helicopper

As of today, I believe that Acting Commissioner Cullen is still "acting" Commissioner and the DES/DPS merger is "off the table". Both DES and DPS are suffering cuts in the 2012 budget and DES (along with a bunch of other departments) face layoffs. DPS was spared actual layoffs but will lose vacant lines and funding in other areas. The exact implications of these cuts will not be known until next month when a final budget is approved by the Board of Legislators and the exact numbers and dollars/cents are revealed. As for your doomsday scenario, I think it is highly unlikely that DES could be shut down in its current form. The second DC line hasn't been funded in years despite it showing up on the organizational chart. I don't think they could fill that position even if they wanted too.

http://www.newsday.c...-1.3335897?qr=1 http://www.nbcnewyor...-134213278.html http://www.nj.com/ne...ts_al_qaed.html

Sure you can. But, and this is not a reflection on any members of the NYSP but rather on their administration and similar budget problems, they're spread too damn thin. The State Police haven't put a class on in years and they're losing people to retirement on a regular basis. They have to cover the entire state so the stark reality is that, yes, the state will come but depending on what resources you need it may take a while. Rockland County has a bomb squad because it was simply impractical to wait for resources from Newburgh, Middletown or Albany (from the State) or Westchester or Bergen Counties when they had a job. To lose that asset would be a disgrace after all that has been invested (both equipment and personnel training). Politics at its finest.

The SWAT team is one of the few things that would remain intact. The SWAT team is made up of officers from all the town PD's and SO.

Date: 11-18-11 Time: ongoing Location: Caughlin Ranch area Departments: numerous Description: Major windswept wildfire overnight resulting in over 10,000 evacuations in Reno, more than 25 homes destroyed, 1 person reportedly killed, dozens more with smoke inhalation. Winds of up to 60 MPH driving the fire and Reno FD Chief states it will be at least five days to contain. NV declares state of emergency, FEMA declaration for major disaster. More than 90 schools closed. a Over 125 crews operating - that's over 1000 firefighters. Fire is over 2500 acres. Links: Writer: helicopper

Reporting the operators of vehicles involved in serious accidents is not uncommon. Noting the associations and/or relationships of those involved is also a common media tactic so we shouldn't be surprised that it was reported. Right, wrong, or indifferent that's how the media operates. Some would call it irony. Finally, the accident was two days ago and is under investigation. Charges and/or fault has yet to be determined; summonses are rarely issued at the scene of such an accident and it is currently unknown if such action is appropriate. After staff discussion, in light of the unusual nature of this incident and involved parties, this thread is being closed. It may be reopened at a future time if conditions warrant. Thank you for your understanding.

It was a question. Leave it at that. If the answer results in pot-stirring then it will be handled. Let's not criticize based on possible interpretations or what may happen some time in the future.

You are correct. There is no rule against questions. Members shouldn't criticize each other for doing so.

IA contributors, Please review the above guidelines to make sure you're submissions are consistent with site policies. Thank you!

All, The staff is delighted that a lot of new members are posting Incident Alerts and providing information to the rest of the membership. However it is very important that the above guidelines for IA titles be followed so people know what is posted and can read what interests them. Everyone should also review the policy on what is an appropriate IA before posting. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. The EMTBravo web team

The exercise of the first amendment is a wonderful thing; we're one of the few places in the world where you have that. But just because they're opposed to things that I'm opposed to doesn't make them an ally so I have the same right to protest against their methods - not necessarily their message. I don't think "camping" in a park is the kind of protest that will effect change but that's just me and my first amendment talking. It's refreshing to see that activism is alive and well but the "Occupy Wall Street" movement could take a few lessons from some of the great activists of our time who were articulate and convincing in their message. The double-talk gibberish that they use with the media further alienates me. And I seriously doubt that any of these protesters want to see our wages increased and our pensions protected. That is part of the hypocrisy. My two cents.

A couple of questions on the subject that would have to be answered by each individual hospital... 1. Do the hospitals have adequate space to serve as a shelter in addition to their day to day obligations? 2. Who will staff them? Who will pay for the staffing? 3. Can they be properly secured with shelter population segregated from hospital population? 4. Is the infrastructure capable of supporting the expanded population (bathrooms, kitchen, sleeping space, parking, generator(s), etc)? Aside from ventilator patients or those in need of medical support, I don't think it's such a great idea. I don't think firehouses should be used as shelters either. These locations have enough to do in an emergency without compounding their responsibilities with sheltering. Just my two cents...

Why not?

Is this really a "protest" anymore? It may have been at the start but now it is just a bunch of people living in tents in an urban park. How are they effecting change through their efforts? I think they'd be more productive by applying for permits and protesting outside a different company/bank/individual with whom they have an issue every day. This "occupation" doesn't seem to mean much to anyone other than the "occupiers". I've gotten really bored with it and stopped paying attention so I may have missed something. It seems, as evidenced by some of the more notable incidents down there, that a large number of EDP's and other social misfits are "attaching" themselves to this while they have nothing at all to do with the movement.

Why does it have to be apparatus securing the scene? If the scene is not safe and it is a liability to leave it unattended what about fire police, DPW, PD, or even CERT? So long as an effort is made to safeguard the scene, the liability is reduced. That could be a single person standing there (obviously not practical in severe weather but you could still do it if you needed to). If the wire is on private property and you notify the landowner, the liability should be transferred to them. It's on their property after all. From what little I read about this case it seems that there was no notification and that is where some of the responsibility was placed. Again, that's just from a couple of the online stories.

You're right, I'm thinking more of larger incidents where this becomes a bigger problem and 90% of the time (probably more) at day-to-day structure fire the span of control doesn't require an Operations Section Chief. Thanks for pointing it out.

Herein lies one of my biggest issues with the implementation of ICS. It's the fundamental misapplication of the roles and responsibilities and titles of the players. These posts highlight the issue and part of why we still don't get ICS right. The IC should absolutely be someone on the scene. If you're being overridden by someone who isn't even there, they don't understand the process. This isn't unique, it's sadly a common occurrence. The command post can and in most cases should be located remote from an incident scene. Consider a large wildfire, how do you put the ICP in front? Or floods, or a winter storm... You get my point. As for the chief's around the structure, aren't those division supervisors (Subordinate managers of geographically located operational elements)? Don't get me wrong, there is a definite advantage to "seeing it" but that can still be accomplished even remotely and doesn't always have to be done by the IC. I'm going to posit that most often the "fireground commander" isn't the IC but is rather an operational supervisor (division or group supervisor, task force leader, or something similar). I say this because he is rightfully focused on the fireground and not the entire incident; or shall I say tactics while the IC should be focused on goals and objectives, perhaps strategies, and the other higher level issues. Great post, wraftery, and I'm certain Emmanuel Fried is right on the mark if you're recommending his book. However, if tactics are his focus, isn't that operations and not command? That's where most of the misunderstandings arise. If you're focused on tactics, you're not focused on command and are probably down in the weeds instead of up at a higher altitude looking at the big picture. I think the most common direction in ICS/IMS/Command and General Staff training is to stop going tactical and step back to the higher perspective. Very often I think new officers are given an inadequate foundation on which to base command development and attending an ICS course or two does not bridge the gap. Sadly very few officers seek out the additional training available to them because the "guidance" says all they need to is a couple of entry level classes. [/soapbox]

Did they fly that down from Albany also???

They landed at least twice on the west side of the bridge near the toll plaza. The Thruway Authority boat was also there.

According to the Rockland DES, their Technical Rescue Team is not involved in this operation; it is strictly a State Police operation using Mobile Response Team personnel from Newburgh and Albany. Subject now in custody aboard Yonkers PD safeboat being taken to shore.

That makes sense. Not uncommon to misread a plate going by at 100+

Don't get me wrong, I agree that pulling over a marked police car is an exception to the rule but given the way that car was being operated, I would probably have stopped it too. This is a unique case, it's not just a speeding car, and I understand why the trooper thought it may have been stolen. High speed, erratic operation, plates don't come back to PD, failed to comply... all indicators that something more is going on. Add to that the frequent "warnings" about fake emergency vehicles being used by criminal or terrorist organizations and I think there's ample cause for a high-risk car stop. Were there tactical issues with how she conducted it? Well, that's an entirely different conversation.

I hope you're just kidding about not yielding to a marked unit attempting to stop you. Had the cop pulled over, he might of only gotten a warning and an earful. Leading a marked unit (from whatever jurisdiction) on a five minute pursuit is just plain dangerous and negates any possibility of receiving professional courtesy. (While the professional courtesy situation in south Florida may already be strained, there is never any justification for such conduct.) If the reports and transcripts are accurate the plate check didn't come back to a PD vehicle, further justifying the need for a stop. It's really hard to find any justification for the cop's actions in this case; he escalated things by acting with such impunity and disregard for everyone else. Personally, I don't like the situation at all and the fact that the trooper is now receiving death threats from fellow LEO's is even more discouraging.

Your post is a little cryptic but if you're suggesting that Buffalo's power lines are underground, I would point to 2006 when they had an October storm not unlike ours this year and suffered many of the same affects. Major power outages, trees and wires down, and roads blocked in the City of Buffalo and surrounding Erie County.

If anyone is basing their agency's operational decisions on whether or not a thread will pop up on EMTBravo they need serious help! Seriously, there is a problem when there are multiple white helmets standing around one of the ubiquitous SUV's but they're not operating as FF and instead calling for mutual aid crews for fire suppression. You're spot on that there needs to be an Incident Commander. That's ONE. Is there any reason that the other available chiefs can't/won't/don't serve in another supervisory position or even as an FF?