Larchmont weighs Fire Department merger

[efd184 59]

is there a county list for chiefs that they can pull off?

or would they have to give a test for that area?

[efd1674 5]

I think Dave Sayles should come out of retirement and run the show.

[yfd910 8]

Larchmont board skips vote on paid fire chief

(Original publication: April 5, 2007)LoHud.com

Larchmont trustees last night did not vote on a measure to install a paid fire chief to oversee the village's combination paid and volunteer fire district.

Mayor Liz Feld unexpectedly adjourned the meeting to next Wednesday night because of "delicate discussions" with the village's volunteer fire officials, who are against the creation of the new position.

The volunteer fire department will hold its election of officers tonight, including the election of a new volunteer fire chief.

- Candice Ferrette

←

It's amazing that on this board with all the stupid taglines/signatures of "work together, win together" "train hard" "enthusiast" "pursuing fire career", etc. that there are people here who are against making a full time Career Chief, especially career men who try to point out the cost of this. Not to mention in the above quote, the volunteer officials(??) who are against this position.

You guys really need to get a grip on the fire service in general. So many of you talk about protecting the public, and then rant against the creation of a position to oversee that protection on a full time basis?? Obviously, the Mayor feels someone needs to be held accountable for this protection. From what I read there are 2 Captains in Larchmont. One of them becomes Chief, promoted from within. Up until they both take the test, a chief can be appointed as provisional. A Captain to Chief, a Lt. to Captain, a FF to Lt., and possibly....a volunteer (who's on the list!!) to FF?? Is there really something wrong with that?? Like I've said before, the test is in June, how many of you volunteers in Larchmont, or all over the county will be taking that test??? All?? Most? Trust me, drive by the testing site and you'll see the Chief Cars outside, the stickers on the windows, blue lights on the dashboards and all the Dept. T-Shirts on everyones backs. Everyone wants to be a FF.

And why the hell are the volunteers so against this?? Balance of Power?? Are you the same induviduals who say "protect the public"??? What are you so afraid of? Losing your "Wet-down" parties?? Inspection parades?? Company get-togethers?? You talk about a cost factor of thousands of dollars , and yet you're the same people who knock on the doors of these taxpayers and use fill the boot drives to ask for money (donations) for your Company parties??

I understand the cost does have a domino effect, believe me I do, but millions of dollars should not be placed in just anyone's hands. Like someone said in an earlier post, look at what happens in Long Island and the "charity" money that was used to fund vacations in New Jersey.

This is another example that combination departments do not work when "balance of power" is an issue or deciding factor, and consolidating departments in Lower Westchester is around the corner. The study is being done using Yonkers as a model, and I'm sure in the next few years it will be a reality. A full-time staffed, career fire district in Lower Westchester, protecting the public 24/7/365.

[efd184 59]

good post YFD910

One of them becomes Chief, promoted from within. Up until they both take the test, a chief can be appointed as provisional. A Captain to Chief, a Lt. to Captain, a FF to Lt., and possibly....a volunteer (who's on the list!!) to FF?? Is there really something wrong with that?? Like I've said before, the test is in June, how many of you volunteers in Larchmont, or all over the county will be taking that test??? All?? Most? Trust me, drive by the testing site and you'll see the Chief Cars outside, the stickers on the windows, blue lights on the dashboards and all the Dept. T-Shirts on everyones backs. Everyone wants to be a FF.

this is the 100% truth!

Edited April 5, 2007 by efd184

[ex-commish 490]

The volunteer fire department will hold its election of officers tonight, including the election of a new volunteer fire chief.

←

This is what is the biggest problem I have in the volunteer fire service...it is 2007 and we still elect our leadership which in most cases are short lived. I ask you this....look back and see how many of those elected were truly capable of doing the job. I have seen myself those incapable yet elected due to either popularity, too easy, nice guy or gal, was owed, had to do it...etc.

I feel there should be a testing process for volunteers at each level...model it off NFPA's standards for LT up to Chief, add to this experience, committment to training, and dedication to the department and not just to who makes the most parades, etc.

[Guest]

This is not just adding a career cheif issue.

←

actually all this is a career chief issue...the proposed merger has nothing to do w/ this issue

[Guest]

YFD910

You hit the nail on the head!!!

[Guest]

Consolidation of Lower Westchester Depts.. Not in our lifetime, I guarantee it! They've been talking about that for the past 20yrs. and still nothing and ya know why? Too many factors to take into account, especially egos. Everybody will be fightin at the IC Post about who's in charge and before ya know it, we'll all be doing our own thing as usual at the scene. There are, and will be, too many differences of opinion, and you can forget about YFD taken part, they're definitely OUT of IT. They are their own entity, and Goof for Them. That's the direct end result of having a STRONG UNION and an Administration, constantly striving to improve. Consolidation, DOUBT IT Very Much! There are plenty of ways Career Depts. in Lower Westchester can improve their full time Fire Protection for their citizens, they just have to put the time and effort in, to achieving this goal, and not take the easy way out by either constantly requesting M/A or settling for a Cosolidation of all Depts. I know what some of you are going to say and that is, "Why not consolidate, we're always assisting each other on M/A anyway." That's my point. M/A was instituted for the BIG ONES, not your everyday 10cent fire to supplement another districts FP inadequacies. I guess everybody is finally starting to see this though, and they now feel the next easiest solution is to consolidate all these Depts. so it won't be considered M/A abuse anymore. We can all then be, one Big Happy Family Together WHOOPIE!

[Guest alsfirefighter]

This is another example that combination departments do not work when "balance of power" is an issue or deciding factor, and consolidating departments

If this statement is the truest of truest statements. I wish I could only get more in depth with the things I've seen, dealt with and am dealing with. It's always a "balance of power" issue in some eyes, always the ignorant and false rallying cry of "they're trying to take over." When most career firefighters in combo departments want teamwork and to make things work and better. We all have our 10% on both sides. But it is amazing how when emotions get involved, common sense and brains goes elsewhere. Keep wearing the blinders and sipping the cool aid.

[ajsbear 11]

I don't understand how 90-140 gets up to 200K. 60K in bennies. If they make someone from the ranks, they already have the benefits(healthcare, dental, etc...)What is the 60K for?

←

Think of what Partyrock said. You would have to replace whomever you promote.

So you have the Salary and benefits (medical insurance, vacation, life insurance, uniform allowence etc) of the new FF

You have the extra money paid the new Chief

The new chief gets a car added to the fleet of cars used by the other chiefs

This gets up there. Now you have a full time person seeing to the administration, training of all personel etc. There really is no downside. Today we are all challenged to earn a living, spend time with our families and no matter if a FF or EMS train. Add to all this the extra time to run the department as a Volunteer chief and it adds up. Everyone I have known who was or is a chief can't wait until there term is up so life becomes normal again.

[Guest]

I'm sorry, I wanted to be done with this until more accurate Larchmont information came out to the public but I see where these posts are going...again...I cannot and will not speak for anyone in the Larchmont Fire Department, but I don't think the issue here is solely about a career chief but rather how this process was started by a politician who seems to be overstepping her power...as for some of the other comments made here regarding money and power, turning that into a paid vs. volunteer issue is wrong and irresponsible. Anyone who lives or works in Yonkers should know better then anyone about corruption and mismanagement of funds:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...753C1A961958260

also hiring or promoting through the civil service process is not what the mayor of Larchmont originally proposed...and lastly the comment that most career firemen in lower westchester combo departments are about teamwork and making things work better is simply untrue. This is not to say that many don't want this but I haven't heard of many career members drilling or training w/ volunteers, or promoting safety and knowledge(except some instructors who are often tagged as "scabs") when it involves volunteers...making things work and making things better does not neccessarily equal hiring more members, and while I understand "job-security" I am yet to hear about southern westchester departments firing paid staff or closing firehouses. You all have your jobs, and good pay and fight very few fires. Getting a grip on the fire service means first looking in the mirror...many volunteers are un-, or undertrained, many paid men are the same and no one gets enough work to rationalize these attitudes that prevail in the combination service. There is a difference between being anti-career and being realistic about the needs of a community...and the latter does not make you regressive. People in Yonkers or New Rochelle don't b**** about the cost of maintaining a full paid department because they understand they need it, they live in fairly big cities, not 1 or 6 sq. mile hamlets...

damn, I just broke my soap box...now that I have written all that I can go get a life...sorry for the soliloquy

Edited April 5, 2007 by blkcloud

[TCD0415 26]

I cannot and will not speak for anyone in the Larchmont Fire Department, but I don't think the issue here is solely about a career chief but rather how this process was started by a politician who seems to be overstepping her power...

also hiring or promoting through the civil service process is not what the mayor of Larchmont originally proposed...

←

Black Cloud hit the nail on the head here. This was more about the mayor abusing her power. There was no intention of moving one of the Captains up to Chief and moving a Lt to Captain. The mayors plan was to promote a Lt right to Chief (a specific Lt who was already chosen in advance I will add) and jump right over the present Captains. That should say something right there about intention.

If she really felt a need for a paid chief, thats her perogative, but to do it in a way that was pretty much railroaded through is BS. Go through the correct process and get a list and interview and go through a selection process and work with everyone involved to make sure this is the correct choice.

And if it does happen, the candidates should come from the outside and have no prior affiliation to the current staff. Same crew with a new title aint gonna change a damn thing.

Backdoor politics is all that is going on here.

Good Luck

Edited April 5, 2007 by TCD0415

[spike2231 38]

lfd budget is more then the tmfd becuase of ot

the lvolunteers do not drive any front line rigs becuase they voted not to about 20 years ago the only thing the volunteers drive is the rescue and some times not even that so a paid personnel has to be called back in if there is even a stand by or mutual aid

should the tax payers paid for m/a like pelham and pmfd do with mt vernon fd

only send the carreer staff

[AFS1970 504]

I do not think the idea of a Career Chief is regressive, but I can’t say it is all that progressive either. Not being from Larchmont, I don’t know all the internal motivations at play here, but it seems to me that Public Safety is not high on that list. It seems to me that the Mayor simply wants a controllable puppet in the Chief’s position, regardless of weather that individual starts out as a career or volunteer firefighter of any rank. Early on in this thread it was said that a Career Chief would be “accountable and accessible”, has the current Volunteer Chief shown not to be either of these? Or is it simply that he is more accountable to his membership than to the Mayor?

I remember trying to find information on one of our old rigs once. I found the name of a department that had bought it, and called to this fairly rural community to get information. The county Dispatch Center gave me a number to contact the Chief at; it turned out to be his house. He was at work, but his daughter gave me that number and I talked to him. I apologized for bothering him at work, and he assured me that it was ok. Now that is an example of accessibility. I know I talked with my Chief about firehouse business yesterday while I was at home and he was at work, I can’t imagine Larchmont is all that different.

Electing officers is not the problem so many people make it out to be. Our Chief serves a two year term. Our two most recent past Chiefs served 20 & 18 years respectively. Compared to Career Departments that hire Chief’s for 5 year contracts that are rarely finished or renewed, I would say we are at least on equal footing, in terms of consistency and ongoing mission. What is the difference between reelecting or reappointing (or failing to do so) at regular intervals?

I also don’t think that call volume or the type of calls should enter into this all that much. No matter how many calls a department does, is there a lack of command? Have there been that many calls where no Chief Officer has responded? As long as you have adequate command there should, at least in theory, be no reason to replace or redesign that command structure. As for counting wires down, EMS calls or other not Structure Fires, I guess that all depends on if the Chief is going to be required to respond to those types of calls. If the Chief doesn’t go to EMS calls, the EMS call volume is irrelevant to the discussion of who should be Chief.

Yes, this is about the balance of power, but at least from reading this thread, it seems far more political than firematic. That is not the right approach to whatever the real or imagined problems may be in this case.

Edited April 6, 2007 by BFD182

[antiquefirelt 994]

I have no idea of the political implications in this case, but I do work in a combination FD with a paid chief, 3 paid A/C's, 3 paid lt.s and 11 paid fire/EMS personnal and then we have another 25-30 call firefighters. We run 2500 or so incidents a year including 65% EMS. I cannot imagine having a volunteer Chief. The number of telephone calls and meetings our Chief and in actuality our A/C's handle, is ridiculous. The public wants access to the Chief regarding a huge list of things. Our line supervisors cannot give most of the answers these people seek, nor do they have time to. I can imagine the Mayor's office wanting to have access to a Chief as needed, not when his/her FT job allows.

Not to mention the popular vote election of Chiefs is a cancer of the fire service. What are the qualifications? Does the Chief have any skill in dealing with career staff? Does he/she understand FLSA, Union contracts, legal issues, etc. ? We actaully hired one of our call (volunteer) fire captains to be the paid Chief (not the first, we had paid chiefs since the 1950's). He clearly was better than many other paid chief's who applied, in qualifications, knowledge and vision. and yes, there are times when his practical provate sector approach clashes with our Union municipal employee rules. But in all we're much better off than many other combo depts I'm familiar with. This is obviously not the case most of the time, but it is possible.

The Fire Chief's job is not a Union position. The Chief owes nothing to the union and if anything is immedaitely put in an adversarial position. Trust me, given the political climates and financial constraints a paid Chief will be forced to try to maintain service using volunteers over more paid staff everytime. The only way to get more paid staff is to prove that you need them for safety and/or better service.

If you are a volunteer worried about your status, then look at the quality of the services you and your dept. provide. Todays taxpayers expect trained professionals to come to their emergency, quickly. If you can provide that, then you should have nothing to worry about. If you frequently cannot get a truck out of the station quickly and staffed to work, then you should be worried.

Lastly, regionalization will not come at a lower price. It will be service driven, when the taxpayers decide they are willing to pay more for what they see as better service (quicker response times, more accountability, more services).

[firecapt32 282]

Wow I have waited a while before weighing in on this one but here I go, lots of comments both ways. you can make issue of career vs vol all day long. Balance of power, election of Chiefs hireing of personnel all good sound arguments. Pick a position argue all day long.

Maybe the position of the Larchmont Village officials is whats best for the citizens of Larchmont.

Thats what they are elected to do. Will the establishment of a career chief bring uniformity to the department? ie establish a chain of command simaular to the police?? will it establish "one" person responsible for the entire department? including training standards ect?

The question is and remains not vol-vs career but whats best for the citizens of Larchmont.

If you are a Larchmont volunteer having a career chief will not change or should not change your desire to be a volunteer. Remember what you volunteered for to "protect the citizens" life and property. Not to party and parade.

Lets not lose the vision 'PROTECT AND SERVE'

[spike2231 38]

i still say larchmont needs a full time village manager like other towns and villages have around westchester than maybe the cops and fireman can get contracts done

that the voters agree on

Edited April 8, 2007 by spike2231

[firecapt32 282]

Spike you may be 100 % correct-- there are time when we lose our sight and not look at the complete picture of things. We cannot be short sighted and have tunnel vision. We have to look at the whole piture of larchmont and what the elected Officials see not just what the fire department is looking at.

[efd184 59]

is there any new info on this issue?

[Guest]

No

[Guest]

In the Saturday, April 21, 2007 edition of The Journal News there is a full page add on page 7A taken out by the Larchmont Professional FF Association. It's a letter to Larchmont residents from LPFFA president Bryan Doherty. Basically outlines why the village needs a career chief and also mentions that Lt. Richard Heine is the candidate up for consideration.

[efd184 59]

good luck brothers!

[spike2231 38]

good luck brothers!

←

i will never be sold on this idea in a same town like larchmont because when a fire dept has to send a ladder and an engine on a ems call it means they are just bored because their work load is so low lol

be real 2 engines on a ems call is crazy these guys are just looking for work that does not exist

they need to grow up

Edited April 24, 2007 by spike2231

[Guest]

i will never be sold on this idea in a same town like larchmont because when a fire dept has to send a ladder and an engine on a ems call it means they are just bored because their work load is so low lol

be real 2 engines on a ems call is crazy these guys are just looking for  work that does not exist

they need to grow up

←

Words of wisdom from a real professional i see. Not only are your comments arrogant and ignorant, but they are simply unfair to the LFD. Grow up.

[spike2231 38]

Words of wisdom from a real professional i see. Not only are your comments arrogant and ignorant, but they are simply unfair to the LFD. Grow up.

←

whose tring to be professional im a volunteer isn't that what this is all about

i was trying to be funny not trying to offend anybody

[spike2231 38]

Words of wisdom from a real professional i see. Not only are your comments arrogant and ignorant, but they are simply unfair to the LFD. Grow up.

←

whose trying to be professional im a volunteer isn't that what this is all about

i was trying to be funny not trying to offend anybody

[turk182 37]

i will never be sold on this idea in a same town like larchmont because when a fire dept has to send a ladder and an engine on a ems call it means they are just bored because their work load is so low lol

be real 2 engines on a ems call is crazy these guys are just looking for  work that does not exist

they need to grow up

←

So you would rather have taxpayers money go to guys sitting around doing nothing? I would give them credit for wanting to get out there and be useful to the community they serve

[efd184 59]

i will never be sold on this idea in a same town like larchmont because when a fire dept has to send a ladder and an engine on a ems call it means they are just bored because their work load is so low lol

be real 2 engines on a ems call is crazy these guys are just looking for  work that does not exist

they need to grow up

←

it seems like you need to grow up!

you must be a vol that does not go on any ems calls to see that sometimes all these men are needed.

i bet you wouldnt be complaining if they were coming to your house to help you and your family!

Edited April 24, 2007 by efd184

[Guest]

this is where we're going again huh...sounds "professional"

[efd184 59]

this is where we're going again huh...sounds "professional"

←

it is what it is!