One reporters idea regarding staffing and saving tax $$$

[markmets415 524]

Wow what is this reporter thinking, posted with permission from the secretlist.

Hey....

Below is a link to an editorial that was sent to me by a close friend-I hadn't seen or read it until now...

we just had to share it with you. Maybe you already read it. Back from therapy yet?

A columnist, noted for his interesting views on improving local government, shares suggestions (to save tax dollars) that if someone dials 9-1-1 to report a fire, the fire department should only send a firefighter in a car to verify that there really is a fire. If there is really a fire or emergency, that firefighter should then rapidly summon "major-scale" equipment and more firefighters ....when there's a truly a confirmed serious fire emergency.

What a great idea.

Their next proposal should include a heart attack verification unit. Because the.. "Arrrrggghh ...HELP ME.....girgle.....gasp....I am having a h-h-heart attack!!" ..9-1-1 phone call and the callers gasping words really don't prove anything until someone gets there and verifies it. No sir, it's NOT a heart attack until WE get there and VERIFY that it is. The blue "hue" of non-breathing Uncle Hugh's face means nothing.

Or perhaps an un-armed citizen patrol volunteer should respond first when someone calls "claiming" that there is some dirt bag beating up a woman while a little kid watches. After all, it isn't true unless it is first verified.

Or the FIRE idea. A fire in the basement creates a little smoke in the upstairs of a home, the occupants notice it, they call 9-1-1 as the smoke detectors sound, and the FD sends "Smokey" in a nice, red, sporty, 68 Buick. Smokey gets there and sees Mom trying to get to her children that are trapped in the basement, the basement that is now well involved. Smokey calls back and verifies that there is a "major scale" fire...and knows that if he had hose lines, tools and about 20+ more firefighters, he might be able to actually give the taxpayers their moneys worth. But who are THOSE parents to actually think THEY know when their home actually needs more than ONE Firefighter. Silly taxpayers.

However, they did save money on all that apparatus fuel that otherwise "might" have been wasted. But then what about the coroners fuel? All tax dollars.

...seriously...WTF?!

We aren't going to get into a psss-ing contest debating the issues of waste in local, state or Federal government. It's there and everyone knows where it is. Start at the top and work your way down. Staff, Take home cars. Perks. Ridiculous salaries at many levels. You could walk in blind-folded to many City Halls and trip over waste. The City Hall dwellers live for that stuff. Look who we have been bailing out lately and how they have been spending our money ...after being "bailed" out... by "our" Federal Gov't.

How's that worked out? Yeah-exactly.

But don't think for a second that some potentially un-drug tested locally elected official somewhere is reading the below commentary, thinking "Hmmm....that's not a bad idea"...." we should do that here"....

So what's the solution? One might be that perhaps some cities, counties, villages, towns, whatever...develop a plan.

A plan of priorities. Not one of blatant risks to public safety, but one of priorities for what is important to those who pay the taxes and what is less important, no matter what the economy. In other words, when the last tax dollars are available, what are the pre-planned priorities? Whatever level of fire rescue service was previously decided upon is it, which should mean then, until there is no money left, that's what gets funded. That means everything else is cut. Or maybe soccer fields are the priority with the city deciding they only want 1 police officer on patrol and 5 Firefighters arriving in 3-4 minutes? Then that's the plan and the FD will act accordingly. After all, we cannot handle a 25 FF fire with just 5 FF's no matter had badly we may want to. Take your own garbage to the dump-there is no more collection. Mow your soccer fields-the mower people are gone. But if your kid has a medical emergency or you MIGHT have a house fire, we will be there. Or at least Smokey in the car will, and he'll then call for "not-so-mutual" aid.

Its kinda nuts that when things are great, the spending just keeps on going...but then when money is tight, like it is in almost everyplace these days, political agendas take over vs. what may be best for those who need the most critical of basic government services. And that would be those who call 9-1-1.

The bad-day havers.

This isn't going to be the first "out there" brainstorm of irresponsibly dangerous ideas that will eventually cost lives. No emotion: fact. 1 FF going to verify if there is a reported fire = dead citizens. Sooner or later. That's why fire companies were created by Ben Franklin...the guy on the horse checkin' to see if there was really a fire didn't work out real well...the fire predictably got worse. When everything is sprinklered (and we do support that), then maybe our world will change, but that's not reality today.

But this is also an opportunity for fire service leadership, from the IAFC and the IAFF to the NFPA and other related national fire organizations to continue to further aggressively help their members locally and nationally deal with this kind of proposed lunacy...from the "municipal critics".

HeII, we haven't even discussed the "response to terrorism" role that the very busy Smokey-In-The-Buick must also play. That should also work out real well.

=Here is that newspaper commentary:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/oh/story/opinions/editorial/2008/11/30/ddn113008peircexxeb.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=22

Edited December 1, 2008 by markmets415

[joetnymedic 43]

i read that story too. the guy who wrote it is an absolute clown and soomeone needs to take his crayons away. what is he thinking. i actually posted the story myself on another website. what this guy is proposing is lunacy. when the guy in the car shows up and calls for back up, whats he supposed to do till they get there toast marshmellows? and on the heart attack protocol he proposes, uh yeah, ya know what, we're trying to save money this month so we're not going to give you nitro or a line because hey, the er has all that stuff there. this is exactly why people who have nothing to do with emergency services should express an opinion on what said services should do. basically you'd get a better response from a wall than this clown. what's next, well ya know even though the fd went to 5000 calls last year, only 300 were real calls, so look at the waste of manpower and equipment so lets start cutting jobs and selling off equipment. This guy is one of those people who would probably convince some mayor or counsel member somewhere that any of the above mentioned would be good for them. and the sad fact is as most mayors or council members have no idea about emergency services, they'd probably convince some shmoe to go for it. what's next telling cops not to shoot at someone unless they actually get hit - hello. This guy is outright dangerous

[Turborich 12]

A columnist, noted for his interesting views on improving local government, shares suggestions (to save tax dollars) that if someone dials 9-1-1 to report a fire, the fire department should only send a firefighter in a car to verify that there really is a fire. If there is really a fire or emergency, that firefighter should then rapidly summon "major-scale" equipment and more firefighters ....when there's a truly a confirmed serious fire emergency.

Not to start a flame war BUT..

What do you think of "Smokey" in the Suburban or Expedition who holds off second dispatch to "investigate" the A/F/A, CO call w/o symptoms, etc. on the lonesome during the daytime, peak hour responses? Same stuff but occuring everywhere and more so a reality lately secondary to "manpower apathy".. listen and you'll realize it happens more than you think.

This idea isn't a shock to me.. it has been something that has been going on in Orange/Dutchess/Putnam/Westchester/Ulster for years however "Smokey" is in the form of a Chief in a district vehicle.

It only takes one lawsuit.. liability is the tie that binds in public safety.

[Danger 160]

Great point Rich

[JBE 328]

It's kinda funny, I can't think of how many times I have heard, "Can you only send a couple of guys over in a car??" for something that required a standard structural fire assignment. This guy has his opinion, but it is the same opinion I have heard more times than I care to count. Obviously, it is not a very good opinion in the eyes of those of us who deal with fires and emergencies on a daily basis.

Interesting flipside to the discussion though. Especially since the writer brings up how the unions will bend in light of the weakening economy. Businesses close, buildings go vacant. Fire duty goes up. Major scale responses, as the author puts it, are reduced because they don't have enough equipment to put out said fires. Union members get the shaft when they have to wait extended periods of time to get help. They'll scream even more and be even less flexible.

I look at it this way, and I'm pretty confident my opinion is shared by a lot of you. Better to have and not need, than need and not have. And Rich, I'm right with you with the Smokey.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

LOL. That happens Rich.....nooooooo.

I had to chuckle a bit. I know of a lawyer who represented a municipality who brought up the fact he wish he could do basically the same thing for AFA's. He figured it would reduce the liability of having apparatus on the road and keep other resources available if a actual fire comes in. It doesn't happen often, but I brought up that we could actually have a policy where the first due goes hot only and the others respond cold. Or we could reduce the residential AFA response to either 1 engine or a 1 and 1 response reducing the amount of apparatus. In regard to resource managment I always ask the same question when they get into resource managment dictated by trying to stop an apparatus from responding to certain types of calls. "Does the PD keep a car from going to calls because a bank robbery might happen?" Then why do we try to do the same for a fire apparatus?

[xchief2x 79]

Well said as Usual Tommy. Our Dept. policy is the 1st due engine responds emergency mode and the balance of the assignment responds non emergency mode. This article reminds me of back when I was still a cop, when we were going to make the switch to the semi automaitic sidearms one of our genious citizens in attendance at that particular Village board meeting wanted to know why we couldn't just buy maybe 3 or 4 and everyone could share them. There are just way too many "smart" people out there.

[markmets415 524]

I am in favor of the first engine running hot and the rest in non-emergency mode, I do not like the only one engine theory, I have seen it happen, right after I got out as Chief, the new Chief reduced our response to the one engine only and on our first A/F/A after the change, he arrived and discovered heavy smoke in the basement as a result of a dryer fire. The assignment was qucikly changed back to all equipment.