FFPCogs

On the money Pat!! As I know you are aware much has been researched, developed and forwarded in respect to incentives for recruitment and retention which to date has seen little in the way of action. The pursuit of a concrete plan to achieve the necessary volunteer personnel will continue unabated regardless of the ultimate outcome of the either the SVFD or SFRD options. Cogs

Yes the money comes from the residents. I cannot and will not speak for other VFDs, but as I said we at Belltown have been very good caretakers of our resident's investment. Cogs

You missed my point. It is not the NFPA that is at issue, it is the perception of the residents of Belltown who see this prospective change as a amounting to the loss of THEIR fire department. And as we all know perception can be a powerful force irrespective of the facts. Cogs

You seem to be under the impression that I ardently support the SVFD plan. If that is the case you are mistaken. What I have said repeatedly is that of the two currently on the table I support the SVFD one over the SFRD (Brown) plan. Have 70+ pages of debate and dialouge gone unnoticed. I have laid out over and over what I see as the option that will best suit the needs of Stamford, while maintaining the volunteer sector as a vital and integral part of the system. As I see it (and these posts are MY opinion) the SFRD plan is in effect a death sentence for those volunteers who, like myself, are commtted to helping our neighbors and serving the community. But I truly believe that besides the personal loss there will be unforseen, or should I say unmentioned, future costs to the "cost neutral" plan put forth by SFRD. As a resident and taxpayer as well as a volunteer in Belltown I firmly believe that volunteers can and do save the taxpayers i.e. me money and provide a valuable service. So while not perfect by any means the SVFD plan does incorporate volunteers as an integral element thus offering the benefits both as a taxpayer and as an active volunteer, hence my support for it. Truth be told I would liked to have seen a different approach taken, one that unified both sectors, but that belief is one shared by only a few of us. Niether the VFDs as a whole or SFRD seem interested in actually melding the two "sides", but rather each seems to want to have their cake and eat it too. This is unfortunate for all involved and in my opinion an opportunity squandered equally by the intransigence of both sides. As I stated earlier the decision has been made by the memberships of 3 of the 4 VFDs to proceed, including mine. As a member in good standing it is my duty to adhere to the program even if there are elements that I personally disagree with in principle. I fully intend to do so inasmuch as I can. But with that comes the duty to work to improve upon that which I and others see as areas that could stand improvement and this too I intend to do wholeheartedly. If a day comes that a coordinated effort is made to truly integrate SFRD and the VFDs I will be the first in line to encourgage, and with any luck particpate in, that endeavor. Until then I believe my FD serves our residents well and to their benefit. I am also of the belief that should the need arise under the SVFD plan that that service will be extended to all of the residents incorporated in the SVFD district. As such I and others are prepared to do what is necessary to see that that service and the benefits it offers to our community continues. Cogs "As such I and others are prepared to do what is necessary to see that that service and the benefits it offers to our community continues." So this line isn't misconstrued, this refers to our commitment to respond, train and act professionally in the performance of our duty. PC

Wrong at least in BFDs case. We own all of the apparatus, equipment and property. This was all purchased with money donated specifically for that purpose by our residents and we have been good caretakers of their investment. The City through tax dollars supports the operating expenses only, so if the City funding tap were turned off the assets would still belong to BFD to do with what we see as in the best interest of the community and our residents. I cannot nor would I argue the fact that at present the VFDs..all of them...rely on SFRD to differing degrees for assistance at working fires. It is the goal of the SVFD plan to alleviate that situation dramatically. Will it succeed? I do not know but I will say that I agree in principle that hiring 47 additional FFs for up North will not be the end all be all of solving the issue. It will take a considerable effort in recruitment and retention of volunteers to meet the staffing needs of the future. Unlike many I do believe that this is possible given enough support from the City in making it so, For me though, to garner that support the come as you please response mode must cease and a formalized duty schedule implemented. We will see. Cogs

If you type a little larger more people might see it. But to the point. You are not alone in your concerns, so maybe a review of the past few pages can show that I too share many of those cited here and elsewhere. But my support here such as it is, stems from the simple fact that I do believe that the SVFD plan is superior to the SFRD plan at ths time. Cogs

For me the Can is taken for two reasons 1) To nip any small or incipient fires in the bud while investigating smells and bells. A Can can work well in dousing smaller fires or at least controlling them until the lines in place and working in the manner in which JohnnyOV explained. 2) And of far more importance the Can is used for the protection of the search team should they become jammed up. Their job isn't to extinquish the fire when it is going, it is to search the premises for victims and locate the fire if possible for the hose team(s). The Can is there to protect the search team should an area begin to light up on them. A series of sprays with finger over the nozzle creating a msity fog will generally disrupt the thermal layer in preflashover conditions just enough to make a hasty retreat, shutting the door behind you. Simply put there is no substiture for a handline in attacking a working fire, expecting a Can to do the job of a handline is foolhardy at best but frankly it's simply dangerous. Cogs

You are correct that SFRD has been fully involved in the recent fires up North, even the ones that turned out badly. But this has been due to the fact that there has not been an adequate in house presence in those VFD stations. The SVFD plan will put paid personnel in all 6 stations and with continued perseverance along with them will be a contingent of volunteers to bring the staffing up to NFPA standards. Along with this asigned personnel home responce will continue and with proper management the required resources should...yes I said should... provide the necessary level of coverage to the residents of North Stamford. But again as a pragmatist I realize that all the pieces may not fall so neatly into place...and that goes for ANY plan. Well just as history has offered insight into the ability of the SVFD to provide adequate service, so too does history offer us a glimpse into the future of volunteer fireighting in Stamford. We have at our disposal two departments right in our own City that amply demonstrate the most likely outcome... Springdale and Glenbrook. Of course when we look farther afield we see that more often than not as career departemts "take over" the primary role the volunteers cease to exist. Are there exceptions to this? Of course there are but these are not only few and far between, but these success are usually based on integration, not volunteers as a support service. To date I have not seen any inclination on the part of SFRD or L-786 to develop an integrated service in Stamford, instead volunteers can look forward to a future of being the "farm team" for SFRD. As you can well imagine this glorious image of the future does not sit well with many volunteers, myself included. And just to clarify the SFRD (Brown) plan calls for the elimination of the fire districts and the reduction of the volunteers response areas to their street addesses. Now in less something has changed BFD is not slated to house any SFRD units so in fact there will be no assigned fire protection in Belltown proper as there is now. This constitues a loss for the residents of Belltown who are being served presently by a functioning VFD that has to date answered 100% of it's dispatched calls, many times without the assistance of SFRD. As a resident of Belltown I can assure you that the BFD is held in high regard by our neighbors and they will not take the elimination of their FD lightly. Cogs

Whether or not the VFDs would willingly hand over their properties to SFRD or the City is up to the individual departments. To the best of my knowledge no such decisions have been made, but they would be fully within their rights to sell the property, equipment ect ect. and give the proceeds to charity if they so chose. Here again I am simply pointing out some of the facts that exist surrounding the SFRD plan that could potentially sink it. Cogs

As with your interpretation of Pat's post and how he used the word "IF" in regards to volunters at their stations, so to is it in my post that the key word is IF. IF it becomes apparent that the resources of the SVFD are incapable of handling the responses, not when or they will be. There has been much made by contributors here, many from SFRD, of the notion that the SVFD will be incapable of providing adequate manpower for incidents. I was simply pointing out that any additional resources necessary already exist and would be a simple radio call or AMA agreement away. I was also pointing out that any resistance to such an arrangement by L-786, should it beome a necessity, would not bode well for that organization in the public eye. As far as SFRD itself goes yes I do expect any mutual aid will "simply come from" them as they don't really have a choice in the matter. And just to clarify I do not at present see the need for SFRD to assist up North once the SVFD is in place, but as a pragmatic fire officer I do realize that unforseen circumstances could arise and we must be prepared for them. As to part two of your query, Yes I am worried about the lack of availibility of units and service that the residents downtown will face if the SFRD plan were to become reality. But my concern is not limited to just downtown. The proposed redistribution of the available resources I believe puts many areas of the City at risk since SFRD will be stretched thin within the confines of Stamford's geography and certain areas i.e. Belltown will be without fire protection at all. By the way my concern in that particular post did not address the situation of SFRD units being pulled North from their current stations. That is a whole other can of worms. Cogs

Let's put it this way, in house staffing be it paid or volunteer does address the question of responses. There is a number of us who now believe that volunteer staffing either in conjunction with or instead of paid personnel is the way to go. As such steps are being taken to ensure crews are assembled, assigned and responding. BFD has been fortunate enough to have members in house 24/7 for the vast majority of the time we've been 100% volunteer, as our regular cancellation of responding SFRD units attests. As things progress a more formal program to ensure a minimum compliment is on hand will become the norm. In the end it will be the public we serve that benefits. Cogs

Often here at work when I have down time my mind naturally drifts to the events unfolding with our Fire Service back home. Like most I am truly concerned with what will happen, not only because as a volunteer I will be affected by any changes, but more importantly because I have a wife and three childern as well as other members of my family whose lives depend on the outcome. Recently as I dwelled on our mess I realized that with each "plan" presented there are flaws which may ultimately fail the public . For the volunteers: 1) An inadequate and uneven distribution of volunteer personnel. Some VFDs have a good number of active and dedicated members, some do not. As I see it there has been no concrete attempt to alleviate this situation. 2) The paid personnel while adequate carry with them a host of issues ranging from salary requirements, to collective bargaining, to the workload that may be placed upon them. 3) The command issues. As of yet there is no definitive standard to which all ranks must adhere and I fear that there will be those among us that undermine all attempts to create such a standard 4) Recruitment and retention. This goes to point one and is to me one of the most challenging yet critical elements in assuring the public safety. As I often say "There is no such thing as a one man fire dept". Members, without them there is no fire dept. To me this seemingly overlooked aspect needs attention in the form of a contractual agreement from the City to support incentives, such as those of Greenwich's volunteers, and from the volunteers side the commitment to effectively use of these new and existing members in a manner far more formalized than come as you please. 5) A unique problem also arises for the union. If in fact this plan comes to fruition and it becomes apparent that, as is regularly stated, additional resources are needed who do you think the SVFD will turn to. Well SFRD of course. Now given that scenario will L-786 refuse to sanction responses into the new SVFD district? To do so would be suicidal in the court of public opinion. And as City employees SFRD members are charged with carrying out the policies of the City, their employer. When looking the SFRD option some aspects jump off the page as potentially fatal to the plan. 1) The idea of cost neutrality looks good on paper, but does not take the realitiyof the situation into consideration. It is very safe bet that not all volunteer departments will allow the use of their facilities, even with the elimination of the district boundaries. Remember each VFD station is owned by the individual VFD, not the City. Even if eminent domain were utilized there would still be the costs of building at least one, but more likely than not, more, permanent fire stations for the relocated SFRD units as well as purchasing the properties from the VFDs. At a very low ball figure of half a million per, were talking a considerable cost to taxpayers far above cost neutrality. 2) The reloctaion of the apparatus and staffing again looks good on paper but would leave areas of the City devoid of adequate protection. As I asked earlier in this thread, who want to tell the residents of Woodside that their Engine will no longer be there for them and there will be a longer wait to get water on their fire or start CPR on their family member. An how about the resident of Belltown? With no real fire dept left in their nieghborhood and no SFRD unit assigned what happens to them? Why are they so insignificant that they don't deserve the same level of protection as their neighbors in Springdale or Glenbrook? And who want to tell them that? 3) As two recent fires amply demonstrate SFRDs resources can be spread thin in many cases. Both 2nd alarm fires of the other day drained all downtown units leaving only the uptown Engines and the "unreliable" volunteers to handle the City. With some of those units gone up North and no volunteer sector (unrelaible or not), to rely on, what then? Out of town mutual aid? This has the effect of putting the residents of our neighboring communities in potential risk as their units are drawn off to serve Stamford. Where does this lead? To the need to increase the size of SFRD to effectively cover the City. And with that increase comes the increase in expenses to run it, or in other words an additional burden on Stamford's already tired taxpayers. Much has been said back and forth in support of, or against each plan. Something better may exist but without an effort to formulate and promulgate it we all may end up stuck with a lemon and will have no one but ourselves to blame. Cogs

As I understand it the goal is to have it so that all volunteers can respond from any station should they be available and in the vicinity. As it stands to the best of my knowledge it will be the apparatus and the paid personnel responding as was done previously under the mutual aid system with volunteers fitting into that as described above...if your near TOR ,or LR or any volunteer station and there's a call in that first due area go to that station and respond, (which would be an improvement over the old mutual aid system) otherwise if your Company is dispatched go and staff your firehouse to backfill the vacant paid personnel and await orders as was done in the past. As you are well aware I favor a more fomalized program in which volunteers are assigned duty tours at the various stations with all members being part of one pool of personnel resources. That is agreeable to some, and not to others. The growing number of us who believe that this would be a better alternative will continue to pursue it's implementation. Cogs

Contract Chris.

To all, Thanks for the encouragement and support Johnny, Differences of opinion are what makes the world go round and offers us an opportunity to learn, so no sweat. I and eveyone I work with do really appreciate the kudos from everyone back home, but this is a job that we have chosen to do. Firemen here are the same as firemen back home, no more courageous. Each of us risks when we do our duty but that is the path we, all of us, as firefighters ha've chosen. I'm thankful for the opportunity to work with FFs from all over the world and to serve our troops and I am also thankful for all of you back home serving your communities. America's firefighters truly are the "Bravest" We wear some bright yellow fyrepel I believe is the name. Uncomfortable, hot, and to top it off we're saddled with Cairns Metro 660s or as I refer to them...p#nis helmets. Oh well the gear does at least offer protection as I found out yesterday...twice. We had 2 working fires before 1pm. The first was in a 100x 30 wooden C hut with fire in the rear 3 offices and extending thru the attic space. As first due we got a quick line in place and stopped it cold, although my Phillipino crew needed a little encouragement to advance in the form of a good shove. As for the other it was a 40 x 20 metal storage shed used to house a couple of buses. A total loss before our arrival as they tried to put it put themselves. We did manage to save the nearby exposures, two office trailers and a wooden barracks which were on the verge of going up upon our arrival. We were first due here as well. Now on to the important stuff. A Colony pie...mmmmmmmmmmmm as Homer would say. That my friend is my first stop when I'm home in Sept., hot oil, stingers and sausage...damn my mouth's watering just thinking about it. But hey good things come to those who wait right? Stay safe Cogs

Maybe so. But there are a few things that must be considered besides the current percieved stance of City Hall 1) The plan may not get through the Bd of Reps 2) There's a very good chance the SFRD plan could meet the same fate 3) Most agree that one department is a long term goal So there is plenty of reason to get moving now on some of these ideas that have graced these pages over the months, maybe even years. Anyone of these factors is, in and of itself, a reason to move, but combined the reason multiply exponentially. No one can stop individuals from exploring options, and even if those talks go nowhere there will be a lasting result from the efforts.....the sides will have talked with the goal of building bridges. Eventually there will come a time when that effort will be put to use, maybe a year from now, maybe 20, but the groundwork will have been laid now, and that is a step forward no matter how you slice it. This simple action can carry over into a myriad of interactions between the union and the VFDs, between the VFDs themselves, between the Admins of SFRD and the VFDs and maybe even between the City and all it's firefighters...the sky's the limit. Now before you go thinkiing I'm a complete lunatic, idiot, or naive fool, rest assured I do have a fairly firm grasp on the brevity and depth of the situation and what's going on and what's at stake. If I'm guilty of anything it's unbridled optimism based on the fact the firemen do what must be done and that is a trait we all share. Why not build on our similarites ourselves rather than let others or circumstances tear us apart. Cogs

I have been a proponent of a confederated FD for a long time. One in which SFRD and the VFDs work together in a much more formal manner than is currently the case. A dept made up of two divisions which ultimately answers to one authority be it a Chief, or commissioner or whatever. There are differences and unique circumstances between SFRD and the VFDs which cannot just be overlooked or plowed under if there is to be any kind of real working relationship. Now an idea was hoisted up the flagpole before the Task Force which both sides found fault with, and maybe to an extent rightfully so, but that idea did merge everyone under one ultimate authority while allowing for the differences, hence the two division model. OK so SFRD or should I say L-786 doesn't want it;'s members to work days only, ok that's a point which can be negotiated so that the needs of the community and SFRD are met while the unique contributions of the volunteers are also incorporated. Greenwich's system is not the model I would suggest to achieve that, nor is Danbury's even if they work fine there. A more integrated system is what I firmly believe is in all of our best interests. Again a combination of a Montgomery Cty type model and aspects of what has worked here is to me the best route. Anything that puts one "side" above another will not yeild a lasting solution, or maybe it is that perception that one has an advantage, but let;s face it perception IS reality to those involved. What is needed is compromise and a willingness to respect and incorporate the things that are most valued by the players to reach the common goal of premeir fire protection for Stamford. Both SFRD and the VFDs can provide that when working together, but that must be a two sided coin, not one telling the other it's this or that or the highway. Concessions would be necessary from 786, there's no way around it, just as they would be required of the VFDs. The trick now is to find that which can be conceded without either '"side" losing it'self in the process. Keeping sight of the overall goal.....an integrated, combination fire service for Stamford.....is key. Cogs

I have heard such runmors as well. I try not to put too much stock in rumors as they usually are started to support someones agenda or create animosity that needn't exist. If in fact that is what happens than so be it, but until then nothing is lost in keeping an open mind and willingness. Cogs

As I stated in my previous post our members have spoken so like you with your union we will follow the path laid before us, working where ever we can to enhance it if possible or necessary. That you agree to much of what I asked is heartening since many believe that the Mayor's plan will not get the support of the Bd of Reps. Let me say that I do not,believe that is the case, but even so should such an eventaulity happen what then? The SFRD plan presented by Chief Brown has some serious deficiencies and some unanswered questions, at least to me...as is to be expected I guess. Some of these may cause that plan to fall flat as well in the Bd of Reps. So as we can see when keeping level heads there is much that we agree on at least in theory, probably 90% in terms of operational parameters, so the other 10% while being the actual obstacles are sumountable. Would you at least agree that on the points in which there is disagreement compromise is possible through negotiation? Prudence demands that since nothing is set in stone as of yet we should continue exploring options that may yet yield results hitherto unforseen. Do you not agree? Cogs

I can see how this could be confusing. Think of it more along the lines of a strategic partnership in the business world. Each independent entity i.e. current VFD will be contractually bound to work within an established framework to serve the common goal under the authority of a Fire Chief / Administartor hired by a Bd of Directors comprised of the President and 1 member of each member department . As I understand it each member department (partner) will retain much of their independence in relation to membership. administration of the company, by-laws (so long as they don't contradict those of the partnership agreement), fundraising, social activities, and such. All fireground and operational SOGs, preplans, command, and other such functions will be standardized, while responses will be more akin to the old mutual aid system with each partner assisting the others. Any employees, and the fire investigation and inspection services will be unified and under the authority of the paid Chief /Admin in conjunction with the Bd or Directors as described above. This type of arrangement is very common in my current employment. KBR a giant in the field of support services in war zones has many times taken on strategic partners to provide certain aspects of their service,. WSI did the firefighting for KBR throughout Iraq as a strategic partner. More recently two contract fire compaies have pooled their resources to provide the necessary level of service as required by Army Reg 420-1 and any number of NFPA standards since neither could effectively do so alone. I will say that some of us had hoped to take a different approach to this situation and fought hard for our beliefs. But be that as it may the memberships of the partner departmets have spoken and as such we that are dedicated members of those departments will adhere to the program and contribute to the success of the venture inasmuch as we can. Cogs

Yes, three....... thank you for the correction....one of the three current partners.

I would assume the same as they are already employed by one of the four partners.

Thanks for the honest answers. And now it's my turn to answer yours. 1) Structured scheduled duty shifts 2a). There will be overtime of course. I would like to see volunteers as fill ins 2b). I honestly don't know, but this is something I among others is pushing for. 3) I would not have a problem with assigned career personnel voting to elect volunteers officers assigned to that station, after all as I envisiojn it they will be working together under a unified and integrated chain of command.

Everyone's entitled to an opinion my friend, but I suggest you tread lightly when making such accusations.

Tom, The redistribution that you envision should the SVFD become reality is a good one and one that only increases the service to downtown. So in at least in that respect there is a positive to it is there not? Now as far as sinking ships and all goes, well there are problems to be faced that's for sure but as a stalwart believer in the ability and dedication of many current and with the right grounding any futute volunteers I'm just not quite ready to throw in the towel just yet. It may come to pass that this will be an epic failure, but if that is the cae it will not be so because I and many others did not contribute all we can towards itt's success. I'm alot of things as I'm sure you're aware, but a quitter isn't one of them, no matter how high the odds. Even from my new "home" in Afghanistan I am still able to contribute to the success of Stamford's volunteers in ways that can shape our future positively. Of course on my R&Rs every 90 days I will be a fixture at Belltown or wherever else I'm needed. And although there are some valuable aspects of Greenwich's system, I am not at all convinced that such a set up is in Stamford's best interest. Yes we should most definitely takes what works such as their recruitment and ioncentive plans and incoporate them, but they should be incorporated into a system more akin to Montgonmery Cty MD where the "sides" are far more thoroughly intergrated. Barring that the SVFD is as far as I'm concerned the better of the two options available at the moment. Now some of that belief is without doubt rooted in my history with the BFD and it's part as a community anchor in that neighborhood, but there is more to it than that. In the end we must all follow our beliefs and work to make them reality. I and many of my volunteer brothers intend to do just that until we are no longer able. Stay Safe Cogs