot ladder truck cost about $450,000. Today, it costs more than $1 million. The increase is driven by inflation, technology and compliance standards. The last time the fire district ran a voter-approved bond was in the early 1990s.

The district is not buying a “yacht,” it is proposing to replace an aging, increasingly expensive to maintain, fire and rescue boat. The new fire station “on the very edge of town” is part of the 20-year plan to add a station as the population in that area continues to grow.

The statement against also suggests the district should acquire “low-cost rapid response vehicles and EMT sub-stations.” So, on the one hand you are being asked to vote against what is needed to provide quality and effective service to the community and, on the other hand, build multiple limited-use buildings, which would require even higher levels of firefighter staffing than we have now.

Clearly, the authors of the statement against are trying to discredit the fire chief, the administrative staff and the duly elected fire commissioners.

The district is not “bullying” the public. Yes, the district did say bad things “could” happen if the fire stations should collapse in an earthquake. The bad thing is the district could be prevented from responding to your emergency.

The bottom line is, a “no” vote means a decrease in the quality of fire and medical response over time.

I urge you to vote “yes” on Prop. 1.

Scott Dornan, Federal Way