Officials weigh selling 1978 fire rig while stressing need for redundancy

The meeting included an extended debate on fire protection language, equipment ownership and whether the town should sell an older 1978 structure vehicle.

Special Commissioner explained the legal distinction between town and county fire organizations and that most active members serve on the county volunteer department. Committee members offered contrasting views: one member argued the old '78 rig mostly sits unused and selling it could generate funds for needed equipment; another cautioned that keeping spare structure rigs provides redundancy for incidents and training.

Committee member (S6) urged keeping multiple rigs to ensure backup capacity, noting that various rigs (structure, crash, DNRC brush rigs) have different capabilities and that losing spares could leave the community vulnerable in a multi-vehicle incident. The group agreed to remove rigid 'preference' language that assigned equipment by geographic boundary and instead leave operational deployment to the fire department's judgment under the interlocal agreement.