21 Year Old Fire Chief

[HFD201 0]

Perhaps a typo?? I thought it was quite interesting that the chief of a township with a population of close to 15,000 according to the 2000 Census is a mere 21 years old. I know several departments where you cannot join as a full member, not explorer, until you're 18 years old and are required to serve two years before becomming promoted to Lieutenant and then two more years as lieutenant before becoming Captain and so on, so what is the basis for having a 21 year old fire chief???

Burned New Jersey Firehouse had no Alarms

BEV McCARRON AND CATHY BUGMAN, STAR-LEDGER STAFF

The Star-Ledger (Newark, New Jersey)

A Warren firehouse damaged by a fire yesterday morning did not have a fire alarm or smoke detectors, according to local fire officials.

A passing patrolman spotted smoke rising from the eaves of the squat, brick Washington Valley firehouse around 4:30 a.m. He reported the fire, which caused moderate damage to the building and sent the Washington Valley fire chief to the hospital for smoke inhalation, according to the Somerset County Prosecutor's Office, which is investigating the blaze.

Warren Township Fire Chief Tim McGowan said none of the township's four fire companies - Washington Valley, Mt. Horeb, Community and Mt. Bethel - are hooked up to an alarm system that rings at a third-party location.

McGowan did not know if the Washington Valley firehouse had smoke detectors, but the chief for that fire company, Ryan Valentino, said there were none.

McGowan said the firehouses are not required to have alarms. "There's nobody in the house to hear the alarms," he said.

He also said alarm systems are too costly for an all-volunteer department. Each company owns and maintains its own building.

"The fire companies themselves have to pay for it," McGowan said. "If it fits in the budget, it fits. If it doesn't, it doesn't."

Valentino, the 21-year-old chief, said he did not know why the 36-year-old building hadn't been equipped with smoke detectors or alarms.

"It's possible because it was old, it wasn't required," he said.

The state Department of Community Affairs last night said the building may have been exempt.

"Although we cannot comment directly to this location as we do not know enough details about it, in general, it is possible, based on both the usage and the age of the building, that detectors and/or alarms are not required," said spokesman Chris Donnelly.

In Somerville, fire official Barry Van Horn said all four fire company buildings in the borough are outfitted with alarms that ring directly into an alarm system. The borough paid for them, he said.

"So anything happens, we're going to get notified and they'll dispatch the fire department like any other business in town. And we know they work because they go off when we cook," he said.

Firefighters point out the fire alarm system to school kids who visit the firehouse, according to Van Horn.

"I always like to look at it as, we practice what we preach," he said. "We point out the detectors, and say, `We even have them in our house, so you should have them in yours.'"

Investigators from the Somerset County Prosecutor's Office and the Warren Township police are investigating the cause of yesterday's blaze, which brought out 50 firefighters from Warren and Watchung, who found the apparatus bay engulfed in smoke. Once the fire was located, it was quickly extinguished, according to the prosecutor's office.

Valentino was treated for smoke inhalation at Somerset Medical Center, but was released and was back at the firehouse last night assessing the damage.

The blaze began in the southwest corner of the building, damaging a utility closet, a bathroom, a workshop area and an upper-level storage area holding historical records, McGowan said.

As a result of the fire, some electrical circuits blew and the garage doors wouldn't open. One of the rigs, a ladder truck, was damaged as firefighters pulled it out of a bay and will be out of service until it is repaired, McGowan said.

Staff writer John Holl contributed to this report.

[ac316scu 31]

maybe hes been a cheif for 21 years idk just a guess

[IzzyEng4 427]

Maybe they meant Captain???

[Guest]

correct me if im wrong, but doesn't fairview have a vollie chief who's 21 y/o?

[Scottyk107 9]

So there are two chiefs? Im kind of confused there is chief McGowan who Im guessing is the chief of the whole dept and then there is Chief Valentino who is the chief of that company. Could it just be that they have different titles then we are used to? I guess most people call the person in charge of the house a Captain maybe they call them Chiefs. Just a guess

[Danger 160]

It says in the article that he is the chief of one particular station, not the whole district. And I do think it's way too young.

[traumajunky 5]

According to my FD's bylaws for any officer position including chief you only need have FF1 or Essentials/Basic, Fire Officer 1, and a minimum of 3 years in the Dept, you can start at 18... so in theory a chief could be 21... our youngest chief was 23, and is still an asst. chief at the age of 29 now.

[Guest EFFP411]

Personally, as long as he is good at his job, then it shouldn't matter how old he is. Just my two cents....

[foreman1923 22]

i agree why does it matter how old he is as long as he gets the job done safely and effeciently it shouldnt make a difference if hes 21 or 42

[T. John 21]

21 or 23 is too young for a Chief's position in any department. There is something called experience that can only be gained over time. A good chief needs to have experience not only on the fire-ground but with handling their personnel, community relations, budgets, and fund raising, apparatus, politics and more. The chief is also the person that carries the most responsibility for their Department (i.e. legally). I certainly appreciate and respect younger officers as I once was one. But, the path to becoming a chief should be a gradual, trained and experienced position.

[Guest]

In lite of this story, what should be a good starting age for a chief be then? 30? 35? 40?

Just curious what you guys think.

[x129K 1,393]

21 or 23 is too young for a Chief's position in any department. There is something called experience that can only be gained over time. A good chief needs to have experience not only on the fire-ground but with handling their personnel, community relations, budgets, and fund raising, apparatus, politics and more. The chief is also the person that carries the most responsibility for their Department (i.e. legally). I certainly appreciate and respect younger officers as I once was one. But, the path to becoming a chief should be a gradual, trained and experienced position.

Perfect!

Be leary of Chiefs under 25........be very leary.

[Fex404 0]

For all of you talking about 21 - 23 being "Too Young" to be a fire chief, well i have a question. I know you base it off of experience and I absolutely agree that experience is the key to knowledge, especially in the fire service. Now what if a young man or woman decided to take a year and go join a FD in prince george county, Maryland, which a few of my fellow members have. Well now based on experience, they are way ahead of any volunteer, or for that matter even paid department in westchester county. I know of one company that has 70 working fires in their first due and countless more out second or third due etc... this year, and they dont count little room in contents fires or oil burner fires. These kids live at the firehouse and make 95% of the alarms, and they will come back richer for the experience, and now be ahead of just about any volie chief no matter how old he is. So should this person who has the knowledge and experience just sit back and not help everyone out by putting his knowledge to work just because he is 21? If you think so then you need to humble yourself and come to terms with reality.

So DONT "Be leary" of a 21yo fire chief, if the company does not think he should be there then they shouldnt vote for him. but if he has the experience and knowlede (probably a lot more than you) then maybe you owe it to him or her by at least seeing why they feel they can be fire chief, then maybe they can enlighten you on their experience.

Everyone needs to start worrying about themselves before they start passing judgements on others.......

[louis 1]

I agree with FEX404. As long as the new fire chief has all the training, whats the difference. He had to be a Lieut. or captain first. It's good to get young members active and with responsibility. At 21 he has a choice sitting in a bar drinking or taking a active role in his community. It's ok to die for our country at 18, but we question if a 21 year old fire chief doesn't have the experence. I've seen older Chiefs with experence make bad judgement calls. Thats why you depend on your Asst. Chiefs and Lieuts. to guide through. Good For Him I wish him the best. The only problem is wil the other members in his firehouse respect and listen to him as a Chief or a wet behind the ears 21 year old.

[T. John 21]

For all of you talking about 21 - 23 being "Too Young" to be a fire chief, well i have a question. I know you base it off of experience and I absolutely agree that experience is the key to knowledge, especially in the fire service. Now what if a young man or woman decided to take a year and go join a FD in prince george county, Maryland, which a few of my fellow members have. Well now based on experience, they are way ahead of any volunteer, or for that matter even paid department in westchester county. I know of one company that has 70 working fires in their first due and countless more out second or third due etc... this year, and they dont count little room in contents fires or oil burner fires. These kids live at the firehouse and make 95% of the alarms, and they will come back richer for the experience, and now be ahead of just about any volie chief no matter how old he is. So should this person who has the knowledge and experience just sit back and not help everyone out by putting his knowledge to work just because he is 21? If you think so then you need to humble yourself and come to terms with reality.

So DONT "Be leary" of a 21yo fire chief, if the company does not think he should be there then they shouldnt vote for him. but if he has the experience and knowlede (probably a lot more than you) then maybe you owe it to him or her by at least seeing why they feel they can be fire chief, then maybe they can enlighten you on their experience.

Everyone needs to start worrying about themselves before they start passing judgements on others.......

Let's keep this to a general discussion and not cast stone's on any one individual.

There are a lot of variables that play into someone's ability to lead an organization successfully, training and experience being one of the most critical aspects. I am sure there are chiefs' out there that have been in the service for 30 plus years but don't necessarily have the right combination of experience, training or common sense to do the job right either. Training, experience and leadership ability varies from person to person and must be taken on a case-by-case basis. But, this does not mean we can't engage in a discussion that talks about what the minimum qualifications of a chief should be, regardless of age. As I said earlier, there is a lot more to being a "chief" than being a good interior firefighter (although that is critical). Just because someone 'fought a lot of fire' does not necessarily make them the best candidate for chief. Also bear in mind that we are talking about the position of CHIEF - not a Lieutenant or Captain.

Experience: This will vary from individual to individual. I come from a combination department that runs over 4,000 calls (we do not do EMS) a year, my station alone runs 900-1,000 including providing technical rescue services for the entire Town. A department's call volume (and the types of calls they run) will vary. A person's practical experience will be dependent upon where they served, the types of calls they run and to the level that they participated (did they watch or pull a hose line). Yes, you may have some people that have been to hundreds of fires in just a few years and others that have not. Generally speaking, I do not think there are a lot of 20-25 year olds that have a lot of practical, hands-on experience to be a CHIEF. There may be exceptions, but lets talk generally.

A good chief has to have experience at COMMANDING a fire, not just pulling a hose line and going in the front door. This is why the progression through the ranks is important. It is important the department's groom their officers - don't throw people into a command role with no training or experience. It is also just as wrong to assume that a person that ran calls with PG County (or any other active department) for a year and saw a lot of fire would be a good CHIEF (were they an officer in that Department? did they LEAD? can they manage an entire Department?).

Leadership: A good CHIEF is a leader. He must have the experience and charisma to lead his officers and the department - not just at a fire scene. Leadership is a talent and not everyone is a good leader. Again, just because someone saw a lot of fire and is a good interior firefighter does not necessarily make them a good Chief or a leader. Can they handle personnel decisions? Can they manage a budget, apply for grants, recruit volunteers, interact with the public and government officials, be a good PIO, etc. A chief must wear multiple hats - just being good at wearing the black helmet necessarily won't cut it.

Training: A chief should be trained for the position he/she is in. They should have Fire Officer I (and maybe II, III...), NIMS, etc. A good chief should be the one that is eager to continue learning and "doesn't know it all." Learning is a life long process and is something that never stops.

Authority: A chief must also have authority to make decisions and, if those decisions are questioned, have the CV and resume to back it up. Remember, a jury of your peers will judge you and you will be compared to another Chief with regards to experience and qualifications.

Does all of this mean a younger officer can't be a good chief? No! But, before a Department names a new Chief, lets make sure they have the "right stuff" before they are elected. And, I am sure that there are no departments' whose elections are simply a popularity contest....

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

Can the chief come out and play!

[T. John 21]

Can the chief come out and play!

Sure, Chief's can play but they have to give up their radio!

[Fex404 0]

First let’s NOT talk generally, because this post started about a certain individual in a certain department and also i started my first post because there was a generalization of young chiefs. So the whole point is to NOT talk generally and to give whoever it may be a chance. When someone says "be leary of chiefs under 25.....very leary" - that it generalizing and that is very close minded and immature.

The textbook on fire chiefs was great, but I live in the real world. I totally agree with what was in there and you are absolutely right that a good firefighter does not automatically make a good fire chief, but it is one of the necessities that a fire chief must possess. And about calls -- I don’t care about call volume - just actual fire.

But we cannot just write them off immediately because they are young. See what they are all about, they may surprise you.

Forget about age, and look at their capabilities and then tell me that so and so is not a good chief because they lack a certain ability, not because they dont fit into a certain age bracket.

[Guest]

While I do agree 100% with T.John’s comments about the qualifications for Chief, shouldn't we all be asking the more important question. Barely 2 months after Fire Prevention Week a firehouse suffered an unreported fire causing damage, which from the sounds of it was due to the lack of smoke detectors and/or an alarm system.

The second week of October has all of us, as firefighters, talking to kids about the importance of smoke detectors and fire prevention. What type of message does this send to the public, when the firehouse does not practice what it preaches?

And even more so, the fact that, in addition to this being bad publicity for the Fire Dept, the citizens may have to pick up the bill for the Dept’s lack of action on fire protection for their own station.

[T. John 21]

The second week of October has all of us, as firefighters, talking to kids about the importance of smoke detectors and fire prevention. What type of message does this send to the public, when the firehouse does not practice what it preaches?

You bring up a very good point. The fire service needs to practice what we preach. Our own safety (and that of our equipment and the building) should be a top priority. It is really in-excusable that a fire department does not have a functioning fire alarm. I realize that budgets may dictate certain things, but a life safety system should never be omitted.

McGowan said the firehouses are not required to have alarms. "There's nobody in the house to hear the alarms," he said.

This is a dangerous statement. I have never been to a firehouse that there are not people milling around or hanging out (or maybe fell asleep on the couch). Even if the alarm is not tied into a central station, it will at least alert people on site to a problem (and wake them up). We all know that fire can go undetected even with people present. Let's protect ourselves first!

Edited December 7, 2007 by T. John

[ONEEYEDMIC 68]

Here is my take. Although it may not be a figherfighter issue, it works into many other fields. I personally don't think that ANYBODY 21 should be IN CHARGE OF ANYTHING. At 21 what do you know? Prob not as much as somebody that is 31 and been doing whatever job for 10 more years. I don't care if you did 1,000,000 more jobs. Doesn't make you smarter just puts you in the right place at the right time. Just so I am clear. If somebody joins the FD at 18 or whatever you need to be and then 3 years later another 18 joins the FD in 3 Years who should be more qualified to be CHIEF. Given that the same 2 people have all the same course under their belt but the NEWER MEMBER might have seen more fires? In case you can't follow me, 1 member is 24 and the othe member is 21 if my math is right. I would have to go with the 24 year old just based on MORE EXPERIENCE. You mean to tell me that there are NO MORE EXPERIENCED MEMBERS OF THIS FD THAN A 21 YO. WOW.

I would have a hard time taking orders at work from anybody that has had LESS TIME on the JOB then me. It would also bother me if they were younger but I can't help that since people get hired at certain ages. But LESS TIME would really bother me. I like to think that everyday I go to work I learn something new. In fact in LIFE I like to think that.

There are the people that are STEET SMART and there are PEOPLE that are BOOK SMART. BOOK SMART people get promotions, STREET SMART PEOPLE SAVE THE BOOK SMART PEOPLE. That is just my OPINION. BTW, I AM STREET SMART. Try and be BOOK SMART just take TESTS WAY TO FAST.

[5slow 9]

What's interesting is that there were several names mentioned in the article, but only his had his age associated with it. The reporter trying to throw in their feelings a little?! Gotta love the press...

[x129K 1,393]

Fex404 - I see from your profile that you are 23 years old - so I really do not expect you to understand what I am trying to say... but since you seem to be stuck on my comment, let me try.

Be leary...YES! Be leary! If you walk up to a house "goin' good" and your EXPERIENCE tells you this will be an exterior attack first - but the young "aggressive" Chief yells to you - "Let's get this one by the balls!" Sorry, Chief...not so much! We'll be out here with our deck guns and ladder pipes waiting for it's balls to float out the second floor window.

There is nothing wrong with "being leary" and analyzing a Chief's orders to ensure YOUR SAFETY. That's where experience comes into play - with a "true" Chief - there will be no need to analyze his orders - you would follow him into Hell.

As mentioned - there is much more to being a Chief than fire experience, although that is probably the most dangerous... Yes - one can get the required training at a young age - trust me it is easier then, no family committments, no need to work OT to support that family, no crabby Wive's....etc. And there is nothing wrong with striving to be a young Chief....but do not forget how important it is to be a GOOD CHIEF first.

God Bless and Happy Holidays Brother.

[MFVFD179 0]

but do not forget how important it is to be a GOOD CHIEF first

With that I believe it is safe to say that you were stating the 21 year old Chief was a BAD Chief. What makes him a bad Chief? If I read your statement wrong, please correct me and word it differently so I can understand it better.

I know some firefighters that are 21, 22, 23 years old that I would have no problem at all if they were Chief. Also, I know a lof of older people that are not cut out for a line officer. I can also say the same the exact way around. Just because you have 20 years of service doesn't mean you are fit to be Chief.

ONEEYEDMIC...

My brother graduated college this past May and started his job two days after graduation. I feel, as well as many other people, that he has more knowledge than many older people that are 3, 6, or 9 years older than him that graduated with the same education. Granted he does not work for the service, but he is very well qualified to do what his job asks for. So my question to you is this, what makes it different from my brothers case to the fire service? Maybe more people trust the 21 year old not because he is 21, but because he is a trust worthy guy that has the qualifications to do his job. Also, maybe the people who were running against him (who were probably older than him) were not people the department felt comfortable with taking orders from.

[x129K 1,393]

With that I believe it is safe to say that you were stating the 21 year old Chief was a BAD Chief. What makes him a bad Chief? If I read your statement wrong, please correct me and word it differently so I can understand it better.

.

I was not referring to the Chief mentioned in the article. I do not know him, or her for that matter, so I can not say.......

[MFVFD179 0]

I was not referring to the Chief mentioned in the article. I do not know him, or her for that matter, so I can not say.......

Fair enough...

As a general statement though, I understand what your saying. With all the training, regardless of age, a good Chief needs to be able to control the scene. It obviously goes deeper than that but I don't feel the need to type it here...

[ONEEYEDMIC 68]

With that I believe it is safe to say that you were stating the 21 year old Chief was a BAD Chief. What makes him a bad Chief? If I read your statement wrong, please correct me and word it differently so I can understand it better.

I know some firefighters that are 21, 22, 23 years old that I would have no problem at all if they were Chief. Also, I know a lof of older people that are not cut out for a line officer. I can also say the same the exact way around. Just because you have 20 years of service doesn't mean you are fit to be Chief.

ONEEYEDMIC...

My brother graduated college this past May and started his job two days after graduation. I feel, as well as many other people, that he has more knowledge than many older people that are 3, 6, or 9 years older than him that graduated with the same education. Granted he does not work for the service, but he is very well qualified to do what his job asks for. So my question to you is this, what makes it different from my brothers case to the fire service? Maybe more people trust the 21 year old not because he is 21, but because he is a trust worthy guy that has the qualifications to do his job. Also, maybe the people who were running against him (who were probably older than him) were not people the department felt comfortable with taking orders from.

So your profile says your between 18-20. I don't expect you too understand this as you are still maturing. I never said that just because you have 20 years of service you deserve to be CHIEF. I don't think that a 21 year old should be CHIEF. You can't tell me that there was not another qualified member of the FD that should have been CHIEF. Maybe nobody wanted the position except for this LAD and they gave it too him. Prob a bad mistake on their part.

Tell your BROTHER CONGRATS. I don't have a COLLEGE education. I have had some COLLEGE COURSES prob enough to give me a degree but never formally walked down the isle. What I do have is TONS of STREET EDUCATION. LEARNING HANDS ON not from a BOOK. I have learned from books but I believe that ONE LEARNS BETTER HANDS ON.

Two of my younger brothers have their Masters degree and are under 30. Does that make them smarter than me. NO WAY. You know why? Because I have seen more in the WORLD than they have. In their fields of work it makes them better, but that does not mean that they could do my job and be as good at it does it? And I couldn't do at least one of their jobs. The other one I could do in a HEARTBEAT, or lack there of. LOL

And why would somebody Trust your brother at his young age? What makes your brother so much smarter than other people at his job? Sounds to me like you look up to your brother and I think that is great. I look down to my brothers to look up to them and am often JEALOUS of what they have achieved. But I chose my FORK IN THE ROAD and I went down it. I am not for 1 second ashamed or embarressed. In fact I have probably overcome more obstacles in my life then most people on this site. In my opinion somebody that is 21 has not earned the right to achieve the highest status at any job unless he starts his pwn job. Then of course he is boss. But as for LE, FD, EMS or any other SERVICE. 21 is too YOUNG.

[Guest]

No one seems to have an answer for what the average age of a chief should be. Some people mature faster then others. Some people are faster learners then others. While I will say with years of service comes experience, and my own personal opinion is 21 is too young, doesn’t mean someone at 21 is not capable or qualified.

[Goose 188]

Oneyeyed,

I hear what your saying here, and i do agree that when looking to fill a void in leadership you need to look at qualifications, time served and experience. However, I'm 21 and have been involved in EMS in a career capacity since 19. At work I'm tasked with the health and well being of my patients during their time in my care, sometimes that means making quick or difficult medical decisions. While i don't claim to know everything ( i learn something new every tour), i do feel as though i am fully capable of handling just about everything that comes my way. I've seen 40 and 50 year old EMTs who i wouldn't trust with a flea! I'm not contesting your comments, because i think that your correct at some level, but at the same time I don't think its completely fair to write someone off because of age alone.

Edited December 8, 2007 by Goose

[CPFD91206 0]

Just about every post that is mentioned here deals with the aspect of commanding incidents. I haven't seen one comment or question about a 21yr olds tackling the administrative side ie; training, policies & SOG's, FF physicals, PPE purchasing/maintenance, apparatus reserve funds & committes, apparatus maintenance, station maintenance, projected community growth, LEPC meetings these are just a few to mention.

Not knowing anything about this department where this incident took place, I would hope that they have one hell of a mentor program for the junior officers to advance!