Update on Stamford Merger

[jayhalsey 6]

Mayor overstates challenges to unified fire service

Published 06:36 p.m., Wednesday, June 1, 2011

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/opinion/article/Mayor-overstates-challenges-to-unified-fire-1405426.php

The next question is: Which of Stamford's Volunteer Fire Chief's would advise the BOR's to make the appropriate changes? I think we should make the next wheel round. Stay tuned...

"Advice" makes me think they just wanted to make sure that the two parties involved would each have their voices heard. One does not need to heed "advice". If they had swapped "advice" for "approval" that would be a sticky point.

[FFPCogs 863]

"Advice" makes me think they just wanted to make sure that the two parties involved would each have their voices heard. One does not need to heed "advice". If they had swapped "advice" for "approval" that would be a sticky point.

As expected I tend to see the term advice differently, or maybe it is wording which states that the BoR can change it with 2/3 majority WITH the advice of Chiefs. of both SFRD and each VFD district affected. My understanding is that the term "with" when used in this context usually denotes a requirement. And quite frankly if all that was needed was a 2/3 majority or enacting an ordinance this would have been settled long ago. But as our former mayor found out the fact is the VFDs have to agree to ANY changes to their districts.

Events should begin to move now as there is an announcement pending today about this. We'll see.

Cogs

[jayhalsey 6]

As expected I tend to see the term advice differently, or maybe it is wording which states that the BoR can change it with 2/3 majority WITH the advice of Chiefs. of both SFRD and each VFD district affected. My understanding is that the term "with" when used in this context usually denotes a requirement. And quite frankly if all that was needed was a 2/3 majority or enacting an ordinance this would have been settled long ago. But as our former mayor found out the fact is the VFDs have to agree to ANY changes to their districts.

Events should begin to move now as there is an announcement pending today about this. We'll see.

Cogs

I guess it would be open to interpretation. I would certainly hope that both parties being affected would be included in the discussion, and would have to sign off on any changes. But, as we have seen, sometimes the powers that be arent interested in hearing the "advice" from both parties affected. I am curious to see what this announcement today is going to bring, though.

[CTFF 65]

I guess it would be open to interpretation. I would certainly hope that both parties being affected would be included in the discussion, and would have to sign off on any changes. But, as we have seen, sometimes the powers that be arent interested in hearing the "advice" from both parties affected. I am curious to see what this announcement today is going to bring, though.

My guess is you'll see the "Big four" ( Long Ridge, Turn of River, Belltown & Springdale) have agreed to merge...

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

Hey when is the Springdale parade, thats a lot of fun, boy can't wait !

[Geppetto 31]

Is this it?

Daily Stamford

Anthony Buzzeo

06/03/11

http://www.thedailystamford.com/news/glenbrook-station-unites-stamford-firefighters

nvm

[FFPCogs 863]

Is this it?

Daily Stamford

Anthony Buzzeo

06/03/11

http://www.thedailys...rd-firefighters

nvm

I believe CTFF is closer to what a little birdy told me was in the works for later today. As for Glenbrook, well it's wonderful to read that such a good "working" relationship has developed from their situation. Unfortunately with a response record of only 12% of their dispatched calls, one has to wonder just how much work they are actually doing. That record by the way is one that is far worse then even the most abysmal response from the other much mailgned VFDs in town. Frankly many tend to see Glenbrook and it's relationship with SFRD as more akin to that of a "puppet regime" to it's master. They have been repeatedly touted as the "model" VFD to support the SFRD vision for Stamford's future. With that 12% as a model is it any wonder the others have chosen a different route.

Cogs

[CTFF 65]

I believe CTFF is closer to what a little birdy told me was in the works for later today. As for Glenbrook, well it's wonderful to read that such a good "working" relationship has developed from their situation. Unfortunately with a response record of only 12% of their dispatched calls, one has to wonder just how much work they are actually doing. That record by the way is one that is far worse then even the most abysmal response from the other much mailgned VFDs in town. Frankly many tend to see Glenbrook and it's relationship with SFRD as more akin to that of a "puppet regime" to it's master. They have been repeatedly touted as the "model" VFD to support the SFRD vision for Stamford's future. With that 12% as a model is it any wonder the others have chosen a different route.

Cogs

A little birdy? C'mon Coggs, if there is a signed agreement one would have to think that the memberships of the big four have seen the agreement and voted on it, right? Or did you miss that meeting?

[CTFF 65]

4pm @ TOR station 1 for the announcement according to my sources.

[FD828 77]

I believe CTFF is closer to what a little birdy told me was in the works for later today. As for Glenbrook, well it's wonderful to read that such a good "working" relationship has developed from their situation. Unfortunately with a response record of only 12% of their dispatched calls, one has to wonder just how much work they are actually doing. That record by the way is one that is far worse then even the most abysmal response from the other much mailgned VFDs in town. Frankly many tend to see Glenbrook and it's relationship with SFRD as more akin to that of a "puppet regime" to it's master. They have been repeatedly touted as the "model" VFD to support the SFRD vision for Stamford's future. With that 12% as a model is it any wonder the others have chosen a different route.

Cogs

Just because Glenbrook only has as you say a 12% response record, doesn't mean that having SFRD in all the VFD's wouldn't work the same or BETTER. That is of course the VFD's refused to work with the career staff and that wouldn't happen would it?

[Geppetto 31]

12%, That's interesting data. Is that for a fully staffed piece of apparatus, or 1 non-qualified (medical or fire) person in a pick-up truck, signing on with a radio? I would be interested in seeing how well the other "maligned" companies actually respond. But as always, their sovereignty seems to afford them with the luxury of not providing it.

[FD828 77]

12%, That's interesting data. Is that for a fully staffed piece of apparatus, or 1 non-qualified (medical or fire) person in a pick-up truck, signing on with a radio? I would be interested in seeing how well the other "maligned" companies actually respond. But as always, their sovereignty seems to afford them with the luxury of not providing it.

Such a very good point. The other VFD's may be responding but with what man power? What level of fire or medical training do they posess? Is it any better if a VFD responds but has little or no qualified members? I guess as long as the BRT shows up everything is fine?

[FFPCogs 863]

A little birdy? C'mon Coggs, if there is a signed agreement one would have to think that the memberships of the big four have seen the agreement and voted on it, right? Or did you miss that meeting?

In fact I'm 7000 miles away back working in the sandbox my friend, much to your dismay I'm sure, so news comes to me via a variety of sources including little birdies.

[FFPCogs 863]

12%, That's interesting data. Is that for a fully staffed piece of apparatus, or 1 non-qualified (medical or fire) person in a pick-up truck, signing on with a radio? I would be interested in seeing how well the other "maligned" companies actually respond. But as always, their sovereignty seems to afford them with the luxury of not providing it.

The numbers don't lie. GFD does not respond to the vast majority of their calls no matter what kind of window dressing one wants to put on them as a "model" VFD. That's not my fault that's just how it is. As far as the responses of the other VFDs go, well I can really only speak for one of them which, as most already know, has responded to 100% of their calls and more often than not returns SFRD units to service since sufficient staffing is on hand to handle the majority of our calls. But even if the others are lacking in numbers they do at least respond with far greater regularity than the "model" GFD. Personally I don't think the taxpayers would want to fund four more such "models" of efficiency. It's quite possible that they may yet call for a better accounting of GFDs purpose based on such a low return on their investment. Regardless, with things now progessing there will be changes coming which I'm sure some will not take well to.

Cogs

[FFPCogs 863]

Just because Glenbrook only has as you say a 12% response record, doesn't mean that having SFRD in all the VFD's wouldn't work the same or BETTER. That is of course the VFD's refused to work with the career staff and that wouldn't happen would it?

Yes it's always the vol;unteers that create problems isn't it? Why it's a well known fact that Stamford's VFDs (sans GFD of course) specifically cite SFRD as a rival organization. Oops sorry I got that backwards. it's L-786 aka SFRD's membership that regards the volunteers as rivals. And of course such a view would never carry over into the interactions between the career and volunteers in their firehouses now would it?

Tell me just how wiilling is SFRD to work with the volunteers to create a true combination system in such areas as an integrated command system? Alternate staffing options? Cross staffing apparatus? Volunteers riding ALL SFRD apparatus in every station? Volunteer incentives, or as many like to mislable them, compensation? Seems to me willingness to work together has to be a two way street if it's to be successful and BETTER. Unfortunately as of yet I have neither seen nor heard of any aquiesciences on the part of SFRD to any of these or other such ideas. Or maybe I'm mistaken because such an unwillingness to compromise on the part of SFRD would never happen now would it?

[CTFF 65]

Simply amazing you have GFD's numbers but not SFCO's or TOR's, guess the note would have been too big for the birdy.

Edited June 3, 2011 by CTFF

[FD828 77]

Yes it's always the vol;unteers that create problems isn't it? Why it's a well known fact that Stamford's VFDs (sans GFD of course) specifically cite SFRD as a rival organization. Oops sorry I got that backwards. it's L-786 aka SFRD's membership that regards the volunteers as rivals. And of course such a view would never carry over into the interactions between the career and volunteers in their firehouses now would it?

Tell me just how wiilling is SFRD to work with the volunteers to create a true combination system in such areas as an integrated command system? Alternate staffing options? Cross staffing apparatus? Volunteers riding ALL SFRD apparatus in every station? Volunteer incentives, or as many like to mislable them, compensation? Seems to me willingness to work together has to be a two way street if it's to be successful and BETTER. Unfortunately as of yet I have neither seen nor heard of any aquiesciences on the part of SFRD to any of these or other such ideas. Or maybe I'm mistaken because such an unwillingness to compromise on the part of SFRD would never happen now would it?

I know you were at the same meeting I was when Chief Brown made his proposal for the future fire service to the BOR where he talked about the volunteer firefighters riding out with the career staff, training with the career staff and when specifiacally asked if the volunteers would be able to ride in ALL of the SFRD stations the answer was NOT no. I believe he also talked about incentives for the volunteers in the form of points on the entrance exam, 5 for being an ACTIVE member and 5 for residing in town. So Yes, you are mistaken. A very big step forward was taken by the SFRD Chief to work with the volunteers (and save tax payer money) and as of yet except for GFD, the other "big 4" have yet to be willing to take that same step forward to even meet somewhere in the middle.

Everyone agrees that there should be 1 department and 1 chief, but because of the "fear of the VFD's bringing law suits" we are going to have 2, I mean 3 departments. There will never be 1 department if the mayor forms his plan even though he has stated that would be the optimal goal. You have to start somewhere. Form one department and start somewhere. Try things one way, then try them another. Keep what works and get rid of what doesn't. Nothing has to be permanent. It can be a work in progress under 1 chief!

Again the big sticking point... who is in charge.

[FFPCogs 863]

Simply amazing you have GFD's numbers but not SFCO's or TOR's, guess the note would have been too big for the birdy.

What is truly amazing is that anyone would question why GFD is being singled out based on their performance.

As much as some may want to divert attention away from the truth, the fact is it is GFD that is a problem, not the "model" solution some espouse it to be. As has become readily apparent to anyone with eyes, GFD under the tuteledge and supervision of SFRD has become a completely non functional organization. Yet even in the face of such a blatant example of failure it is still held in high regard by some as the model for our future. Sorry but that is a future we don't want, nor do many on the Board of Representatives or the public. This is evidenced by the fact that even under the unrelenting assault by L-786 and the previous administration no Charter change or specific ordinances were passed to abrogate the status of the VFDs. Why do you think that is? Because a clear example of what lies ahead under the SFRD plan is staring everyone right smack in the face in the form of GFD no matter how much smoke, mirrors or wiindow dressing some have tried to obscure the truth with. Besides Stamford Fire Lies.com and some members of L-786 have done a marvelous job of relating the response numbers of the other VFDs (sans BFD's 100% of course) to the public, the Board of Reps and the contributors here so there was no need for me to cite them yet again.

Chirp chirp

Cogs

[CTFF 65]

So today's annoucement was about TOR, BFD and LRFCO merging per news12. Springdale has not voted on it.

Edited June 3, 2011 by CTFF

[CTFF 65]

What is truly amazing is that anyone would question why GFD is being singled out based on their performance.

As much as some may want to divert attention away from the truth, the fact is it is GFD that is a problem, not the "model" solution some espouse it to be. As has become readily apparent to anyone with eyes, GFD under the tuteledge and supervision of SFRD has become a completely non functional organization. Yet even in the face of such a blatant example of failure it is still held in high regard by some as the model for our future. Sorry but that is a future we don't want, nor do many on the Board of Representatives or the public. This is evidenced by the fact that even under the unrelenting assault by L-786 and the previous administration no Charter change or specific ordinances were passed to abrogate the status of the VFDs. Why do you think that is? Because a clear example of what lies ahead under the SFRD plan is staring everyone right smack in the face in the form of GFD no matter how much smoke, mirrors or wiindow dressing some have tried to obscure the truth with. Besides Stamford Fire Lies.com and some members of L-786 have done a marvelous job of relating the response numbers of the other VFDs (sans BFD's 100% of course) to the public, the Board of Reps and the contributors here so there was no need for me to cite them yet again.

Chirp chirp

Cogs

Cogs,

I'd simply like to see all the numbers for all of the dept's. Hell I'd like to see the NFIRS for each dept showing who actually responds to calls. I think the whole situation is still a very long way off from being resolved.

[FFPCogs 863]

I know you were at the same meeting I was when Chief Brown made his proposal for the future fire service to the BOR where he talked about the volunteer firefighters riding out with the career staff, training with the career staff and when specifiacally asked if the volunteers would be able to ride in ALL of the SFRD stations the answer was NOT no. I believe he also talked about incentives for the volunteers in the form of points on the entrance exam, 5 for being an ACTIVE member and 5 for residing in town. So Yes, you are mistaken. A very big step forward was taken by the SFRD Chief to work with the volunteers (and save tax payer money) and as of yet except for GFD, the other "big 4" have yet to be willing to take that same step forward to even meet somewhere in the middle.

Come now. Yes I was at that meeting, but there was no commitment from SFRD on volunteers riding out of every station citywide as an integral part of the system. My recollection is that we were told that particular point required union approval. On to exam points, yes a 5 point bonus on SFRD tests was offerred but 5 points on EVERY civil service test was not. Why because that would allow people who recieve 5 points on a garbage collector or police officers test to remain an active volunteer firefighter. On the other hand, as we all are well aware, once hired by SFRD with those 5 points one's abilty to volunteer as an active firefighter disappears. As far as other incentives go such as tax breaks, LOSAP, stipends and the like, all have met with vehement protests right here on this very site and thread, among other places, as turning volunteers into paid staff. Fact is the LAW allows for certain incentives while maintaining volunteer status. Just because that may have a negative affect on filling potential future but currently non-existent paid positions does not mean that we as an organization should not pursue them. And if in fact there was a serious consideration by SFRD to enhace the volunteer sector then they would be embraced. There has been no copmromise on these plain and simpe even though some do have a proven track record of success in increasing volunteer ranks....or in other words as an incentive to join and stay. What about integrated command? Cross staffing.?..well to be fair Chief Brown did at one point say this was possible, but again it would be contingent upon union approval...the very same union that specifically cites LRFCo, ToR, SFCo and BFD as rivals by the way.

Everyone agrees that there should be 1 department and 1 chief, but because of the "fear of the VFD's bringing law suits" we are going to have 2, I mean 3 departments. There will never be 1 department if the mayor forms his plan even though he has stated that would be the optimal goal. You have to start somewhere. Form one department and start somewhere. Try things one way, then try them another. Keep what works and get rid of what doesn't. Nothing has to be permanent. It can be a work in progress under 1 chief!

Again the big sticking point... who is in charge.

I'm not so sure everyone agrees that there should be one Chief, but I ceratinly do given the right conditions. And it is here that the true colors are shown. There are some of us that have called for an INTEGRATED command comprised of both career and volunteer officers and Chiefs. Again and again and even with the stipulation that all must meet the same criteria and standards as well as take the same exams there has been no acceptance by SFRD or L-786. Why? Who is it that really wants control? To be "in charge"? So much so that they are unwilling to help create an integrated system, a true combination system that utilizes such an approach? I can say with 100% confidence it is not the VFDs. therefore it must be SFRD and L-786. This option, this real step towards a middle ground, has been repeatedly brought forth and rejected. Why?

Why can't we work towards a one chief department by starting with 2 (or 3) instead of the curent six and go from there? As you say this will be a work in progess, and from 6 to 2 is a realistic approach under the circumstances and truly is progress. Why the resistance?

Cogs

[FFPCogs 863]

Cogs,

I'd simply like to see all the numbers for all of the dept's. Hell I'd like to see the NFIRS for each dept showing who actually responds to calls.

The department response numbers I'm sure are readily available through dispatch records. As for NIFRS, well that takes a little more doing, but I believe an FOI request can probably yield the information you seek.

I think the whole situation is still a very long way off from being resolved.

Agreed. There is much work to be done, and I for one will do all I can to see a successful outcome that benefits the community first. You can believe that or not, but above all else that IS my motivation.

Cogs

[DDixie 12]

There is a reason I bought a house in Stamford with a hydrant in the front yard, have 100 ft of hose, and have no problem tapping the hydrant to access water if my house catches on fire. I'm tired of the fighting between the Fire Rescue staff and the volunteers. I've had to call the 911 twice - once for smoke in my neighbor's house which was an oil burner malfunction, and another was for my neighbor who was unresponsive on her front yard. It took 10 min for TOR to show for the smoke in the house and less than 5 min for SFR who arrived when my neighbor passed out. As long as TOR can guarantee a trained crew to respond IMMEDIATELY on a piece of apparatus from the station (not just a darn chief car) 24 hours a day, then I'm ok with the volunteers continuing to operate as a volunteer house. SFR crews do a great job: they respond immediately from a trailer/station that's closer to my house. The wait time is minimal. Will TOR promise the same? I want that guarantee.

[FFPCogs 863]

There is a reason I bought a house in Stamford with a hydrant in the front yard, have 100 ft of hose, and have no problem tapping the hydrant to access water if my house catches on fire. I'm tired of the fighting between the Fire Rescue staff and the volunteers. I've had to call the 911 twice - once for smoke in my neighbor's house which was an oil burner malfunction, and another was for my neighbor who was unresponsive on her front yard. It took 10 min for TOR to show for the smoke in the house and less than 5 min for SFR who arrived when my neighbor passed out. As long as TOR can guarantee a trained crew to respond IMMEDIATELY on a piece of apparatus from the station (not just a darn chief car) 24 hours a day, then I'm ok with the volunteers continuing to operate as a volunteer house. SFR crews do a great job: they respond immediately from a trailer/station that's closer to my house. The wait time is minimal. Will TOR promise the same? I want that guarantee.

And you rightly deserve it.

[Geppetto 31]

Fire departments announce merger agreement

Fire companies agree: Members of 3 departments endorse plan to pool resources

Jeff Morganteen

Stamford Advocate

Friday, June 3, 2011

STAMFORD -- The Belltown, Turn of River and Long Ridge fire departments on Friday made official an agreement to pool resources and equipment, the first concrete step in the mayor's ambitious plan to reorganize the city's fire service by merging four of its five volunteer fire departments.

At a news conference Friday afternoon in front of Turn of River Station 1, city officials and fire department chiefs announced the membership of each of the three departments voted to ratify a joint venture agreement between the fire companies....

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Fire-departments-announce-merger-agreement-1409133.php

[CTFF 65]

And you rightly deserve it.

As long as he knows he will be getting a smaller crew from the volunteer dept, consisting of paid personel out the door more often then not.

Edited June 4, 2011 by CTFF

[Geppetto 31]

Three Volunteer Fire Departments Announce Merger

Chandra Johnson Greene

Stamford Patch

June 3, 2011

http://stamford.patch.com/articles/video-three-volunteer-fire-departments-announce-merger

[FD828 77]

So basically everything will continue the way it is now. What a joke this whole thing is. Cogs, you talk about smoke and mirrors? Well this is the biggest smoke and mirror job that they are trying to force upon the public at large.

[FFPCogs 863]

As long as he knows he will be getting a smaller crew from the volunteer dept, consisting of paid personel out the door more often then not.

Under the proposed staffing guidelines that may be correct as they are the minimum, but it is entirely possible that those staffing guidelines will be subject to change based on the availibility of guaranteed, scheduled volunteer staffing. Alternate guidelines remain a possibility and have recieved a number of modifcations to allow for 4 man staffing in each station 24/7. As has been said before this will be a work in progress and as such little is cast in stone at the moment. If or when some of the other programs associated with recruitment and retention bear fruit it is even more likely that residents of North Stamford will actuially see an increase in staffing per rig to 6 or multiple units staffed per station to better serve them. Given continued supprt from 888 the residents of North Stamford will see a far greater return for their investment than they have in the past or would with the proposed SFRD plan.

Cogs

Edited June 4, 2011 by FFPCogs

[CTFF 65]

Under the proposed staffing guidelines that may be correct as they are the minimum, but it is entirely possible that those staffing guidelines will be subject to change based on the availibility of guaranteed, scheduled volunteer staffing. Alternate guidelines remain a possibility and have recieved a number of modifcations to allow for 4 man staffing in each station 24/7. As has been said before this will be a work in progress and as such little is cast in stone at the moment. If or when some of the other programs associated with recruitment and retention bear fruit it is even more likely that residents of North Stamford will actuially see an increase in staffing per rig to 6 or multiple units staffed per station to better serve them. Given continued supprt from 888 the residents of North Stamford will see a far greater return for their investment than they have in the past or would with the proposed SFRD plan.

Cogs

Are you saying 24/7 with a mix of paid and volunteers? Or does the plan already recognize the need for 4 man career staffing but it will be sold to the public as something else?