TRex

If the Stamford Fire Protection Delivery Services are to act as one "co-hesive" entity, why then are the vol. chiefs complaining about not being invited to the table top hurricane drill? Are they not aware that it is one department now as the city voters have indicated they want it to be? It would seem that they are still stuck on the fact that they are no longer chiefs of separate departments. One department. They are more accurately now district chiefs of separate companies for separate districts. Wake up District Chiefs. I do not think the Director of Public Health and Safety screwed up and over sighted them, like the over sight to pay for new fire engines. Along those same lines with supposedly one Fire Protection Delivery System, perhaps training for LRFD and its infallible chief should include operations on hydrants. Perhaps they can instruct on HOW TO FRACTURE A PRIMARY WATER MAIN and ignore that it occurred or that they possibly were responsible for it.

Hello Brothers. I have seen this up here in the northeast New England. There is at least one smaller combination department that is amid 4 larger city departments. We are not county operated here in CT. However, our small state places a lot of diversification within reach of each community. That department is "on-boarding" costs associated with employing and developing new FF's if they within a prescribed amount of time leave for any reason. It seems to me that PB city should as you guys pointed out, just provide the incentive with contract enhancements to maintain those that they are losing. I think they are taking a gamble and figuring that it would be cheaper to hold back the enhancements and loose the hiring costs. It looks like to me they are loosing the bet. Good Luck. TRex.

X, I would agree that success should be based on sincerity and accuracy; in a perfect world. I believe in that principle. However, if we are to be truly realistic the bottom line is getting the grant, at least for them. If they were sincere and factual in their motivations, they would not have received the award. It irks me that another department probably in CT that sincerely and accurately need the funding may have been denied it. Their grant writer is successful. Politicians are successful. It is all about perceptions, not truth. However, isn't that the goal, success? I only wish at times that my goal were to be always successful. I am to a fault though, striving to be sincere and accurate. At least as fellow fire fighters and leaders among each other I consider myself successful by being sincere and accurate. There can be no other way in our line of work. Agreed?

C, I will agree. Your organization certainly does set a good example of how it should work as a 100 % volunteer operation.

I know a thing or two about how the grant process works. One of the courses for the B.S. degree in Emerg. Mang.,was all about FEMA and the grant process. All I can provide at this point other than the new non matching funding requirements is that a panel of "experts" sits and applies their criteria to the answers provided on the app. and in the explanation narrative. I seriously doubt that any claims are actually verified given the enormity of the number of requests submitted. One thing does remain certain though, there will be an accounting of the dollars at the end of the process and that at times is the main concern of the Fed. Therefore, only the bean counters will verify just the numbers, unless of course a complaint is filed. I being a federal tax payer would certainly hope that money is going to places where it actually as needed. I am having a difficult time understanding how the city collectively has been successful in getting what amounts to back to back SAFERs! I believe there is a question on the application that asks if there has been any other recent grants awarded for that jurisdiction. The last SAFER which was just over a year ago included 8 fire fighters to additionally staff the two engines that primarily respond and are stationed in that district. Does anyone believe they would have been successful if the expert panel knew this fact? Yes ladies, that is correct. Two fully staffed 24/7 career units, backed by a large support system within the city including the other volunteer companies. I can only imagine that they answered no, otherwise I highly doubt they would have been successful, or perhaps they would have. I wonder if their application indicated this fact any where within it. If not, it might not be a lie, but certainly a misrepresentation. I too am no lawyer, but a taxpayer concerned about money be thrown where it is not needed. Kudos to there grant writer. I am told he is a grant guru. Imagine Cogs, if all of this talent were being bridled and being directed for the greater good of ALL, and not just for ToR! Was any of the personnel offered to Belltown, or Long Ridge? P.S. Does anyone know of any other CT department that received any SAFER money. As best as I could tell, ToR was the only one.

.

Alpine Runner; They are not an asset when they operate under a different set of rules, SOGs, etc., and create confusion with who is Command, and who is not command and do not operate as a unit etc. This in fact creates a hazard, not an asset.

Good Point Monty

Thanks G. Boy do I feel dumb.

I am beginning to realize that continued discussion on this Mayors plan is becoming more and more feudal. As we come closer and closer to the full board meeting this month, reliable sources have indicated that the Mayor does not even have the support of the Repubs let alone the full board's support. Thank God there are some clear thinking people on that panel to help keep the lunacy at bay. Proponnents of the plan, that being the volunteer heads (empty as they may be), better start thinking of another way to maintain their fiefdoms. I think they would better serve themselves and their constituency by trying to smooth over the ripples they've made in any sort of combined effort. The administration may have an alternative and maybe screw with the budget, but facts are the facts, and the truth will prevail, and that is that the volunteer system in Stamford is almost defunct, and what remains should be bolstered and resign themselves to the fact that eventually, one fire dept., one chief, one set of rules, SOPs etc. will be the fact. Maybe Belltown will become the only volunteer organization that remains.

I can't remember such an instance. It is manpower that puts out fires. Even if you pull up with out a pump and you get there quick enough without having to wait for others from home, a water can and other extinguishers and even a quick S&R can still be utilized. I have seen it. If the fire is well involved you are going to loose it anyway.

Cogs, I am not in favor of the Brown plan as well but it makes more sense than the alternative, as well as answers the mandate that was given by the TASK FORCE controlled by the Mayor, that being a neutral cost alternative. It is not the SFRD's fault that they responded to the mandate as directed. The city probably thought it was not possible. And yes, it does not say for how long, but how long does the cost of the SVFD plan project out over. No numbers after 3, 4 and 5 years are given. And as far as the Mayors plan's effectiveness, time will tell and prove that farce.

As we approach almost a full year of this debate, coupled with budget time and contract negotiations information is surfacing that the full board is not in favor of this joke of a plan, and the support is not there. The plan may be failing, but not to worry, a new contrieved attack on the SFRD may come in the form of budget reallocation, essentially putting the whole mess right back to what it was before the paid consolidation of human resources took place. One step forward and two backwards. Perfect.

Cogsy Ol' boy. You too, can right a very intelligible diatribe as well. And as I have stated in the past, Kudos to Belltown in not obscuring the truth and not counting the SFRD members that continue to belong to the Belltown organization in one way or another as active available participants. As we also know they shouldn't be for a number of reasons, but none the less there is history right? I will however say that the comments of the former volunteer to whom you refer seems to have done more than just "sound off". He apparently has alot of background and background information, and is not afraid of stating fact. He does not seem apprehensive of any retaliation either from his employers. I think he provides credible insight, and possibly veiw point that may be of more interest to the real people that actually count, the Tax Paying citizens that are actually interested. I hope he has nothing to loose in acting like the true professional he is, unlike some other former volunteers that could also have contributed but refused for some reason, (they are on promotional lists as chance would have it as I understand). Did someone say "Tammany Hall" in a previous post?

Yeah, as slanted as the vollunteers are when they refuse to back up what they claim when they say we have plenty of TRAINED and AVAILABLE people. Why then don't they provide the records of all their claims of sufficient resuorces as requested after over 100 days. Oh, that's right, they are volunteers and should not have to keep such records right. After all they are doing this for nothing. Is there anyone available to supply these requested documents?