Bnechis

The standard does not say, but since it only totals call volume, if the FD is doing the EMS work I'd say yes

ISO requires 1 "alarm dispatch circut" if your dept. recieves <600 calls/year and 2 if >600. The horn, pagers, house alarm or PA (for staffed FH), plectrons, tec. each count as 1. If you are using pagers and do 600+ alarms you need a 2nd way to alert members. This is based on NFPA 1221.

Have you taken the career fire acadamy? I was trained as a vol, retrained as a career and have been an instructor for a long time and The training is not the same for a lot of reasons. Which would desurve its own thread. There is a lot more too it than a paycheck or not. It should not be that way but it has been for atleast 30 years and with major changes a few years back it improved but still has miles to go.

Good Luck. If its in the City Charter you will need to go thru a Charter Review, which includes a public referendum. Do you have the public support to even get charter review? Does the public even care? Would the public percieve this as a major tax increase to fund the FD? Dont hold your breath. Nothing has changed in decades. Lets go back 4 or 5 mayors. In the early 1980's I made a complaint that my Amb. (MV Amb #1) got stuck in a snow drift with a 2 y/o child in respitory arrest and needed a plow ASAP to get us out. None was available. But one was sitting on standby in front of the Mayors house 24/7 in case he needed to be rushed to the command post in an emergency. How about the fact that every mayor going back 30 yrs gets a 3 man security team? Yes there is something wrong with it, but the public demands service and if they don't believe they will have a fire, but every week they throw out garbage, which one becomes the priority? Maybe Pace should, but who will pay for it? The state gave the chiefs a grant to pay for this study, because the state believes that this is the way to solve the issue. The Feds are involved because Fed $$$ (HUD Section 8) appears to be missing. They could care less about waste and how any other money is used. Please define last resort? Everyone has been complaining about MVFD manning (both the members of the dept and MA depts) for over 30 years that I'm aware of. Since every career and combo dept (both in the study and not) are making the same complaint for as long as I can remember, it may not be gospel, but it is reality. Which depts in Westchester have increased manning in the last 20 years? How many fire deaths does MV have annually? How many shootings and homicides? The public does not see fire as a threat, but they are scared to death of crime. That budget difference is the norm nationally. Is it right? Dont know, but it is reality. How many FFsin MV or anywhere are n the Federal Dime? Berfore SAFER there where none. At the same time there where over 110 fully paid cops in Westchester alone (mostly housing cops and the COPS program). Now with SAFER, there are 12 partially (20%) Federally funded positions in NYS. When the Northeast Chiefs, Westchester career chiefs and the Task Force asked for 100 Federaly funded task forces, which would have provided 110 additional paid ff's in Westchester (with 12 going to MV). Where was the union? The IAFF was against this proposal and killed it. If the local union wont fight for 12 additional positions at no cost to local tax payers what makes you think they will fight and win for solving your manning without outside help.

Is it really helping to retain the volunteers?

Aviation Fuel $$$$$

20 years ago the school tax was 50% of the tax, now its over 60%. So while the City has been holding the line, the school has been running wide open. And lets no forget to add the county tax.

Some career depts (FDNY & YFD) have maximum age for hiring (29 ?). Pension system says 62 is manditory retirement (with some exceptions for those already on the job). So if you are over 42 you will not recieve a full pension.

The dividing line for 1710 / 1720 is majority. If the majority of the dept is career then its 1710. The real argument is: If a combo dept has 12 career and 25 vol it would be under 1720, but what if that same dept responds with 3 career on duty but the average turnout is 2.5 vol, then I believe its 1710, but I think that would be a fight in court to sort that out and NFPA has not clarified this issue. In most of the combo depts in the study, they have more career than vol or the average career response is higher.

The 16 is in 8 minutes, additionally you need to pet the 1st engine on scene in 4 min. Because of eastchesters size you need all 6 or 7 companies staffed with 4 (24) plus 2102 (2) = 26 x 5.25 (4 shifts plus contractual time) = 137 plus staff, so thats an additional 62 plus staff for 6 companies & command or 83 for 7 and command. These #s are off the top of my head, the actual numbers are detailed in the study, but thats the basis of how we came to them. A simple way to look at it, If you have 75 men and are riding 2 per rig you need to double it to ride 4.

While FD's do not produce revenue, they can save property owners way more than they cost. In NR for example the average property owner pay about $325/yr for FD. If we had no FD (and he gets his $325 back) his property insurance goes up by $1,200/yr so the savings are about $875 x every building in town. The Fire service is not good at "sell" its economic value. What is the true cost of fire protection? Its not just the FD Budget.

If you have 8 onduty now and need 16 on the 1st alarm thats 8 addition per shift x 4 shifts = 32 + approx 22% to cover contractual time off. This is based on a standard manning calculation of 5.25 ff's per seat to maintain 24/7 coverage with a 38-40 workweek.

One of the concerns is that Hudson merge was forced on them by the elected leadership with little warning or planning...i.e. next monday thou shall be one dept. When talking with them they agree that the road the took was extra hard because of that (including the unions going to court to stop the process). But they seam to all agree now that it was the best thing that could have happened. We are trying to learn from there experience as to how to do this "right".

What are the numbers that are needed? To meet the most basic goal of NFPA 1710, including placing 16 on every 1st alarm (and we are not saying that that is enough personnel) this is what is needed if the depts do not work together: Eastchester - 75 Fairview - 40 Greenville - 45 Hartsdale - 45 Larchmont - 65 Mt Vernon - 50 New Rochelle - 30 Pelham - 65 Pelham Manor - 65 Scarsdale - 40 Thats 500 additional ff's & officers at a cost of $75 million. Who here thinks this is going to happen? With consolidation we can meet the 1710 goals within the current or slightly increased manning.

The only public info at this time was a press release that was made by Pace Univ. at the begining of the process. The Draft is due out in the next 30 days. By draft, we mean that a version will go to the chiefs (that contracted this to be developed) to ensure acuracy of any statements about existing depts. Then it will be finalized. The 5th district of the NYSPFF (union) has been advised in the past as to the progress, but has only been recently asked to sit down to start to activly participat in the process. It has been understood thru the process that the study can not proceed without the unions active involvement. The depts. that are being study include: Eastchester, Fairview, Greenville, Hartsdale, Larchmont, Mt Vernon, New Rochelle, Pelham, Pelham Manor and Scarsdale. The process was open to others, who at this time politly declined (but all said they would be willing to assist in the process). This does not mean that in the final format all of these depts will merge, just that they were willing to look at how merging would help the fire protection needs of their district. Currently there are 3 committees: 1) Operations, which has been mostly dealing with mapping. Determining the number of rigs, stations and manpower needed to meet the standards. 2) Finance (what is currently spent and what the total cost of #1's recomendations are). 3) Legal (what will it take to make this occur) Additional committees are anticipated once the draft is out. These include labor, volunteers (since some of the depts still have them) and others.

While a few years back I believe that is correct, currently many of the chiefs involved in the study are in the bottom of the 8th inning career wise (with a few in the 10th in double overtime) The chiefs are the ones who are paying for the study and they are the ones who have been saying this is the right thing to do. The next question is will the members back this up. I strongly believe it will be in the best interest of the members; safer with proper manning, more officers, better chance for promotion, better job security and better contracts. The county has very little to do with this issue since none of the depts work for the county and when (not if, because this is going to happen, maybe not in our lifetime, but it is coming) it occurs it will not be a county dept.

Already figured it out and it is achivable. All of the chief's have seen it and agree.

NYC spends less per capita to have 5-6 man rigs than most depts spend on 3 or 4. Its the overall size of the tax base that counts. They actually spend less per capita than most of the combo depts spend to put 1 or 2 on the rig.

Thank you I apreciate that. Regionalization or consolidation will hopefully solve many of these issues. Thank you for the FD comment as well. While I am not happy that almost every dept is understaffed and at times feel we are taken advantage of, I also understand that NRFD is not large enough to be self sufficient. While we can put the proper amount of equipment and personnel on most fires almost every working fire we have requires MA to cover our stations. This is after we do a call back. Last year MVFD covered our city a cpl of times each month. So the citizens of NR did get something in return. Sorry you feel this way. The real issue is does regionalization solve the problem? I believe it does and all of the chiefs have stated it does. It will mean every rig will have 3ff's and an officer. It means meeting NFPA 1710. It means having the 1st due engine within 4minutes and 22 men in 8. Enough garbagemen...about the same manning as the FD. Teachers..they have none (only Yonkers has them, the rest of us have seperate tax districts that have no limits to spend on that). My point was not that PFD has enough FF's or that they can get by with what they have because of the volunteers, my point was that if no MA of anykind and no vol. were in PFD, the village taxbase could not support a full career FD. Last year I calculated that just replacing PFD's ladder was equal to 4.5% property tax increase for the village. Based on my previous manning numbers to add 10 ff's per shift would cost them about $6 million or a property tax increase of 45%. There is no way any taxpayer would support this. Thats because they want someone to come and help them when they need it. A few years back one of the VAC's in the northern part of the county said they would not do MA, because they could not aford to send the amb out of town. So all the neighbors said fine dont, but also dont ever call for help, you have to give to get. Most people have no idea what they are paying for or recieving. People believe if they see a fire house with a bunch of trucks they are protected, but trucks dont put out fire. We are trying to address this issue. One of the big problems is none of the districts have the ability to properly fund all sorts of programs. I worked EMS in Yonkers in the early 1980's and I remember how bad the YFD's funding was. It would be a whole lot easier if the rest of us got even a portion of the state revinue sharing that we are suppose to recieve. We tend to cover our own fires but we have called most of the combo depts to help. What options do we have? And no we do not allow "anyone". PFD has been training with us and only sends us career ff's who do. That was not what I was refering to. "Trained, checked and certified" well 2out of 3 isnt bad, but there are issues here. The city of Yonkers has adequate resources because it recieves more state $$$ per capita than all the rest of us. If NR recieved the same per capita we would get an additional $19 million. If only 20% of that came to the FD we would have proper manning. YFD has positioned it self thru a lot of hard work to make itself a 1st rate dept., but without the $$$ coming in you would be in a lot worst shape. Its a nice position to be in. but it was not always that way.

What do you consider "proper staffing"? Lets consider ISO, PFD would need an additional 10 ff's per shift or another 50 FF's if we consider NFPA 1710 thats 13 more per shift or 65 additional personnel. If no dept ever responds to Pelham again, they will never be able to increase staffing to the level need (the taxbase is ot there), infact the numbers needed is more than the total personnel for the village (PD, FD, DPW, etc.) 1) The state should not allow any ff's to participate (MA or in there ow dist.) if they are not adequately trained, checked & qualified. Should career depts do MA with other career depts that dont meet these standards? 2) What say does a union official have to "not allow their members to work" if the chief sends them?

A good set of Irons never fail. We have had Rabbit tools fail (blown gaskets) and they don't work on outward swinging doors. They also work better if the rabbit is very weak or missing and on pad locks. And at $400 per set its a better bet.

2in/2out is not an NFPA standard it is OSHA 29CFR 1910.134 NFPA's attempt at staffing has been NFPA 1710 & 1720 1720 is staffing in VFD's and combo that are mostly VFD and its a pretty poor standard. The Volly Orgs fought it because they felt you cant mandate staffing in VFD's so basically it says dont start interior attack until you have enough people on-scene. If that takes 3 hours then it sucks to be the victim. 1710 is generally well put together. NFPA 1710 is based on the fire propagation curve (which shows how fast fire will spread from the room or origin to the remainder of the structure) and on the American Heart Association (AHA) standards on preventing death / disability in patients who have stopped breathing. The most critical components of NFPA 1710 are: 1) All engine and ladder companies shall be staffed with a minimum of three (3) firefighters and one (1) Officer. 2) An engine shall arrive within a 4 minute response time 90% of the time to fires and medical emergencies. 3) A 1st Alarm Response to a structural fire with a minimum of 16 firefighters and officers within 8 minutes response time 90% of the time. For this standard, a structure is defined as a 2,000 square foot, two story single family occupancy without a basement and with no exposures (detached home). Larger structures, high life hazards (Hospitals, Schools, Nursing Homes, Multiple Dwellings) and high hazard locations (Factories, Chemical Storage, Special Properties) require additional personnel in the 1st Alarm Response. 4) Chief officers shall have an aid (responsable for scene accountability) The biggest problem with 1710 is the International City/County Managers Association (ICMA) fought against it and refuse to impliment it in many places saying "who is NFPA to tell them what they need for staffing". The ironic thing is the satffing levels recommended in the ICMA's fire administration handook are higher than 1710's.

Have you ever sat on an NFPA committee or even been to a meeting (they are open)? Because you assume that its completely manufacture driven (It often is, but not always). Back in the early 1980's NFPA was working on establishing a rope standard (1983), 1/2 the committee was rope manufacturers. FDNY insisted that the standard require you use the rope once then get rid of it. All the manufacturers thought that was insane and voted against it. THe Fire Dept reps on the committee out voted them. NFPA tackled that one a decade ago...Its called 1500 and when it 1st came out many ff's made all the same complaints that it would kill the fire service and it was not really important, the cost will put us out of biz, etc. THe big problem is too many depts still do not follow it.

Nothings wrong withthe pack strapped in, the next version of NFPA still allows it. The reason many depts are opting to remove them is so that there is more room in the cab, particularly depts that run 70 - 85% EMS runs. I have also heard 2 other issues, 1 is a number of depts claiming multiple minor injuries in exiting the cab with SCBA on and A lot of ff's claiming that they dont wear there seat belts because they are packing up or the straps get caught up in the seat belt.

THats in the NFPA standard, the problem is to many tankers are home grown conversions that are not safe to be on the road Great Idea, but how would that work considering the number of FF's who don't buckle all the SCBA straps like they were tought in school? Other than the unrestrained tech all of those issues are covered in NYS under DOH regulations. The bigger issue is convincing EMT's & Medics to buckle up and to slow down.