FFPCogs

I'm posting this to keep my facts straight regarding the necessary requirements for volunteer staffing. Upon reading an article in Firefighting News.com I have to amend information from a previous post. When I addressed the manpower pool for volunteers I based my calculations on a pool of 40 volunteers available to staff the firehouse. According to the article Chief Didelot states there are 20 active volunteers currently at Belltown. The actual number of shifts per volunteer would be as follows. 20 members divided into 4 person crews = 5 crews. 365 days divided by 5 crews = 73 shifts per year. Or 73 shifts divided by 12 months = 6.08 shifts per month. Basically 1 shift every 5 days. I'll be the first to admit that this obviously makes the shift alternative less attractive as a possible solution. But this is do-able in the short term. An extremely aggressive recruitment drive as well as coverage by willing certified non members would be needed as well to continue this for the long term. Also the average number of live-ins in those staions in MD. and VA. that use them varies between 10-15, although they generally are not all there at the same time. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Thanks, Geppetto Cogs

When I first posted here I did so to show my support for the BFD, and offer whatever help I could. I didn't have any set proposals or ideas in mind as to what that help may be. Very quickly by reading up on this in the paper and by talking to some friends down at Belltown it seemed eveident to me that they do have some legitimate grievences. It also dawned on me very quickly that simply reverting to a 100% volunteer department would not rectify the problem. So in an effort to lend assistance I began to look into alternatives that would allow the BFD to remain 100% volunteer, while providing the level of service the citizens need and deserve. I could only draw on my own experience, so I read up on what I could and then got on the horn with friends and colleages both career and volunteer that I knew had faced a simlilar situation years ago. (By the way those systems and 100%volunteer departments I regularly cite in my posts have been in existence in most cases since the mid to late 1980s. Also they currently and for the forseeable future are not in jeopardy of being unable to provide the necessary levels of coverage or being converted to fully paid organizations). Based on what I learned there and and my understanding of the current status of the situation in Stamford, the volunteer shift system seemed to me to be a viable alternative. So that's what I have posted here in a manner I hope has been objective. I will readily admit that as a volunteer firefighter, I am inclined to work towards a solution that would favor the volunteers there. That being said I have consistently maintained that if the volunteers CANNOT meet the necessary criteria or levels of service needed that there is NO other option for them except an SFRD presence in their stations even if this leads to their eventual demise. For me, I will continue to post here citing the volunteer staffing option as a means to resolve this situation, while continuing to investigate other options. When and if I find any that will provide the levels of service demanded of the volunteers I will post them as well, Although I'm something of an arrogant SOB, I did truly post this alternative and the facts and my opinion in defense of it, in the fervent hope that others here would follow suit. I had thought (apparently idealistically) that others would look and say "here's a better idea" or "hey that's a good idea" that would address this situation as it currently stands. Unfortunately up to now that hasn't happened. The line that divides career and volunteer firefighters has yet again prevented any real substantial discourse. Actually in this case that line is more akin to the Berlin wall. After years in the fire service I guess I should have known better than to think anyone would cross the "wall". I suppose that for a volunteer to come here and post that yes, a paid presence is the only real option, they would be labled a "traitor" at the very least. And for the career union side, anyone accepting an alternative other than paid personnel in those VFD houses would be considered anti labor and outcast in their job. That no-one seems able to move past their affiliations to offer an objective outlook is a travesty. It appears that reasonableness, objectivity and respect are just further casualties of this whole mess. What a shame. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Joe, No argument from me. I agree that the charter is outdated, but that doesn't matter. The situation is what it is. I do believe as apparently others do, that volunteers are still viable. That doesn't matter. Many post here firmly convinced that paid personnel are the only option. That doesn't matter. There are systems in which volunteers do exist and meet necessity in busy areas. Other than as a model, that doesn't matter. What does matter, what is really important here is that those that can influence this mess need to pull their God-damned heads out of the sand, take their backs off the wall and sit down as Fire Service providers to figure this out. There is room for compromise The City for it's part needs to justify the change in status forced on the volunteer departments in terms of their former paid employees. The major burden though falls squarely in the lap of the volunteers. They MUST come up with a practicle, and workable alternative to paid employees to most importantly serve the residents and also support their decision to go 100% volunteer. Neither side here is completely wrong, nor are they completely right. They all need to realize and accept that reality. As a former member and current volunteer I do believe that there MAY be alternatives available. Also I hate to see another volunteer system die a slow, painful death. As an outsider this whole affair borders on the absurd and it seems as though there is absolutely no willingness on the part of those concerned to entertain any point of view other than their own. No matter what the outcome there will be repercussions. Those involved better be ready, willing and able to deal with those repercussions when they occur. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Well the fact is that the "famous' charter exists and gives the VFDs the authority they have. I didn't write it I'm just pointing out the fact that it is there and must be dealt with. It's not that I disagree that pride seems to have taken center stage, but like it or not it that pride on BOTH sides is a factor in this whole mess. Like I've said before, whatever happens it WILL directly affect the lives of those involved...so it is completely unrealistic to think that things like pride wouldn't be a factor. There are alternatives available out there if all involved are willing to explore them. Some have even made their way into this forum. It is up to the parties involved to put the citizens first by considering all the factors that will affect them. Of course the residents safety is the absolute prime concern...and whoever doesn't think so needs to have their head examined. I believe that the alternative that I have proposed can provide the necessary level of protection for the residents living in the districts involved, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it. Just as many here believe fervently that SFRD personnel is the ONLY possible solution. The fact is that it is really up to the BFD and TORFD to find a solution that will meet or exceed what SFRD personnel can and will provide.They have the authority to make the choices they have made. But with that authority comes the responsibility to do what is in the residents best interest. If they can't provide for the residents what is necessary then they MUST bite the bullet, and open their doors to the SFRD. This is a no brainer. Personnally, I would like to see the BFD et al retain their autonomy, hence my proposal. But of far more importance than what I or anyone WANTS is doing what is right by the citizens. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Read the article too. Well there you go, the VFDs are going to have to change their operating methods to meet the new reality. I've repeatedly stated what I think would work given the time and determination to put it into place. As it now stands the SFRD is out of those firehouses so who's got a better idea? Remember the VFDs are independent entities and are empowered by city charter to make the decision as to if there are paid employees or not. Based on that and respecting their current stance is anybody ready to actually step up and help SOLVE the problem? Cogs

Everyone's opinion and views are valid and deserve their due respect, and close scrutiny of anything that I post is more than welcomed by me. This is how we actually move forward and allow all sides of an issue to be explored. That being said I'll do my best to address the questions and statements regarding to my postings. To itrob, What happens when career personnel go on their paid vacations? Same dilema..same solution. And nowhere did I state that firehouses would be manned by 18-23 year olds exclusively. There are many members of the BFD and other departments that are both older and more experienced that would be a part of any manpower pool. To Bnechis, Is there proof or reason to believe you won't see the monies earmarked for the LOSAP program? Also it seems we won't be seeing any proof that this doesn't work any time soon either. As for the taxpayers getting what they pay for, only vigilant oversight of the program can guarantee that the money will go where it's supposed to. Just like ALL other taxpayer money spent by government, be it local, state or federal. Whether or not that oversight will actually do what it's supposed to is open to question just as it is for all taxpayer funds. And to Jason762 Public safety is absolutely the number one priority here and for any issues involving fire protection. Let me repeat that I never stated that college student would be the exclusive source of manpower for this alternative. Where that notion comes from is beyond me. If you read my previous postings here you will see that they will make up a portion of the total manpower pool. It is true that they may well make up the majority during daytime hours, but they would be augmented by retired members, and those that work 2nd or 3rd shift jobs. Again this is a system that is already in place and working well in other states, as I've already mentioned. Those college student by the way that are enrolled in the programs in Maryland and Virginia all have previous training and most have at the very least some experience. They must be current certified FFs with a bona fide department as well as medical first responders to even be considered for the live-in program. These are not people who just walked in off the street or on a lark. This criteria would be a must for any such similar program in Stamford. I'm fairly certain that an acceptable number of candidates who meet this criteria can be drawn from area colleges and universities here to fill the need, just as they are there. As for experiene and training. I could not and would not dispute that overall paid firefighers have access to more training, but there are many volunteers trained to the same or higher levels of certification as their average career counterparts. I for one have a wall full of IFSAC certifications. Regarding experience let me start by asking a question: what is the average number of working fires worked by any given shift of SFRD personnel? 6 maybe 8 per year or roughly the same number as dealt with by the volunteers in Stamford overall. Now I know that the SFRD responds to most if not all working fires within the city limits now, but by virtue of the mutual aid and automatic response set-up the volunteer response has climbed as well, as has their experience level. My final point to you is this, the simple fact that a person receives a paycheck DOES NOT guarantee that they are a good firefighter. All departments have great firefighters, average firefighters and firefighters of questionable abilities. that's a fact. A paycheck does not necessarily guarantee a persons dedication to this craft or their abilities...I'm sorry but it just doesn't. Those of us who do this to serve generally are better at it than those who don't paid or volunteer. Just one final note. Yet again my posts have been questioned as is your right and honestly your obligation as good firefighters to do. But none of you managed to answer the question posted. What alternatives can you offer to those involved based on the facts as they now stand? That is that both the BFD and the TORFD have chosen to become 100% volunteer departments at least for now. What can these departments do to provide the best possible coverage for their residents without a SFRD presence? Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

To all, Let me just say if 24/7 coverage is a prerequisite to keeping volunteers in place, I don't know of any other method to achieve it other than in shifts by the volunteer members. I can think of no other alternative that will ASSURE such coverage. Although the necessary number of personnel is higher, isn't this what many volunteer ambulance corps have been doing for years? Just a thought Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Bnechis, You are absolutely correct in that it's simple math only if it works. Regarding any unpaid funds, well they would sit there in the budget (collecting interest) to be used if in the end or at some future time career personnel are assigned. Or used I suppose at the discretion of the City administration as they see fit. As to the second point, I haven't seen any study or proof that incentives such as a LOSAP program DON'T work. I'm just pointing out that since the City said this was about budget control and financial savings ANY alternative or program that would offer such substantial savings should be investigated. Slayer, It has been my experience that incentives are NOT the main reason people volunteer. There are many reasons why people volunteer, as many reasons as there are volunteers. Incentives may or may not encourage members to join or stay, I don't have any data either way. What I do have and what I have posted here simply shows that if money is the main reasoning behind assigning career personnel to volunteer houses to save money, incentives offered to volunteers will offer even greater savings...period. LOSAP programs also offer volunteers a small but tangible reward...yes reward, for their years of service. As I stated before, I stand confidently behind what I post. My thinking may or may not be flawed, but I am offering an alternative solution and information in support of that possible solution. So I will ask again: "Based on the FACT that the BFD and TORFD are or are going to be 100% volunteer stations, what solutions can you offer to ensure that the residents recieve the best possible fire protection under these conditions"? Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Since I made the statement about simple mathmatics, upon reflection I felt I should share those mathmatics with the audience here. So I'll start with the BFD. According to the "plan" 4 SRFD career personnel are to be stationed in Belltown. OK so 4 FFs at $50,000 per year = $200,000. No dispute there and this doesn't include benefits and overtime. Ok so that's $200,000 that would be spent in Belltown alone. Now let's look at a LOSAP program that pays $200 a month per year per member. $200 x 12 months = $2,400 per year per member. So $200,000 divided by $2400 = 83. In other words that same $200,000 that would pay 4 FFs salaries would fund LOSAP payments for 83 firefighters. Now let's look at a situation somewhat more grounded in reality. Belltown doesn't have 83 active members. I'll be generous and say there are 40. Ok so 40 members each getting $2,400 per year = $96,000. $200,000 minus $96,000 = $104,000. So there in black and white is a savings of $104,000 per year in Belltown alone. Numbers don't lie. And in all honesty not all current members would be eligible for their LOSAP payments immediately which would lead to further savings. Those live-ins college students I constantly mention would not be involved in the program unless they remain members after their schooling is complete. Their "payment" is a free roof over their heads while attending school. As for shifts again using a base of 40 members. 40 members divided into 4 person crews = 10 crews. 365 days divided by 10 crews = 36.5 shifts a year. Or 36.5 shifts divided by 12 months = 3.4 shifts per month, or basically 1 shift every 10 days. Difficult -yes, impossible-no. This all changes exponentially of course as you add additional stations and members. But 7 volunteer stations staffed by 4 firefighters each = 28 firefighters per shift. So here's a bit more math. 28 FFs at $50,000 per year = $1,400,000. Let's see how many firefighter LOSAP payments that is. $1,400,000 divided by $2400 per year per member would fund 583 LOSAP payments per year. That's alot of FFs. If money saving is the goal here than I see an awful lot of savings here by the numbers. Of course there is alot more here than simply dollars, and again it is the volunteers who would have to be willing adopt the shift system. And the City would have to be willing to fund the program, but again from their statements this is about money so... Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

AMEN PJ. I hope I have not offended you or anyone else, I just put forth what I know. In reality I am doubtful as to whether this type of system could work in Stamford. Again it would require a complete reorganization basically. But from my perspective this is a system that works so long as the volunteers are willing to make the "sacrifices". I also neglected to mention another aspect of this system that I probably should have addressed earlier, my apologies. That aspect being the incentives or "pay" if you like for the volunteers. These include a LOSAP program and tax breaks. These are areas in which the city, to gain the large saving having volunteers would offer, must acknowledge and provide. Let's face it nobody does anything for nothing anymore. That being said even paying into a LOSAP program and offering tax breaks to volunteers would still bring considerable savings compared to full time career salaries and benefits plus overtime. This is not wishful thinking, it's simple mathmatics. I too hope that cooler heads prevail and ALL avenues are explored objectively, including SRFD personnel in the VFD houses (although for me with any luck it won't come to that). Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs For those that don't know LOSAP = Length Of Service Awards Program...basically a small pension for volunteers paid out after 20 yrs of service or age 65 which ever comes LAST. Most of the ones I know of pay about $200 a month.

As am I. In response to your question though. You have Fairfield U., Bridgeport U. and SUNY Purchase to name 3 schools with resident student populations within a reasonable commuting distance of Stamford. I know of 2 volunteer FFs in Virginia who commuted over 1.5 hours to school to take advantage of the $0 board offered by a volunteer station near Alexandria. I also know for a fact that not all students participating in the live- in programs there are enrolled in any fire service related classes. They are there to take advantage of the financial savings offered in return for their time. There are of course other personnel involved as live-ins that don't attend school at all. And yes this system does in some respects become like a "job" for the volunteers involved but it is a commitment they have decided they are willing to make. Whether or not Stamford's volunteers are willing is another matter. We can go on and on, back and forth as to the validity or practicality of this idea for Stamford. Again it may very well NOT be the solution for whatever reasons. But it just MIGHT be a possible answer as well. That is for the involved parties to decide, I am simply a messenger. I don't have all the answers as I've stated before, but what facts I do have and how those facts have worked elsewhere is all I am posting here. The fact is that the BFD and now apparently the TORFD as well have chosen to operate as 100% volunteer departments, as is their right under the City charter. Instead of nit-picking what I propose maybe posting alternatives that address that FACT might be more productive. I have no problem defending my proposals by the way, as I believe them to be sound. I just think that the space here could be better utilized to offer possible solutions instead of debating the ideas proposed. I have attempted to address this issue and offer what I believe to be a viable alternative based on the facts as I understand them. So let me ask all of you: Based on the FACT that the BFD and TORFD are or are going to be 100% volunteer stations, what solutions can you offer to ensure that the residents recieve the best possible fire protection under these conditions? Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

PJ D. I must respectfully disagree. It has been my experience that volunteer stations can be staffed 24 /7 by other than simply off duty career firefighters as they are in other jurisdictions. One proven method is to have live-in members drawn from area colleges and universities. Not all students have classes at the same time and schedules for coverage can be worked out for daytime coverage. Also not all volunteers necessarily work days, those on the second or third shift COULD also serve during the day. The 1st shift working volunteers then take the night shifts when they are not working as well as weekends and holidays. Basically volunteers are assigned shifts just as career firefighters are. These shifts range anywhere from 2- 6, 8 to 10 hr shifts per month depending on the available pool of members. This can and does work as evident in Maryland and Virginia. I do know that this system works there because I've personnaly seen it in action. I also was fortunate enough while working in Iraq to be assigned with close to 40 personnel (both career and volunteer) from those States during my time there. This and similar issues were a topic of many converstaions as it really does affect any community in which there is a combination system. Of course this would require alot of work on the part of the volunteers in terms of recruitment and retention as well as a drastic rethinking of how they operate in Stamford. It would also require a complete re-assessment of alarm responses within the city overall. The fire service in Stamford could in effect become something like a mini version of those countywide departments. Believe it or not I'm no fool, I do fully realize that we are not living in 1980, and that what I am broadly proposing here would be EXTREMELY difficult at best. But if the BFD and any other VFD there wants to survive and meet their obligations they must move past what has been and look towards what is needed now. The City for it's part must also be willing to assess objectively and respect other possible solutions. You know, anything I post here is drawn only from my own experiences. It may very well be that this is NOT the answer, but it is one worth at least investigating. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Joe I couldn't agree more. The parties involved must move past their agendas if there is ever to be a mutually beneficial and productive resolution to this mess. I have steadfastly presented alternatives that through my experience have worked elsewhere, in an attempt to begin that process. That is not to say that I alone have the answers to Stamfords unique situation, but by exploring the ideas presented here by myself and others the process can begin. Unfortunately any negotiation or should I say re-negotiation in good faith may be impossible now between the parties involved due to all the bad blood. The courts will make their determination, but it will still be incumbent upon the departments there to honor the courts decision and put it into place in a workable fashion. To me it is in everyones, the City of Stamford administration, the SRFD, the BFD and most importantly the residents, for this to be resolved as quickly as possible. This means that all parties have to not only listen to the others proposals, but actually respect and accept them. Here's an idea, maybe an outside panel of fire service personnel, not bean counters, or politicians but actual firefighters and adminstators should convene to review the plans of both sides. This panel should include retired paid and inactive volunteer personnel from the surronding area with NO connection whatsoever to the parties involved, who can approach this objectively. They could review the plans and concerns forwarded by all involved and help determine the best course of action. Honestly, it is time for all involved to stop talking and start listening. Take care and as alwyas Stay Safe Cogs

We have apparently diverted from the main topic here. I am more than happy to discuss IAFF members being allowed to volunteer. The constitutionalty of being banned from doing so has now been challenged in some States. Point of fact, in EVERY State in which this IAFF regulation was challenged it was defeated in court. What people do outside of work is their business. That being said I will now return to the topic at hand. Just to review: 1st off this whole sitiuation stems from the City administration attempting to force the BFD to accept a consolidation plan which they did NOT agree to. 2nd the basis of the City's decision was supposedly financial. According to the Mayor by consolidating all paid personnel into the SRFD, money will be saved. Although how this will be accomplished is not exactly clear. 3rd Belltown and the other VFD's in Stamford are independent entities by city charter and as such are entitled to decide how and where within their district funding goes. It is the City's responsibility to provide adequate funding for each department based on taxes raised in those districts and a realistic determination of what is needed to effectively operate a fire department. 4th In reality there are other factors at work here ranging from "control" issues to the complete eradication of the volunteer system in Stamford. 5th All involved parties have to step back and objectively review the situation and ALL alternatives to create a viable and mutually acceptable solution. To PJ DeBart: I fully understand your point about IAFF members staffing Kentland apparatus, but I am sure that the volunteers there would still meet their obligations without those members. Fortunately for them it is not an issue. Again maybe the parties involved here should pull their collective heads out of the sand and look to other municipalities and regions for some answers to this situation. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Ok now we're really cookin' I'll address the points directed at me one at a time To PJ DeBart, I too have absolutely NO problem with career firefighters responding as VOLUNTEERS. As for conflicts of interest, well I don't understand it...for years SRFD and other career firefighters were active volunteers in the Big 5. There apparently was no conflict of interest then so why is there one now. Who is it that decided that union members could no longer volunteer..not the VFD's. As for the response, I do believe you are correct. So here again why is it necessary to put SRFD personnel in the BFD station? As stated here by a few people the citizens of Belltown are currently getting an adequate or better than adequate response as is..so leave it alone. To Flyboy, It is my understanding that taxes were raised to fund full time 24/7 365 coverage by SRFD personnel in the volunteer stations. Since those personnel are NOT currently assigned to the BFD there is a discrepancy as to who is recieving those funds. Also the fact remains that by cutting the BFDs budget people are at risk since they will be hard pressed to meet their responsibilities with less funding no matter what mutual aid agreements are in place. Another thing, the city must have also agreed to that mutual aid agreement as it was requested. It seems to me that they now want to change it. And in response to your statements about the citizens of Belltown receiving more than they pay for my reply is the same as for PJ above..if their needs are met now..why change it. Like my father used to say "if it ain't broke don't fix it". To Mstrang1 Again thanks for the clarification Here's another view as well. Arbitrarily forcing the BFD to make due with a drastically cut budget is like arbitrarily asking all 786 members to go to work for 1/2 pay and no benefits. How well would that sit with union members? And this view isn't apples and oranges either...this is about the budget according to the Mayor. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

There is another aspect of this I haven't touched on. That is the whole reasoning for this mess to begin with according to Mayor Malloy. Budgetary concerns. From what I've read this whole thing started because Malloy and Co. felt that to control overtime and have better accounting of the monies used by the volunteers, somehow putting SRFD personnel into those houses would solve the problem. Maybe so, but it seems to me that since those salaries are no longer needed to pay for personnel at the BFD that the city saves money. Also since the residents of that district have now been taxed for paid personnel, and they are NOT there, where's that money going. Why don't those tax dollars find their way into the BFDs budget. Like I have stated before my mother still lives in Belltown and she is now in effect paying for services she is NOT getting due too the drasic cut in the BFD's budget. She is entitled to have her tax dollars go towards her fire protection regardless of whether there's a paid or volunteer crew responding. I find it somewhat disconcerting that her safety is truly put at risk simply for someone's salary. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

To PJRielly, $72,700 raised on behalf of the MDA since 2002 is indeed a most noble accomplishment that without question shows the dedication and commitment your local has to the community. I have nothing but respect and admiration for such good works. If my post here offended you or suggested that Local 786 has NO interest in the community at large I do apologize. My intent was that by the simple fact of residency in Stamford volunteer members are more attuned to and affected by day to day life within the city and their neighborhoods. It is refreshing to see that you don't all "run home" after your shift ends. You are to be commended for that. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Well PJ, From my experience in talking, visiting and working with members of that department it is the volunteer members who man that station. These include IAFF members from surrounding departments as well as live in...as previouly stated... and live out members. And yes I say IAFF members, since they are ACTIVE VOLUNTEER members of the 100% volunteer Kentland FD. They are not prohibited from volunteering unlike many locals here since the IAFF lost a lawsuit in Maryland a few years back. It would be great to see IAFF members again riding the apparatus as volunteer members of the BFD or any other VFD there like in years past. I fought quite a few fires there alongside BFD and other volunteer firefighters employed by the SFD, FDNY and other career departments. Since you seem to know about the system there you must also be aware that generally speaking volunteer departments in Maryland are staffed 24/7..there is no POV or home response. Volunteers are assigned shifts, and required to attend the same academy as their career counterparts. While I'm at it I am NOT "hailing their praises," I am simply offering an example of a system in which a 100% volunteer fire department can and does effectively cover it's response area. They are part of a larger countywide combination department which includes other 100% volunteer stations as well. What it comes right down to is: it is in everyones best interest to look at ALL the alternatives and from there to determine which will best suit the needs of Stamford. It is by no means a forgone conclusion that a SRFD presence is that alternative..although it very well may be. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

mstrang1, For my part thank you for the clarification. I assumed that TOR and LRFD still labeled themselves volunteer departments. My mistake. Cogs

FD828, I agree that to those of us that are not directly impacted by the decisions which come out of this, this whole situation does seem a bit dramatic (some might say melodramatic). That being said for those involved it is a situation that will directly impact their lives, and as such emotions are high. It is easy to look from the outside objectively and see this as ridiculous, but their are many factors for those involved...some of which have been touched on in this thread. Also Stamford is unique to my knowledge in that their are 6 independent fire departments in the city. You have the SRFD and 5 volunteer departments. Each of the 5 volunteer departments is not only vested by city charter but are incorporated by the State of CT. In effect each is an independent entity with it's own district, rules, bylaws ect to run as they see fit. To the best of my knowledge the city administration cannot arbitrarily dictate terms of their operation, even if they are the major source of the department's funding. I spent 8 years as a member of the BFD back in the '80s and even then there were rumblings of a SFD or city takeover. This is nothing new, but the stakes have become higher. To me SRFD personnel in those volunteer houses will lead to problems if for no other reason than they want ultimately to eliminate the volunteer system and incresase their ranks. And even if this is not the case (which I don't believe for a second) it is definitely the perception. Just try to remember that there is more here than just how many personnel are on a rig, although that is of prime importance. If the BFD and other volunteer departments can meet the needs of their community (which I believe they can) there is NO reason for any outside personnel to be assigned. And you are absolutely correct in that changes are coming, what direction those changes take is apparently up to the courts as of now. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Just another thought, and let me say in advance no offense intended to the author of the quote below. Upon rereading this post it dawned on me that there are other factors at work here besides simply "control". Let's be honest here in that the ultimate goal of the current administration (and most likely Local 786) is the eradication of the volunteer system in Stamford. As stated here in the past, paid FFs in the volunteer houses were drawn from the ranks of the volunteers in those departments. This helped to ensure there was at least a modicum of loyalty to the department and more importantly to the neighborhood by the paid personnel. These are people who live in Stamford, who have a vested interest in what happens there. Most SRFD personnel are now NOT from Stamford and therefore generally are not affected (other than in their paycheck) after their shift ends. Their interest and loyalty lie with the communities in which they live, as it should. In this respect this is the one area in which looking back may be one of the best reasons to maintain the volunteers. Now I know Stamford has changed considerably in my lifetime, but the volunteer houses have remained a focal point to those neighborhoods and the members still live in Stamford. They still have a vested interest in what happens there, and a concern for their neighbors which is uncommon to non residents. This is not to say that SRFD personnel would not perform their duty to the utmost, of course they would. But after their 24 is up, there generally is no further involvement with the community. The volunteers on the other hand are consistently active within ther community on many levels because these are their friends and neighbors. Again this reasoning to maintain the VFDs is dependent on their ability to meet the operational challenges of today, while keeping these qualities of community involvement alive. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

There are volunteer departments that DO respond with 4-6 man crews on each apparatus 24/7. Again look to counties in Maryland and Virginia. While these are generally countywide combination departments, they DO have a large number of 100% volunteer stations. These stations are staffed by a variety of means including live in members, (usually college students). For the volunteer system in Stamford to have any hope of providing the necessary level of coverage, these are the departments they need to look to as templates. The volunteer system as it apparently is will need to be updated to reflect the times. Having a 100% volunteer system in Stamford (north of the SRFD district) is not wrong, bad or impossible so long as the departments there are willing to take the necessary steps to meet the realities and responsibilties of the challenge. New thinking and a determination to make whatever changes are necessary to provide the highest level of service can solve this. And will (if acted upon now) guarantee a long and productive future for Stamford's dedicated volunteer firefighters. The payoff for their efforts is that the citizens served will gain a firefighting force second to none. I just have to say here that a paycheck does not make a good firefighter. Paid 24/7 coverage is great but I'm sorry, the caliber of any personnel is NOT guaranteed simply because they get a paycheck. Just as it is NOT guaranteed simply by membership in a volunteer FD. In my time working in Iraq I have met the gambit of firefighters..some good, some great and some to whom the term firefighter is questionable at best. The point is we are ALL paid for our service, but we are NOT all good at this job. Just like anywhere else. If the volunteers of Stamford can rise to meet the challenges they face they deserve their existence and the support of the city and IAFF. If not they don't. It is really just that simple. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs

Joe I agree wholeheartedly hence this statement

It may very well be that having a 100% volunteer fire department may be in the residents best interest. As long as the Stamford volunteers can ensure 24 hour coverage. This can be accomplished in a number of ways. It would behoove them to look towards the Kentland Fire Dept in Maryland for a possible template. Kentland by the way is a suburb directly neighboring Washington D. C. They are one of the busiest departments in the country and consistently ranks as one of the busiest engine companies in the nation..paid or volunteer. This all accomplished by a 100% volunteer outfit. As for control..well to my understanding the city charter grants control to the volunteer departments in their districts. Be it practical or not that is the way the city is divided. I'll repeat a previous post by reminding all that my mother still lives in Belltown and I have absolute faith in their ability to protect and serve her and her neighbors there. Maybe the Local should look at ways to assist Belltown and all the volunteeer FDs there instead of worrying about getting their personnel into those houses. So long as the resident are well served by the volunteers let them have the slightly lower taxes as well. Take care and as always Stay Safe Cogs