Firehouse strife
Controversial tradition discussed at meeting of Columbia Fire
Alcohol in the Bigler Street firehouse, a tradition that purportedly dates back for decades, was discussed Tuesday evening at a public meeting of the Columbia Fire Protection District board of directors, as debates over the future of public safety and fire protection in one of the Mother Lode’s historic towns continued.
The storage and use of alcohol in the firehouse, also known as Columbia Fire Protection District Station 74, was one of multiple issues addressed at the nearly twohour meeting, before an audience that included Ron Montoya and other members of the nonprofit Columbia Volunteer Fire Department Engine Co. No. 1 — who are not firefighters; Tuolumne County Administrator Tracie Riggs; and Marc Ditullio, assistant chief of Tuolumne County Fire and Cal Fire’s Tuolumne-calaveras Unit.
The building that houses Station 74 is owned by Columbia Volunteer Fire Department Engine Co. No. 1 — which is not a firefighting agency. Members of the nonprofit maintain and display antique fire equipment during parades.
Mark Ferreira, chief of Columbia Fire Protection District, and the district’s board of directors, Matt Foust, Mary O’hearn and Barry Rudolph, shared updates on recent district expenses and current staffing for a paid-call engine based at Station 74. Ditullio provided the latest on plans for a 24/7-365 fully staffed Tuolumne County engine in the Columbia area and possible locations for that engine.
Kathy Phu, acting maintenance chief for Columbia State Historic Park, discussed her efforts to assess a state-owned residence next to the firehouse, which the state rents to the district for $1 a year to use as a barracks.
Fire protection in Columbia has been a hot issue in this Gold Rush town since late May, when an overnight fire destroyed the home of Louie and Chris Gookin at 11424 Yankee Hill Road, less than two football fields from Station 74, which did not have a staffed engine when the fire occurred early June 30. Their son, Pete
Gookin, Columbia Air Attack’s senior helicopter pilot, was also at Tuesday night’s meeting.
Firefighting shake-ups in Columbia in November included voters replacing a longtime incumbent on the Columbia Fire Protection District board, Stan Steiner, with a retired Cal Fire battalion chief, Barry Rudolph; and the county Board of Supervisors electing to spend about $1.2 million on a fully staffed Tuolumne County engine and station in the Columbia area.
“It’s inappropriate for alcohol to be in this facility, for this fire district,” Rudolph said Tuesday evening. “I’m not talking about the county fire department right now. I’m not talking about the state employees. I’m talking about our people. Our firefighters, I was told, have access to that room. In that room, incompatible activities take place.”
Rudolph said he supports the nonprofit called Columbia Volunteer Fire Department Engine Co. No. 1, which he called “the host company,” and their efforts to negotiate with the state to move historic firefighting equipment dating to the 1850s to a location inside the boundaries of Columbia State Historic Park, “where it needs to be so people can see it.”
Rudolph also said he was told last week that members of the nonprofit are unwilling to do away with alcohol in the firehouse kitchen because they have their traditions.
“I’m not going to sit here, now that I’m aware of it, and condone that,” Rudolph said. “By condoning it, I am basically permitting that and promoting it. I’m not going to do that.”
Montoya, leader of the nonprofit, said Wednesday of the alcohol kept in the Station 74 kitchen, “We can shut that down. There’s a metal door between the engine bays and the kitchen. I have to bring it up with the whole company.”
Montoya said nonprofit members keep beer in the Station 74 kitchen’s refrigerator, and there’s a liquor cabinet with a lock on it, “but it hasn’t been locked in 20 years, maybe longer.” Montoya emphasized Wednesday he was speaking for himself not on behalf of the nonprofit.
The next meeting of Columbia Volunteer Fire Department Engine
Co. No. 1 is scheduled at 7 p.m. Feb. 6 at Station 74, which Montoya said will be invite-only.
Pete Gookin, whose parents’ home burned a couple hard yards from Station 74 in late June, said Wednesday the county seems committed to getting a fully-staffed engine in Columbia, and Columbia Fire Protection District and the nonprofit need to compromise on how the Station 74 building is going to be used. If the district and the nonprofit do not compromise, the county will need to find another location to put an engine in Columbia.
“I remember when that building was built in the 1970s and it was built as a firehouse,” Pete Gookin said. “The intention was for it to be a fire station primarily and a community hall secondary. I recognize the tradition that it’s been a community meeting hall, but times have changed and the attitude towards alcohol in a fire station in the last 40-50 years has changed. We need a fire engine in Columbia.”
Pete Gookin said his parents have not yet rebuilt on their property where their home burned near Station 74, but they have been living on the same property in an unfinished apartment.
“I want to see an engine staffed 24/7-365 in the Columbia area,” Pete Gookin said. “I don’t care if it’s at the current station or at the airport. I would prefer it’s not at the college, for the distance to old town Columbia. As a taxpayer I want to see county money spent wisely. There’s already a fire station in Columbia on Bigler Street so as a taxpayer I’d prefer they use existing resources.”
Columbia resident Kim Baker, who has been videotaping meetings of the Columbia Fire Protection District since last year, said Wednesday there is a danger now that Tuolumne County Fire and Cal Fire may have the resources to fully staff an engine in Columbia, but they may not have a place to put it. There are also concerns about where money will come to fund a Columbia engine and station once the next fiscal year ends.
Riggs said the county Board of Supervisors has committed to funding a fully-staffed engine and station in the Columbia area for a full fiscal year. The annual cost of a Schedule A station with Cal Fire is about $1.2 million, which is expected to increase to $1.4 million when the next fiscal year begins in July.
“Tuolumne County is not spending any of the money the board allocated for Columbia fire engine staffing until we hire the personnel,” Ditullio with Tuolumne County Fire said Wednesday. “That won’t happen until we have a location to place the fire engine.”
Yet another potential increase is expected in or around 2024 because Cal Fire’s union is pushing to reduce firefighters’ rotations from a 72-hour week to a 66-hour week.
“While I cannot blame them for making this request, it will increase staffing, which means a significant increase to run each station,” Riggs said.
Pete Gookin said he is urging the people of Columbia to get involved in fire protection discussions and to get involved to further fund a county engine and station when current funding ends.
Video and audio of the district’s Tuesday night meeting, recorded by Baker, is now on Access Tuolumne at https://bit. ly/3iiq5pt.