redddogg317

Federal Grant to boost Stamford firefighter staffing article from the Stamford Advocate http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Federal-grant-to-boost-Stamford-firefighter-3707457.php

Update of The Daily Stamford article Stamford Fire Union Rips Volunteer Plan by Stamford Professional Fire Fighters Association Today . The career fire fighters in Stamford still feel the Mayor's volunteer plan is not the best for Stamford. The following is an opinion article written by the Stamford Professional Fire Fighters Association. STAMFORD, Conn. — In a recent story (Stamford Volunteers Refute Fire Union’s Claim 8-19-11), officials of the Turn of River Fire department — one of three departments that make up a private company that Mayor Pavia wants to give a no-bid, sole-source contract ($8.6 million annually) to provide fire service for North Stamford — actually make the best case against the plan for a second publicly-funded, privately-run department. Matthew Maounis, an assistant chief at Turn of River, admitted that his department only responds to 85 percent of its calls. Seth Berger, president of Turn of River, said, “I’m not saying we don’t miss calls”. While .850 would be a spectacular batting average for a Major League Baseball player, anything less than 1.000 in public safety is a failure -- people can die as a result. This isn’t a game. According to Turn of River’s own website, the department responded to 2,126 emergency runs in 2006, the most recent data posted. That means that 318 emergencies were not responded to. What if you were one of the 15 percent whose house was on fire, whose loved one was suffering a heart attack, who was trapped in a car with your children after a collision or who smelled gas in your home — and your local fire department didn’t respond? Would the 85 percent response rate be any solace?

Sorry about that...thanks for letting me know. Try these links below: http://www.thedailystamford.com/news/stamford-fire-union-attacks-volunteer-plan-again http://www.thedailystamford.com/news/stamford-volunteers-refute-fire-unions-claims http://boardofreps.org/committees/publicsafety/2011/items/ps28035.pdf Happy reading!!! DJ

Just a couple of updates for your end of the summer reading....enjoy The last link is the actual "contract" submitted to the board of reps by the newly formed "Stamford Volunteer Fire Department"....take note that only 3 out of the 5 volunteer depts in the city signed onto this "joint venture" as it's called...Happy Reading http://www.thedailystamford.com/news...eer-plan-again http://www.thedailystamford.com/news...-unions-claims http://boardofreps.org/committees/pu...ms/ps28035.pdf

After first denying the request in writing stating that since they were an all volunteer department that the didn't have time to honor the request, Belltown has started to slowly comply...I guess after hearing from the FOI commissioner as well. Long Ridge is slowly coming around as well. TRFD is using thier lawyer to block it of course, and Springdale....well let's just say they got Shawn Fahan...nuff said But of course the one who should comply right away...the city...not yet

To answer the question of the FOI inquiry the answer is yes all FOI request were sent out about a year ago, but as you can guess all parties involved have been giving the run around including the city administration. Some have started to comply lately but in trickles and drabs...not the city, they seem to be ignoring the request and yes a complaint has been filed with the FOI commission against those that have failed to comply.

Mayor bristles at alternative fire service plan Board of Reps to consider plan that would expand Stamford Fire & Rescue Jeff Morganteen, Staff Writer STAMFORD -- City lawmakers want to discuss an alternative plan to the mayor's proposed merger of four volunteer fire departments this Thursday, weeks after city officials said the other plan -- an expansion of the city fire department into volunteer fire districts -- was too costly for consideration. The decision to discuss the alternative plan, which was endorsed by top officials at the Stamford Fire & Rescue Department, drew heated comments from Mayor Michael Pavia Thursday directed at Peter Brown, the assistant fire chief who helped draft the plan and was invited to discuss the proposed city fire department expansion next week at the Public Health and Safety Committee of the Board of Representatives. Pavia said Brown should be reminded he works for the city, and that he is not sanctioned to oppose the mayor's plans for the fire service. "If this was a corporation he would be fired," Pavia said of Brown. "If this was a military organization he would be court-marshaled. Let's put this in perspective."Read more: http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/default/article/Mayor-bristles-at-alternative-fire-service-plan-1350307.php#ixzz1KXTlzSSq

Read more: http://www.stamforda...p#ixzz1ABd1SVnC

Izzy, You are 100% correct. That is the point I was trying to make in my last statement. Subject closed for now and on to more important matters....supporting our brothers and sisters from Bridgeport

Brothers thank you for having my back. I was simply acknowledging the request of the one individual to not let his name out until the article in the Stamford Advocate came out...for which it did today. It's not available online yet but now I will state that Mr. Dudley Williams is not at all in aggreement with the mayors plan and he was a member of the task force..the other if well lets just say he just turned down a job managing a team in Florida. That being said Pete I need to address you on your comments towards me and me lying by omission. You state in many of your rants about you know this because, or I was told this because, without stating who you information came from, I for one have NEVER seen you at any of the " merger" meetings between the city, the union, and the volunteer chiefs because I WAS THERE FOR ALL OF THEM, so I guess you get your information second or maybe even third hand. My point was proven like I stated it would be once the article came out. Again can you say the same...I doubt it. Today there are more important things to worry about since we lost to brothers in Bridgeport yesterday so this big bad union is making sure that our brothers in Bridgeport get all the support they need and deserve.

Yes very convenient. Isn't most of what you spout out on these boards nothing but hear say and "propaganda" also?? Your claim to have inside information on a number of subjects is falling on deaf ears. Each and every issue on stamford fire truths can be backed up by facts and documentation. Can you say the same?? No, you are going on the hear say of the mayor who to the dismay of many of the board of reps has not provided any documentaion to back up his claims. Why, what is he hiding?? Show the true figures of this fire tax fee..stop fooling the public and yourself with that tax word, any taxes you pay to a form of goverment is deductible...this is fee is not ,just ask Trumbull. Oh and Mr Laribina used Trumbull as an example of a town with a fire tax that works. Really, I guess he didn't know that Trumbull is ALL VOLUNTEER fire department with 3 paid employeess and the budget is still over 1.5 million. What do you think 61 employees will cost?? Plus lowering the mill rate to compensate the fire fee amount only lowers the amount of actual deductible dollars the taxpayer is able to use, taxpayers loose...smoke and mirrors

If the upcoming article in the Stamford Advocate holds true and his part of the interview is published than one member will let his feelings be known, the other well let's just say will also speak his true feelings if he is asked directly...he will not speak out against the Mayor because of their relationship but he will not tell any fairy tales if asked. I have spoken to these men directly and choose to keep there names to myself at this time.

As a side note 2 of the Mayors fire task force panel members ( Chiefs Brown and Conte) have signed this letter along with 99% of our Senior staff members ( with 1 exception ). They along with 2 other members of the task force are in aggreement that this plan was not drafted by the panel at all. Let your imagination wander as to how and when this plan was REALLY drafted and by who.

My apologies...try this link http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/index.php/2010/07/20/how-many-incidents-will-it-take-another-no-show-for-torfd/#more-396

For those who have not had the pleasure please visit www.stamfordfiretruths.org. Today the webmaster posted a factual play by play of some recent incidents in stamford. Here's the link: http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/in...orfd/#more-396 Enjoy...!!!!

Pete I was going to stay out of this but you started stating things about the union leadership...of which I am a part of, so I had no choice but to speak up... 1. As for YOUR plan you presented to the "task force" it in no way "intergrated" both sides as you stated. Second in our infinte wisdom rejected the plan?? How could we reject a plan when we were never ASKED to be a part of any negotiations or the task force to be in a position to reject anything. I hope your still not counting sitting in the audience to view that debacle as being a part of the process....No matter what you say or how you spin it we were not involved, and you've even said as much that we shouldn't have been involved since it didn't concern us. 2.The issue with your "friend" that you threw under the bus first at the task force meeting by stating his name and him being a member of SFRD ( obvious union affiliation) was taking the trip with you, then you add his name to your plan "just for coming down"...BS... The certain individual was man enough to face the body at our meeting stood his ground, heard the bodies displeasure on his choice and also gave his view...the situation is done and over 3. Your plan was in no way the only plan to cover the city and loose no jobs. I guess you forgot about the asst chief of SFRD's proposal to cover the ENTIRE city, create one command structure, ( as recomended in the past 2 fire evaluations) put the volunteers and career under one Chief, one set of SOGS...etc..AT NO EXTRA COST OR TAXES TO THE RESIDENTS OF STAMFORD. 4. As for the layoff issue, when asked when the plan could be put into effect Mr. Pavia answered 6 months to a year...hhmmm a year is exactly when our no layoff clause goes away. Strange timing huh?? And on a closing note about the comments you make referring to our motives, your motives have been made loud and clear to us all Pete

Just a little note to your comment on the Mayor never breaking a promise. Back when Mr Pavia was courting the union for backing members of our E-Board met with him and he basically lied to there faces and said " I will not go back in time with the fire service in Stamford" 1 year later I see the 1980's on the horizon!!!!! This tactic of his is nothing short of union busting and paying back political favors..something he "promised" to get away from....hmmm I guess politics ARE staus quo in Stamford If it is so easy to change the charter to make this debacle happen why not follow the recommendations of 2 fire studies and make 1 chief, 1 command structure throughout the city. The volunteers should be united but as volunteers and also have one chain of command....the union is far from anti-volunteer many of our members came from the Stamford structure. There are many reasons why 4 out of 5 of the "big 5" have been labeled "rival organizations" by the IAFF mainly because when our members were still paid drivers and were unhappy with the lack of response of volunteers and fearing for there safety complained about it. retaliation followed the complaints along with harrasement...all cases are documented

That's it in a nutshell!!!!

That maybe true if not for the fact that most of the young volunteers that are on the rosters of a few of the volunteer dep. in the city took our recent test. So once again if this BS happens and all of the kids are hired what will happen to the volunteer back up AGAIN?? Feels like I just jumped into a time machine and I do not like the trip...conductor can I have a refund please!!!!!

First Pete let's set the record straight on many points you mentioned here: 1. President Keatley's statement was right on point. We were NOT involved in any converaations EVER with Mayor Pavia/Larabina at all. Being asked to speak to the panel ONCE during the 2 month time and being asked to give a possible legal opinion from the union's point of view while "sitting in the audience" can no way shape or form be deemed as being involved in such an important matter that directly affects the possible lively hood of our members. 2. About the Volunteer Chief's being "left out" of the contract merger negotiations, that is not true statement. All parties were at the table in the begining of the negotiations, yes I was there ( unlike this task force debacle and the union never making it to the table). It was not until TOR filed their lawsuit that they were asked to leave the table for legal reasons. Now the rest of the negotiaions may have not been handled 100% the right way BUT at least the Volunteer chiefs were involved, unlike we are NOT INVOLVED now. So if this Mayor is supposed to come in and be the all mighty savior and do things in the city the right way..or as everyone likes to say the opposite of Mayor Malloy then why didn't he?? Could it be to pay back political favors from the volunteer departments..maybe..and if this is true just how different is he from all the accusations made against Malloy. Just like I tell my 5 year old son when he copies his cousins bad habits "two wrongs don't make it right" 3. I'll stick up for Chief Passero a little bit also. We all see what's happening. Glenbrook is being punished for doing what they considered the right thing. Acknowledging they needed the help due to lack of volunteers for a proper response, why else was Glenbrook not included in the "plan"?? and should he or a Glenbrook represantative been included on the panel also? Maybe