Dear Editor,

Flashback to June 18, 2007.

A fire that was considered to be a routine rubbish fire soon raged out of control at the Sofa Super Store and killed nine Charleston firefighters. The largest number of firefighters killed at a single time since the horrific attack on 9/11. This past Wednesday, mothers, fathers, wives, children, friends and fellow firefighters came together once again to remember and honor those brave men on the anniversary of their deaths.

On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 our mayor and City Council decided, against the wishes of the city manager, fire chief and the entire fire department to continue to place our own firefighter's lives at risk by denying acceptance to a federal SAFER grant totaling $578,000. This grant would have enabled the fire department to add two men per shift, increasing the paid staff from 18 to 24.

During the regular monthly meeting, council members told the city manager and fire chief that the lack of growth and an uncertain economic future were the reasons for denying the grant. At the same meeting, council amended an ordinance for larger billboard signs to be placed near the 219 interchange for two new businesses and a possible third to be built near the interstate.

The grant would have allowed the city to hire six firefighters at one time with the federal government footing the majority of the bill for the first three years. In the first year, the city would have paid only $22,000 for its part in hiring the six firefighters, the second, only $46,000 and in the third, $120,300.

Not until the fourth year would the city have to pay the majority of the funding for the grant. Council says maybe it could hire two firefighters at mid-year budget time. The cost of this would be around $54,000 in salary alone. I don't think the math adds up. Hire six firefighters for $22,000 with the SAFER grant, or wait and hire two for $57,000. If the city decided to wait and hire the six firefighters in three years, it would cost the taxpayers $241,000 instead of $188,390 that it would have cost with the SAFER grant. With the SAFER grant the city would have saved $52,610. It's hard to imagine we voted this mayor and council to look out for the taxpayers.

Each time my husband walks out the door to go to work or to a call, I have to worry, as all firefighter's wives do, whether or not he will return.

As the city has grown over the last 20 years, the fire department has not added to its staff since 1997 when a sixth man was added to each shift. The City of Charleston had an insurance rating of one when its tragedy occurred, the highest rating a city can be given. Today, the City of Newberry has a class three insurance rating. Based on future growth and annexation, without accepting this grant and hiring these firefighters, the city could be in danger of losing its three rating and rising to a rating of four or five, which is a surefire increase in insurance rates for homeowners and businesses in Newberry.

Just think, by turning this federal grant down what the chances will be of any future committees with federal grant money being willing to consider Newberry as a recipient. I could continue on with numerous reasons to support the acceptance of the SAFER grant by the mayor and council. I, however, would like to issue a challenge to our mayor and all members of council who are afraid to accept this grant. I ask these men to invite the more than 30 children and 18 wives of the paid staff at the fire department to the next council meeting, look these women and children in the eye, and with a clear conscience explain to them why they (the mayor and council) put their families lives in jeopardy by not hiring the men needed to let these men come home from the fires, unlike the Charleston Nine.

While hiring these six firefighters will not guarantee the safety of our firefighters, it will increase their chances of coming home safely.

Sincerely,

Laurie Meadow

Newberry