mfc2257

This isn't a response to any one post or thread... but rather a response to a theme that I see developing....

There are several threads that have come across the board in the past few months where individuals have taken the point of view on saftey and other similar topics that it is their choice to do what they want, and if something happens there is no one to blame but themselves... So what's the big deal?

It's a very big deal and here is why..... No matter what it is that you are doing, when you are a member of an organization, ultimatly that organization and it's leaders are responsible for your actions. Boy Scouts, Fire Department, VFW, or even a major corporation's leaders are held accountable for their subordinates actions. For example, the Duke University Lacrosse Coach was forced to resign because of the way that his players were conducting themselves off the field. There have been several instances of public officials who have been forced from their posts (Fire Chief's included) because their men (women too) were doing things that were considered inappropriate or unsafe.

We as emergency services providers, when we gather amongst ourselves for sports, vacation, beers at the pub, etc aren't just looked at as a bunch of blokes getting together for fun that did something inappropriate, the press looks for the first common element amongst us to title us. It's not a bar brawl started by a bunch of 30 year old Westchester residents, but rather a bar brawl that was started by a bunch of XYZ Firefighters.... And guess who law enforcement or the press is going to want to put on camera to expain what happened.... The Chief... Who is going to be the first person fired, stripped of command, or charged with a crime for lack of oversight... you guessed it, The Chief.

So my point is, that before we all go and decide to do something that on the surface looks like a personal choice to take a risk, lets take a step back and see what the real long term ramifications are when the crap hits the fan. You may be putting other people at risk who aren't even present for whatever stunt you are about to pull.

I was a 35 and pissed off that I wasn't closer to 40...

Andy –

When you have a moment, maybe you could share with everyone some of the experiences that you and your men had during this incident. Lessons learned based on not only the destruction and danger, but responding, utilizing the teams from your standard mutual aid departments, but also Yonkers, New Rochelle, Fairview, Greenville, and Greenburgh in addition to any other areas that in your mind stand out as items that should be shared with others.

If this incident happened again, is there anything in your mind that you would do differently, the same, build upon, etc.

I've never been one for flashy displays of rank, title, organization, etc... Badges, blue lights, whatever it is.

BUT

This is crazy. If the badge is illegal and the EMT didn't know it then confiscate it and be done. Holding an EMT for 72 hours is out of control. Law enforcement needs to take a step back in this situation and ask them selves what good to the community are they doing by holding someone (an emergency worker who could be out helping others) for 72 hours.

FINALLY

There are plenty of goobers in our line of work who love to put on a huge show with all sorts of gear. My advice is unless it is absolutely necessary as a part of the duty that you are performing while ON A CALL.... leave the "look at me I'm an emergency service provider" gear in the bag or at the station. It'll keep your tit out of the ringer.

By BRYAN E. BLEDSOE M.D.

In a small community hospital in rural Indiana, a 63-year-old man is suffering from heart problems. The treating physician determines that the patient’s condition is serious and makes arrangements to move the patient to a larger hospital with more resources and specialists. A medical helicopter is called to make thetransfer. No one questions the increased cost of using the helicopter — or the extra risk inherent in flying.

There is nothing remarkable about this scenario. Every day, patients in communities across the United States are transported by medical helicopter. But the 63-year-old patient on this flight didn’t arrive at the larger hospital; the helicopter transporting him crashed en route. With the others on board too seriously injured to help him, he strangled to death on a restraining strap. The injured crew and pilot were transported by another helicopter to a trauma center. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) ruled the cause of the accident pilot error; before the flight, the altimeter was known to be malfunctioning.

This disaster is one of 35 medical helicopter accidents that occurred in the United States in 2004 and 2005. Since January 2005, nine crashes resulted in 23 fatalities, a rash of medical helicopter mishaps not seen since the 1980s.

It is widely assumed that medical helicopters provide a significant advantage for patients and save lives. However, recent studies have begun to demonstrate that few patients actually benefit from medical helicopter transport, even during most emergencies. Helicopter transport is appropriate for patients who have conditions that require a time-sensitive intervention, such as life-saving surgery or cardiac angioplasty. These conditions are rare.

Medical helicopters were first used for civilian health care in the 1970s. Initial scientific studies in the 1970s and 1980s indicated that patients transported by helicopter had improved outcomes over those transported by ground. Therefore, many hospitals purchased helicopters and began offering helicopter transport. Today, there are nearly 800 medical helicopters in the United States. In metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona, alone there are more medical helicopters than can be found in all of Canada.

One of the reasons for this proliferation is a change in health care regulations. In the late 1990s, the air ambulance industry was successful in pushing federal regulators to increase Medicare payments for air transports. With an improved reimbursement scheme, an opportunity suddenly opened up for commercial operators to enter the arena.

Many helicopter transport companies opted for less expensive, pre-owned, single-engine aircraft — scores of which had already put in decades of work ferrying oil rig workers to platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. Many of the commercial operators also kept salaries fo pilots and medical personnel relatively low in order to field additional aircraft. Medical helicopters became commonplace.

Recently, researchers have again studied the helicopter transport of ill or injured patients and have drawn considerably different conclusions from those of the researchers working two decades earlier. There is increasing evidence that only a fraction of the patients transported by helicopter derive any significant benefit over patients transported on the ground, a change likely due to improved capabilities of land ambulances.

A 2002 Stanford University study evaluated 947 patients delivered consecutively to a California trauma center by medical helicopter and found that only 1.8 percent needed immediate surgery for life-threatening problems. The researchers concluded that only nine of the 947 patients possibly benefited from helicopter transport and that for five patients, helicopter transport was possibly harmful.

Last year, a group of university researchers, including myself, and state officials from Vermont and Wisconsin conducted a study of 37,350 trauma patients transported by helicopter from the accident scene to a hospital. We found that approximately two-thirds of the patients had injuries that, based on validated trauma criteria, are considered minor. (The abstract was published in the journal Prehospital Emergency Care, and the full article will soon be published in the Journal of Trauma.)

More research may be needed to demonstrate the scope of the problem, but questions about the utility of medical helicopters extend to the highest levels of the medical community. “There is simply not enough science [measuring the utility of medical helicopter transport],” says Richard H. Carmona, U.S. surgeon general and former medical director of the Arizona State Police medical helicopter program. “I am concerned that resources, such as medical helicopters, are used appropriately and cost-effectively for the benefit of the patient.” Carmona suggests that air ambulances be incorporated into the emergency medical system and be dispatched using a common communications system and be held to standards that decrease expenses.

Right now, the air ambulances have a lot of influence over when and where they fly. Overworked hospital physicians will gladly authorize helicopter transport — just to get a patient out of the hospital so another patient can fill the bed. Cost is often forgotten or not considered.

Likewise, at accident scenes, helicopters are easy to call for. Helicopter operations often provide volunteer fire departments and ambulance squads with free pizzas, coffee cups, key chains, and even medical equipment, and encourage the rescue workers to call for the helicopter before they arrive at the scene — long before they have a chance to even lay eyes on their patients. This adds to a system already out of control.

Many families are now being left with air ambulance bills ranging from $8,000 to, as in one case in Arizona, $40,000. Patients are being billed because Medicare administrators and private insurance carriers are more carefully scrutinizing compensation for helicopter transport, possibly because the number of flights paid for by Medicare alone was 58 percent higher in 2004 than the number paid for in 2001. Many of the for-profit helicopter operators hire collection agencies to aggressively pursue patients for payments of these unexpected bills.

Besides cost, safety is a consideration. The proliferation of medical helicopters has been accompanied by a marked increase in the number of accidents, prompting the NTSB to issue a safety advisory for medical helicopter operators last January. The bulletin recommended that ambulance operators improve qualifications of dispatchers, enhance preflight risk assessment, use night-vision imaging, and install terrain awareness and warning systems in all medical aircraft. The air medical industry is slowly beginning to initiate measures to enhance safety and clearly wants to dissociate from the idea that operators are the sole source and solution to the problem.

“Air medical providers are taking the NTSB recommendations seriously,” says Edward Eroe, president of the Association of Air Medical Services. “We want to partner with them to improve safety, as we all have to work together to make real improvement.”

But the increase in the number of medical helicopters has also resulted in a marked decrease in the number of qualified pilots, flight nurses, and paramedics available for hire. The rise in demand, accompanied by the retirement of Vietnamera pilots from the medical helicopter ranks, has caused many medical helicopter operators to drop the minimum number of flight hours they require of pilot applicants. Furthermore, because flights equal revenue, some pilots are being pushed to fly in questionable conditions.

The tremendous increase in the medical helicopter accident rate prompted Johns Hopkins School of Public Health researchers to evaluate emergency medical service helicopter crashes from 1983 through April 2005. They found that being a member of a medical flight crew is now among the most dangerous occupations in the United States — six times more dangerous than standard occupations and

twice as dangerous as mining and farming — similar in riskiness to the duties of combat pilots in wartime.

Here in the land of plenty, we have created a system that has taken a useful tool — the medical helicopter — and transformed it into the most dangerous and most expensive transport modality available.

be.

A few days ago...

Franklin County Engine/Tanker 18 (E/T18) Saint Thomas Township VFD

http://www.stthomasfire.com/

This happened not to far from where I went to college. There is a large group of hills & valleys that surround the area and lots of winding roads. This happened in the flats at the bottom of a hill I believe.

I've seen more robust ladder setups on engines in more rural areas of the country. Where I went to college there were 26 companies in the county. We had the only Ladder and the only Quint. We would run first due to about 2/3 of the county on the Truck assignment with bordering counties making up the other 1/3 of the truck response, but the company who's box it was needed more than just a 24ft extension and a 12 foot roof ladder to get started (especially if they were a single engine company). Soooo some companies had bigger ladder racks that fit two extension ladders, some carried ladders on support equipment, and one that I can remember had two ladder racks, but I'll never be able to show you a pic because they are poor as can be and run one engine out of a steel building in a corn field and definately don't have a web page.

I would say though, that two racks is not common. Better chances are, two 24footers on the same rack with the roof ladder elsewhere, OR the rescue or special unit has a ladder complement on it too.

i believe that baltimore city chiefs do not have an aid or chauffer

←

From the time I've spent down in the area I was under the impression that they did.

I can see why the Liberty is attractive to the city. They are cheep, have diesel motors that sip fuel compared to gas fired alternatives or full sized diesel command vehicles, and they are 4wd for poor weather.

I will say however that after radio, light, siren, and other equipment is installed, I can't imagine that there is a ton of room available in these rigs between the chief and their aid. I don't think that battalion chiefs would be very comfortable spending a 12-24hour tour in one of these.... especially if they are responsible for building inspections and other FD business where they are out for hours at a time and not just ready at the station to respond.

Image sould mean nothing.... function before form... BUT Something larger seems more appropriate for this particular role.

Just my opinion.

Not volly, BUT..... Hoboken (when I lived there about 7 years ago) had a 1970's Seagrave Tiller running with a Mack CF out of the Washington Street Station b/t 13th & 14th Streets.

The men and women of the Millwood Fire Company don't need a rude awakening. They need a good 2nd assistant chief to command their response and keep them safe.

They chose a good chief through a vote. The commissioners denied thier vote and offered no reason (because there isn't a legitimate one).

The rude awakening that needs to take place is with the commissioners. Their job is to provide fire protection to the district and to protect the interests of the taxpayers. One could argue that over the past 5 years they haven't done a good job at either.

Not confirming the company's vote for asst. chief is yet another example of the commissioners looking out for themselves (they want a chief that will roll over and play dead when they stomp their feet) and not looking out for the best interest of the taxpayers and the safety of the FF's.

Don't get me wrong, I would understand if there was a legit reason for the denial of the ff's choice for chief. BUT THERE ISN'T a good reason here.

They are cowards.

Can someone go into more detail about experiences with them. In the box and out of the box reasons to use them.

I was trained on them many moons ago. Seen them used once but I was driving the ambulance and communicating with other incomming units before a commanding officer arrived so my 2 EMT's and the medic were doing all the work and I don't even remember why the call was made to use them.

I served proudly as Lieutenant and eventually Captain under Walter Quast. I can honestly say that out of the several departments and states that I served as a firefighter or officer in, that Walter Quast was one of the two best chiefs that I ever served under HANDS DOWN. He is a no BS get it done type of chief. A man who led by example both by his actions while being a chief and by his historical actions as a superior fire fighter.

The men who the commissioners would prefer to be chief were scared of their own shadow as firefighters and horrible chiefs whom the majority of the firefighters had no confidence in.

On the other hand of all the elected officials that I had playing big brother, the Millwood Fire Commissioners were/are HANDS DOWN the worst. I cannot comment on Angelo Indusi or the other most recently elected member of the commissioners (a citizen who is new to the fire service altogether) because they took office after my departure for Florida, but the remainder of the commissioners have absolutely NO CLUE as to what is in the best interest of providing fire-rescue services to the tax payers and visitors of the fire district OR more importantly keeping firefighters safe. Being on the board of commissioners appears to be a way for them to feel important OR get their friends who were crappy fire chiefs re elected.

To be completely honest, if you took a vote of the Millwood Firefighters who are active, train, actually respond to calls, etc (I’m ruling out the folks who claim to be FF’s but really never show up to big jobs and stand at the back during drills talking about nothing important). I’ll bet that the vast majority would offer a publically affirmed vote to confirm Walter Quast AND simultaneously deliver a vote of “no confidance” in the commissioners.

By the way if the commissioners listen to the folks that they would prefer to hold office, E-245 (ex TS-2) will be replaced with a Tower Ladder and not a reasonable piece of apparatus like NWP’s or Mohegan’s 75ft Quints.

Jonsey you are right about the NIFR reports. I'm really referring to the internal FD documentation that goes along with NIFR reporting. If anything ever happened and the department needed to recall and justify itself, having a descriptive narrative on file to cross reference against a specific NIFR report is important.

To the extent that it is possible, I think NIFR narratives should be as descriptive and congruent with the individual department's internal record and narrative as possible so that in the event of a lawsuit, the brief narrative on the NIFR report is very similar to the detailed description that is on file at the FD.

Lawyers will have a field day with poorly documented events. There is always a reason to over document.

hey all.

A few quick responses to this post.  First to Jason762.  In our dept., as mentioned before, we have a run sheet that we fill out after each call with all pertinent info, like times, location, nature of run, units responding, mutual aid called or rendered, actions taken and even the VIN and product info.  Than when I have time I go down and enter the info into the NIFR's for the chiefs.  Our chiefs hate doing them so they let me do it.  I dont mind, im not an officer yet and like to help out.

For mfc2257.    The NIFRs have numerous pages  for you to enter all sorts of info about the call.  I think that the narrative section allows for anything that wasnt covered in the report that you feel would be pertinent to the incident.  Like when I sometimes enter a call as "Unknown Type Fire" as Call Type, I write what we found on arrival like "Controlled Burn attended by owner.  Did not call dispatch to inform.  Advised to call in the future and explained."  I took some training for the Firehouse Software 6 package that we use to enter NIFR's and they explained that the state really has no time to read all of the narratives and they only take the info from the report, reffering to the narrative only when they have a question about the call that wasnt covered in the report.  It is for the stats, so that the state can focus on problems with faulty equipment causing numerous fires, FD response times, ect ect.

For legal issues we use the info in both our run sheets and the NIFR's that we keep on file.  Hope that helps.

Jonesy

←

This is a long post and may sound crazy to some, but I’ve seen diligent reporting save the butts of a few of my colleagues over the years. There are classes that you can take in writing reports like this for EMS and Fire but I've never participated in one.

Run report narratives are extremely important and have been a point of contention of mine for years. Too many departments (not necessarily my own) don't take any time to make a proper report, and as mentioned before, hand it off to an officer who wasn't even on the call to fill out and submit.

I've seen too many of these reports that basically say "we responded to the parkway extricated a patient, assisted with EMS, and cleared".

Even though Millwood doesn't provide emergency medical services I would write all reports to look something like the following to cover potential legal issues later.

MFD & BMFD dispatched at 2312hrs as dual response to TSP NB just south of RT 100 for MVA reported 2 vehicles into the guard rail.

Units responding: 2251,2253,2051,2052,R-36,R-37,E248, E94, 36M1, 53B1, 54B1, 53B2, 34M1, NYSP, NCPD, Stiloski's Recovery Svcs.

AOS (arrive on scene): E248 AOS first Lt. 2256 establishing command and correcting location/description as TSP NB just south of Pines Bridge Road, 1 vehicle into guard rail 1 vehicle overturned in median with double ejection. 2256 requests 3rd BLS to the scene and NYSP to shut down TSP in both directions. All MFD apparatus respond via PinesBridge Road BMFD respond via Rt100 to TSP NB via southbound lane. 2251 AOS shortly after assuming TSP command with 2051 assuming Operations Command. TSP shut down shortly after via NYSP SB @ RT134 & NCPD NB @ RT100.

Operations: Vehicle 1 (Silver Toyota 4Runner) overturned in median with double ejection. 2 female pt aprox 30yrs old in the median. Pt. 1 identified herself as Jane located north of vehicle in median. Pt CAO (conscious, alert, oriented) complaining of severe pelvic pain with obvious break to right tib-fib with bone protruding. 2253 and E248 crew assigned to Pt 1 stabilization awaiting EMS. E248/2253 apply no-neck collar and stabilize tib-fib with rolled towels and triangle bandages to limit movement. Care transferred to 53B1 & 36M1 with departure for WCMC after approximately 13 minutes. Pt. 2 found unconscious in median face down south of vehicle. Identified by Pt. 1 as Alison. 2052 & R-36 assigned to Patient 2 with second member of 36M1 advising load and go to WCMC via 54B1. 2052 & R-36 assist 54B1 with collar, and boarding of Patient 2 while 36M1 began ALS protocol. 36M1 Reporting Patient 2 as having distressed vital signs and apparent additional trauma to abdomen with possible internal bleeding. 54B1 w/ 36M1#2 departed for WCMC after approximately 6 minutes. Vehicle 2 (Red Mazda RX-7) found in NB #1 lane nose against bridge abutment with single occupant (Pt. 3) identified as John aprox 21years old out of vehicle CAO reporting no injuries other than air bag burns to wrists. No other obvious trauma noted by R37/E94 crew assigned to Vehicle 2. Pt. 3 refused medical attention and requests by crew to board and collar as precaution. R37/E94 turned care of Pt. 3 over to 53B2 & 34M1 after aprox 7 minutes. Pt 3 RMA at scene with 34M1 securing signature from Patient 3. Pt. 3 tx by NCPD to unknown location at Pt. req. R36, E248, 2251, 2051 remained OS to provide lighting for NYSP investigation until aprox 0209hrs (+1 day from dispatch). Stiloski’s removed vehicles following investigation.

Follow up: All MFC apparatus responded to and from alarm without incident and to the extent known so did all other agency’s apparatus. No noted injuries or hazardous exposures of MFC or other personnel reported over duration of incident. MFC FF Jones reported a tear to T/O pants while securing battery of Vehicle 1. Pants placed O/O/S to AAA for repair and spare set issued. BMFD reported missing backboard & trauma bag following alarm. MFC apparatus checked and items found on R36. To be returned to BMFD by Lt2256.

End of narrative. Submitted by John Q. Fireguy, Chief Millwood FD, Car 2251

COMMANDCHIEF and I were both dealing with Sutphen East around the same time. It's like we'd talk and they would hear Greek coming from out mouths.

My old college department of Gettysburg, PA just south of where this Sutphen/Mack was put in service has a 2004 Sutphen Engine/Rescue as Rescue 1 and just took delivery of a brand new Sutphen Engine as Engine 1-1. They heard that Sutphen East sucked (which they do)... And had the trucks built in the western facility. They've been THRILLED. Every other Sutphen in the county is rock solid too. They were all built out west.

Finally.... The entire Orlando FD fleet for thirty years has been Sutphens. But guess what they're all made out west. Engines, Towers, Heavy Rescue, Hazmat. The headquarters station is directly outside of my office window 16 stories below. They turn a Tower, two Engines, Heavy Rescue, Hazmat, Dive Team, and Ambulance out of that station all day long and they love their Sutphens. The entire fleet consists of over 25 Sutphens including spares and they continue to buy them....

If the door is locked from a top mount mag place a halligan bar low in the door for a grip point for pressure then with a flat head axe hit the metal door top (at magnet) with a good shot that will break the contact and you can pull the door open. I have done this many times and it works great. DO NOT HIT THE DOOR IF IT ALL GLASS  opppppppssssss.

←

I believe that the reason why this works, isn't because you've actually created enough force to beat the door off it's magnetic lock, but rather because magnets are subject to losing their polarity when subjected to physical shock. Often times if you drop a magnet from the 'fridge onto the floor enough times, it won't work.

Thus, by striking the top of the door where the electromagnet is holding the door closed, you are temporaraly disrupting the polarity that allows the magnet to secure the door thus the door is released. Without using the halligan to pre-load the door to the direction you need it to go, the magnet will recover it's polarity and you won't be able to open it.

I don't know if I'm correct about this so someone please correct me if I'm not.

I remember the promo picture of this truck and it was a daek red with a white top originally.  Unfortunately I cannot find the picture I had with Mr. Sutpehn sitting on the bumper.  MFC thanks for the photo!

Izzy

←

The rig was probably purchased cheap from Sutphen in "as is" condition white over red. It was most likely painted green by a former chief of the Heidlersburg FD in PA who has an extensive heavy truck shop where he has the east coast body repair contract for Roadway Trucking as well as National Trucking. He also runs a small fire apparatus manufacturing company out of the same shop. He does a ton of custom work as well as retro fits rigs with enclosed cabs, larger rescue style bodies put on older pumpers, etc. He also restors antiques.... He did Millwoods Brockway for me while I was down there in the mid 1990's at school (not cheap though) and he's in the middle of doing my B-model now although he's had it for two years.

IzzyEng4 had brought up in a prior topic thread that Sutphen had built a pumper with a Mack Tranny and Motor under what was supposed to be a new manufacturing agreement. The agreement went no where and the result was one piece of apparatus being built to my knowledge. Some form of legal battle over the rig and it's labeling ensued.

If the picture didn't attach to this post, go to this link. You can't miss it.

http://www.centralpafire.com/forum/showthr...hp?t=98&page=69

While I was in college, my department was the first due truck and rescue into the companys box who bought this truck from Sutphen. Pictures have been hard to come by, but here it is. I'm not sure if the Bulldog and the Mack emblem are still on the front of the rig.

The department is in Pennsylvania... Adams County Company 25... They also run a Mack CF600 Engine (Formerly Engine 25, now Engine 25-1 with the addition of the Sutphen-Mack which is Engine 25-2) they've also got a Mack R Model Tanker an a Ford F-series light rescue (called a Special Unit as a county label)

Well, he pays a lot more than we do. Jet Fuel is actually Kerosene based and just checking the prices now "Jet A" runs between $4.39 and $6.44 a gallon at HPN.

←

Speaking of costs.....

When I saw the Starfighters a few months back I was with a buddy and his dad. The father used to fly F104 Starfighters for the Italian Air Force before moving to Croton over 30 years ago......he got a chance to talk with the team. They said, if everything goes "well" that each time they go up for a 15 or so minute hop at an airshow, it costs about $7,000. "Well" being the operative word. Both the Mig and the F104 were designed in the '50's and like any classic vehicle they demand a serious premium to keep them in usable shape.

Millwood had E245. A 1957 (maybe a 1958 I can't recall this moment) tandem axle B model Mack. It was in service until Tanker 15 was placed on the line in 1995. It had a 5 man enclosed cab and was white over red.

This doesn't seem that strange to me at all. I recently saw two retired Lockheed F104 Starfighters that are now privately owned flying at an airshow in Central Florida.

www.starfighters.net

"The Starfighters Team operates two F-104 Starfighters and has a third awaiting restoration in the hangar. The two operational aircraft were originally in service with the Royal Canadian Air Force. They both later served with the Royal Norwegian Air Force before being imported into the US in private hands"

Before my departure south of the Mason Dixon....

Rescue 36 had a 30lb "D"

Engine 247 had a CO2 cartridge propelled "D" that was quite old but was certified by AAA.

E248 had a 30lb "D" that was delivered with it in 2004 but I can't recall if it was mounted or not.

Productive results usually do not start with tactics that begin with blowing air horns in a residential neighborhood at any time of day. We need the public on our side, not pissed off because of a job-action.

I didn't mean it to be taken quite that seriouslly....

IN ALL SERIOUSNESS....

I keep hearing a theme that revolves around a difficulty in getting the attention of the citizens that FDMV protects. Approaching each citizen individually would be impossible, but try to get sit down meetings with people who have the attention of large groups of people to help spread the word. Politicians do this all the time to Unions... They use Union brass to try and get the votes of union members. Now use political tactics to get right back at them.

It may take some off the clock work by FF's and the Local Union, but I have a feeling that if you could sit with the leaders of the following organizations that you could convince them of the importance of your cause and thus get them to lobby for you.

NOTE: Throwing the mayor under the bus in an inflammatory way won't get you far. Many of these folks may have voted for him. Simply detail the issue and emphasize the fact that ONLY the mayor has control of fixing it.

Every local faith organization... Church, Mosque, Synagogue, etc.

All local social organizations.... Yonkers MC (actually located in MV) the Knights of Columbus, Rotory, Elks, VFW, Boy Scouts, PTA, School Board, etc.

Local tradesmens association or union... Pipe Fitters, Electricians, Teachers

The boards or executives of MV's largest companies... Businesses, Hospitals, Private Schools, Law Firms.

The Union could come up with a clear and succinct message. Then, generate a list of all the organizations and more listed above. Assign each union member a few organizations off the list and make it their responsibility to get in touch with these folks by phone, letter, etc. to set a short in person meeting to discuss the problems. Invite their leaders down to the fire station and show them exactly how many men are at work, what equipment is out of service and how that effects safety. Then ask them to go to their members/constituants and spread the word.