Fire District Consolidation Opposition

[Guest alsfirefighter]

This might be a hot button topic but I wanted to voice my thoughts and disbelief.

I received an email yesterday (quoted below) from a 3rd party that copied a FASNY email in opposition to the proposed legislation requested by the Attorney General.

Can someone please for the life of me. Explain why FASNY would be opposed to this? Is the Volunteer Fire Service only there to save localities money? And what makes them overall so sure that having all these fragmented fire districts in some areas actually saves tax payer dollars with the stacking of apparatus in these districts? Not to mention the consolidation of personnel which might actually make for better service. Why is it...that as an organization they preach about the volunteer fire service...when combination systems...both large and medium sized have worked for years down south and out west. Or when professional firefighter organizations make valid arguments on how paid systems can also save money and what is suppose to be the priority of what we do...enhance service...we are the bastards of the world.

Get an open mind...think about the root issues and how much sense it actually makes. I know of some areas where there are more fire commissioners in a 10 square mile area then they get people on the road for a call. With stations and apparatus a stones throw away...but having the ability to consolidate makes no sense.

PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO ALL FIRE SERVICE PERSONNEL, FAMILY, FRIENDS & SUPPORTERS. WE NEED YOUR HELP

This email is in reference to Assembly Bill No. 8501/Senate Bill No. S5651, which has been proposed this past week at the request of Attorney General Andrew Cuomo that would allow for the consolidation or dissolution of local governments, which includes fire districts & independent fire companies. While we share the Attorney General’s concern as real property tax payers that steps need to be taken to make Long Island and New York State more affordable for people who own real property; we believe that this bill is not the solution to this problem and not even a good first step. As volunteer firefighters, volunteer publicly elected fire commissioners and taxpayer supporters of the volunteer fire service, we need to be concerned about the impact that this bill will have on the volunteer fire service. We believe that it has the potential to do considerable damage to a volunteer system which saves the state and local governments billions of dollars each year. An interesting note is that School Districts are not included in this.

It is important to remember that if we make legislative changes that adversely impact this volunteer system, our only alternative will be a paid system that will cost the real property taxpayers in our communities even more. The financial crisis that the state and federal government are addressing further emphasizes the importance of preserving the best value in local government finance, the volunteer fire service.

We need to make our concerns known to AG Andrew Cuomo, all NYS Assembly people & Senators that we are opposed to this legislation. As a means to show your opposition, we have created a link to the AFDNC web site that will generate an email to be sent out to ALL NYS Assembly people & Senators stating our concerns as to why this bill would not provide the solution they are looking for.

We can only make our dissatisfaction with this bill known with your support. Please follow the instructions below and our message will get heard.

Thanks again for all your help, cooperation and support

[weaselff 6]

This might be a hot button topic but I wanted to voice my thoughts and disbelief.

I received an email yesterday (quoted below) from a 3rd party that copied a FASNY email in opposition to the proposed legislation requested by the Attorney General.

Can someone please for the life of me. Explain why FASNY would be opposed to this? Is the Volunteer Fire Service only there to save localities money? And what makes them overall so sure that having all these fragmented fire districts in some areas actually saves tax payer dollars with the stacking of apparatus in these districts? Not to mention the consolidation of personnel which might actually make for better service. Why is it...that as an organization they preach about the volunteer fire service...when combination systems...both large and medium sized have worked for years down south and out west. Or when professional firefighter organizations make valid arguments on how paid systems can also save money and what is suppose to be the priority of what we do...enhance service...we are the bastards of the world.

Get an open mind...think about the root issues and how much sense it actually makes. I know of some areas where there are more fire commissioners in a 10 square mile area then they get people on the road for a call. With stations and apparatus a stones throw away...but having the ability to consolidate makes no sense.

I think its because the chiefs and commisioners dont want to give up their fifedoms and $60K tahoes. I have three firehouses from 3 different vfd's within walking distance of my home. Each of these dept.'s does 300-400 runs a year.

[Raz 14]

FASNY

You just answered all of your own questions with one word.

[JFLYNN 681]

This might be a hot button topic but I wanted to voice my thoughts and disbelief.

I received an email yesterday (quoted below) from a 3rd party that copied a FASNY email in opposition to the proposed legislation requested by the Attorney General.

Can someone please for the life of me. Explain why FASNY would be opposed to this? Is the Volunteer Fire Service only there to save localities money? And what makes them overall so sure that having all these fragmented fire districts in some areas actually saves tax payer dollars with the stacking of apparatus in these districts? Not to mention the consolidation of personnel which might actually make for better service. Why is it...that as an organization they preach about the volunteer fire service...when combination systems...both large and medium sized have worked for years down south and out west. Or when professional firefighter organizations make valid arguments on how paid systems can also save money and what is suppose to be the priority of what we do...enhance service...we are the bastards of the world.

Get an open mind...think about the root issues and how much sense it actually makes. I know of some areas where there are more fire commissioners in a 10 square mile area then they get people on the road for a call. With stations and apparatus a stones throw away...but having the ability to consolidate makes no sense.

Excellent points. You and I know why FASNY would be opposed to this...because in many areas of NYS, once fire districts are able to be abolished and / or consolidated, it will easily be able to be shown that it would be cheaper and much more efficient to create regional career or combination departments. Less expensive and better service to the public. It will no longer just be a hypothetical exercise to add up all the expense of say, 10 small volunteer departments in a region and then compare costs and response times, etc. to a proposed career or combination department which would need far less apparatus, buildings, fuel, training and equipment expense, etc., etc. It will be able to be presented to the public for a vote and actually accomplished! The myth of volunteer departments in NYS providing the same levels of service as a career department for less money will be shattered. Of course, in some areas a volunteer department still is the way to go, but even there it may be far more efficient and less expensive to combine smaller districts into larger districts. End result would be less Chiefs, less Fire Commissioners, and yes, less apparatus, equipment and fire stations.

Why not let the public vote on this? If, after hearing arguments from all sides of this issue the public votes to keep their local volunteer FD as is, so be it.

Hey guys, I must take great pain here to remember to remind you all to, you guessed it- qtip!

Also, since qtip has, in my opinion, proven so valuable and many of you have taken it to heart which I think is a real good thing, in light of recent events on this site, I will now suggest to you all another valuable piece of advice which was once given to me and I now strive to remind myself of daily- never make assumptions. So, please do not assume anything about what I have written other than what I have written- take it at face value, no hidden agendas, no hate, no condescension, no arrogance, etc. There's too much of all that in the world already, and I certainly don't want to add more. But we all have opinions, right? These are just mine. If you are not sure about something I have written here, please ask and I will clarify.

Oh, if you noticed some sarcasm, I'll plead guilty to that...all in good fun guys, and to help me make my points, so if you're grinding your teeth right now, clenching your fists, muttering, cursing, holding your breath...just relax, ok, take a deep breath, and when you have a chance, buy a box of qtips and tape one to the corner of your computer sreeen- I guarantee that will help.

[shadow12083 17]

Does the bill specifically limit it self to only volunteer districts or just districts in general?

Because if it is for any type of fire district this would be a fire service issue and not a Volunteer or FASNY issue. Because weather your in a volunteer district or a career run district the outcome would be the same if the voters think the district should be merge.

Such as the case of what is happening with Fairview in Dutchess, this legislation might give the group fighting to disolve the district the power to actually make that happen.

Does anyone know if any of the local IAFF have an official opinion on the bill?

[Remember585 815]

If I read this correctly it applies to both volunteer and career fire districts. Also, this is another interpretation of mine, this affects Fire Districts and Fire Protection Districts, not municipal fire departments, correct?

With all of the discussion of fire districts, I haven't seen anything relating to EMS districts. Would it also hit on this subject?

Thanks. (I apologize if I am ignorant and am not understanding this fully. I slept during all of my political science classes...)

Perhaps this will help those departments that respond to automatic alarms during the day with a driver, one Interior and a handful of exterior members. It's happening more and more all over the place.... our public deserves qualified people when they call for help... the old "we're just volunteers" line won't hold up in court!

Edited May 29, 2009 by Remember585

[Raz 14]

Does the bill specifically limit it self to only volunteer districts or just districts in general? Because if it is for any type of fire district this would be a fire service issue and not a Volunteer or FASNY issue.

The bill applies to all fire districts, it is undoubtedly a fire service issue. The reason there are people in this thread speaking out against FASNY, is because once again they've hijacked a legitimate issue facing the fire service and turned it into a struggle to maintain power without oversight.

For an organization claiming to serve, support, and educate volunteers throughout NY, they seem to do an awful lot to fight everything that could improve service to the citizens that ultimately foot the bill. Can't train for 8 hours a year,? Don't worry, thanks to FASNY, you can now complete your OSHA training in about 15 minutes online. Want to drive a 50,000 lbs vehicle? Any other service would require a CDL, but not here in the NY fire service, thanks FASNY. I'm pretty sure they fought the adoption of FF1 classes here in NY as well, leading to the short lived creation of Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced FF classes, instead. Which served to put more unqualified "interior" firefighters into the ranks.

[gamewell45 258]

This might be a hot button topic but I wanted to voice my thoughts and disbelief.

I received an email yesterday (quoted below) from a 3rd party that copied a FASNY email in opposition to the proposed legislation requested by the Attorney General.

Can someone please for the life of me. Explain why FASNY would be opposed to this? Is the Volunteer Fire Service only there to save localities money? And what makes them overall so sure that having all these fragmented fire districts in some areas actually saves tax payer dollars with the stacking of apparatus in these districts? Not to mention the consolidation of personnel which might actually make for better service. Why is it...that as an organization they preach about the volunteer fire service...when combination systems...both large and medium sized have worked for years down south and out west. Or when professional firefighter organizations make valid arguments on how paid systems can also save money and what is suppose to be the priority of what we do...enhance service...we are the bastards of the world.

Get an open mind...think about the root issues and how much sense it actually makes. I know of some areas where there are more fire commissioners in a 10 square mile area then they get people on the road for a call. With stations and apparatus a stones throw away...but having the ability to consolidate makes no sense.

The answer is very easy; while subjective, it's the same reason why the unions representing paid personnel take certain positions on bills regarding the fire service in the state; they are looking out for the best interests of their base membership whether it benefits the public or not. Its the way its been with both volunteer associations and unions since they were formed. It will be a constant battle and whoever has the best lobbying effort will most likely prevail. While I can't speak for other states in the US, FASNY has a very efficient lobby network and they manage to get alot of bills passed that benefit the volunteer fire service.

You want real change, petition the fire district you live in to disband (like they are doing in Fairview - Dutchess County) and merge with another district; I think thats the closest your going to get to any type of consolidation short of changing the state laws.

Edited May 29, 2009 by gamewell45

[firefighter36 52]

The funny part about this is that the machinery already exists in NYS law to change, disband, or merge fire districts. The current standard of more than 50% of taxpaying residents is too much for some politicians.

Additionally, it seems as though School Districts are exempt from this legislation as well.... What is the point of this legislation if certain types of districts are exempt? I would love to see what the financial outlook is for merging a few school districts together.

I am for anything that merges districts together in the name of efficiency, enhanced services, and consolidating costs..... Too bad Albany will NEVER be able to produce such a law the way they are run.

[firecapt32 282]

can some one answer this question for me. is a fire protection district the same as a fire district?? I am confused and have been in this business a long time. Do FPD or can FPD elect commissioners?? like a fire district?? are the established by theState?? who would vote in a FPD?? to disband or reorganize?? lotsof question any one with answers??

couorious minds would lilke to know

[Guest alsfirefighter]

The answer is very easy; while subjective, it's the same reason why the unions representing paid personnel take certain positions on bills regarding the fire service in the state; they are looking out for the best interests of their base membership whether it benefits the public or not. Its the way its been with both volunteer associations and unions since they were formed. It will be a constant battle and whoever has the best lobbying effort will most likely prevail. While I can't speak for other states in the US, FASNY has a very efficient lobby network and they manage to get alot of bills passed that benefit the volunteer fire service.

You want real change, petition the fire district you live in to disband (like they are doing in Fairview - Dutchess County) and merge with another district; I think thats the closest your going to get to any type of consolidation short of changing the state laws.

OK. I ask you this. Show me one single piece of correspondence, legislation proposed or even a comment made by any of the unions that represent professional firefighters that looked out for the best interest of the "base membership" that didn't benefit the public when it comes to enhancing or strengthening service. Raz has very poignantly pointed out a few on the FASNY side. Then look at the outcry of such actions. I personally have only seen and supported lobbying by my professional association that has involved stronger training requirements, better curriculums, the pushing for grants that have benefited both career, volunteer and combination fire departments for both equipment and staffing. Anything else is generally benefits and collective bargaining issues that have no effect on the service to the public. And before someone wants to get on the tax bandwagon...lets not forgot there are many out there that are union employees for other public companies that your same issues result in higher user fees, etc. for you to make a living.

I then have a couple of more questions:

1. If this effects the "base membership," why doesn't it effect the "volunteer firefighter" instead of the "volunteer fire servce?" Isn't FASNY's base membership comprised of firefighters? Not the "fire service?" Aren't there those out there that when it benefits them says we all serve the same common cause. The way I see it their base membership isn't the "fire service" because I'm not part of their initiatives nor are there many they come out with that I would support.

2. How does this directly impact the volunteer fire service/firefighter in any way negative?

All I can say is based on my personal experience in several combination departments...if more energy was put into working as a team, training together and being open minded, as that is put into thwarting the use of career firefighters as they should be, service in many area would be enhanced, as would the training on the department level and the overall experience and operations of volunteer members.

[mdm911 5]

I think I might be able to explain a little...

A fire district is a self-sufficient group that provides fire protection. A fire district has it's own commissioners who make all the decision. A fire district creates it's own budget. A fire district levies it's own taxes. A fire district is not directly affiliated with a town or towns.

A fire protection district is very different.

As an example I will used Dutchess Fairview and the City of Poughkeepsie. Currently the Fairview Fire District protects a part of the Town of Poughkeepsie and a part of the Town of Hyde Park. The two towns are ultimately responsible for fire protection, however a town cannot provide fire protection, it must be provided by fire districts. In NYS you will never hear of the Town of Poughkeepsie Fire Department or the Town of Hyde Park Fire Department. You may however hear of the Town of Poughkeepsie Fire District or the Town of Hyde Park Fire District. A fire district has a board of commissioners and is not affiliated with the town. In a city, the common council and the mayor are the final say for the fire department, they approve the budget they make the final decisions. In a town, the town supervisor and town board have no say or control over the fire district budget or how the fire district operates. If a fire district is dissolved by the residents, it must first be determined by the town board of any town the district lies in (Poughkeepsie and Hyde Park for our example) that this is in the best interest of the public and a better way to provide fire protection is available. Currently what some of the residents want is for the Roosevelt Fire District to absorb the Fairview Fire District. With all due respect to the Roosevelt Fire District, anyone in Dutchess County realizes that the 100% volunteer fire district is barely able to handle their own calls at times and would not be able to take on an additional 1800+ alarms a year. The same situation applies to the Hyde Park Fire District. This would reduce the level of service provided, therefore it would not be in the best interest of the two towns to approve this plan. Fairview is also borded by the Arlington Fire District. Arlington is a career/volunteer combination department that covers the majority of the Town of Poughkeepsie. For this example let's hypothetically say that Arlington is not interested in merging with or absorbing the Fairview Fire District due to the high tax exemption in the district. This would leave the City of Poughkeepsie Fire Department. The City of Poughkeepsie is a municiple fire department. Now is when the fire PROTECTION district idea comes in. If both the town of Poughkeepsie and the Town of Hyde Park were to determine that the Fairview Fire District is not working out, an option that they have is to ask to become a fire protection district of the city. A fire protection district is an area outside of an incorporated city that contracts with the city to provide fire protection. The City of Poughkeepsie would have to look at the area, number of alarms, required increases in staffing and other costs and come up with a dollar amount that they would need to provide fire protection to the Fairview area. If the Town of Poughkeepsie, the Town of Hyde Park and the City of Poughkeepsie all agree on this price, they may enter into a contract. The two towns would still levy fire taxes, except instead of the money going to the fire district, it would go to the city who would be providing the service.

This may sound like the answer to many people, although here is the catch in Fairview. The reason for the high fire taxes is not because we have a fire district, it is because so much of the district (about 47%) is exempt from paying fire taxes. The tax payers of Fairview would still have high fire taxes because the underlying problem has not been fixed.

So a quick review of your questions:

1. Fire Districts and Fire Protection Districts are not the same.

2. Fire Protection Districts do not have commissioners.

3. Fire Protection Districts are established by the town.

4. The town board votes on whether to keep the district or reorganize.

I hope this all make sense, it is very confusing. I got all this information from the NY Town Law section 184.

I believe that everything I posted it true, however it is all from NYS law and the great thing about laws is, that it all depends on how they are interpreted, so if you view things differently please share them.

Edited May 29, 2009 by mdm911

[Guest alsfirefighter]

MDM:

Well stated brother. Just one more quick question. What about villages that have fire companies? I know of a small village which I believe is a fire protection district and they have commissioners. I may not be 100% accurate on their designation but I have never heard of them referred to as a fire district.

[Guest ab2se]

can some one answer this question for me. is a fire protection district the same as a fire district?? I am confused and have been in this business a long time. Do FPD or can FPD elect commissioners?? like a fire district?? are the established by theState?? who would vote in a FPD?? to disband or reorganize?? lotsof question any one with answers??

couorious minds would lilke to know

Just off the top of my head: A Fire District and a Fire Protection District are not the same. Once a Fire District is established it has Fire Commissioners elected by the voters of the Fire District and is seperate from the Town. It organizes a Fire Company or hires Career personel to provide fire protection.

In an area of a Town that doesn't have fire protection the Town may establish a Fire Protection District for all or a portion of the town. The Town Board "acts as comissioners" and contracts with someone who can provide fire protection (a city or village fire dept, a fire district, or an independent fire company) The reason for the Fire Protection District is to collect the tax money for the service provided. The Town is not involved in the day to day operation.

Thats the reason for all special districts. If a town has a certain section that wants street lights (or water or sewer or what ever) the town can create the district in that section and tax those resident that receive the benefits. This way the residents of the other parts of the town that don't benefit don't pay. Only those receiveing the service pay.

See Town Law Sec. 176 I believe. Hope this helps.

[firecapt32 282]

mdm- thanks for the answers--- clear as mud in the mississippi!!! if i lived in a FPD you say the town selects who provides me fire protection?? and sets my fire taxes--correct?? I hope im righ so far. no commissioners Correct?

If i lived in fire district --- I have to have a fire department?? with commissioners?

Heres another kicker I live in a village within a town that has a fire department and covers a FPD--can the town vote to take that FPD away? and give it to another village within the town and the Village lose the money?? it is all about the money isnt it??

and who votes on what?? i hope the AG has answers to theses questions.

[DCJPells 29]

A Fire Protection District is controlled by the Town and they can contract to who they want or gives the best cost. Another Fire District, A City Fire Department or a Private Fire such as Rural Metro all can be used within certain parameters.

Just Clarification

Fire District is a Political Subdivision of the State so they levy the taxes (Commissioners)

Fire Protection District is under control of a Town or a Village (In its proper). (Town or Village Council)

A Fire Department is the membership of the above. (Chief, Asst. Chiefs, Company Officers, Etc)

City Fire Departments are a Department they same as DPW or Police and are a part of the City and City run. Some have Volunteers and Fire Companies (Beacon) and some are almost entirely Career (City of Poughkeepsie)

A Fire Company is an entity of a Fire Department, usually a nonprofit and in the case of a Fire District, supplies the volunteer manning for the Fire Department. (Not sure of City or Village).

There are also Hybrids such as a Joint Fire District/Village Fire District (I believe Pawling is one.)

There are also Private Fire Organizations that are volunteer such as JH Ketcham (Dover) and Milan (Milan). They cover a Fire Protection District of those towns. They negotiate with the Town what the costs will be for the coverage and the Town levy’s the amount to the taxpayer.

[helicopper 1,050]

Hey all... I hate to dispel rumors especially when its getting so many people all fired up but the legislation is not limited to fire departments/districts. It applies to any local government entity - water districts, sewer districts, lighting districts, TOWNS, VILLAGES, and fire districts. Opposing this legislation doesn't insure the safety of the volunteer fire service, it insures that NYS retains more than 1500 special districts including countless duplicate ones.

It is absurd not to include the school districts especially since they account for the majority of our taxes but for whatever reasons they saw fit not to in this round. Perhaps if this is even remotely successful (like two jurisdictions actually merge), it will be expanded.

The complete text of the proposed legislation is attached in a pdf file. It doesn't compel anyone to do it and it doesn't "endanger" the fire service. That's scare tactics plain and simple. It simply enables the tax payers to fix what's been broken for decades - true "home rule" in action.

Municipal_Consolidation_Legislation_2009.pdf

[gamewell45 258]

OK. I ask you this. Show me one single piece of correspondence, legislation proposed or even a comment made by any of the unions that represent professional firefighters that looked out for the best interest of the "base membership" that didn't benefit the public when it comes to enhancing or strengthening service.

Most of the time when you come in here and post, in my opinion, you attempt to give the volunteers a black eye; If you read my post I said that while subjective; nowhere in my post did i mention enhancing or strengthening service in this context. so putting that aside, to attempt to answer your question, granted while the IAFF does in some cases look out for the interests of the public, some legislation such as The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, does nothing for the interest of the public; rather its legislation granting fire fighters and police officers minimum collective bargaining rights by establishing minimum standards for state collective bargaining laws. Tell me, how does that benefit the public? Its a benefit for the "base membership" and nothing more. So thats at least one single piece of legislation proposed that doesn't benefit the public; if you spend more time reseaching, i'm sure you'll find plenty more.

If you read the history of the IAFF you'll find that they were formed for "for the sole benefit of rank-and-file fire fighters in the United States and Canada". Nothing mentioned about the public interest at all. This all comes from a IAFF website of which i have provided a link for your reading pleasure.

http://www.iaff2067.org/history.htm

Likewise FASNY was formed to represent the best interests of the volunteer fireman in the State of New York and likewise I have provided a link for you should you so choose to read it.

http://www.fasny.com/mission.aspx

Notwithstanding the above, I think you missed the whole point of my post; the point i'm trying to get across is that both organizations have their own common goals which benefit their base membership and the importance of having an efficient lobbying base.

[Guest ab2se]

Heres another kicker I live in a village within a town that has a fire department and covers a FPD--can the town vote to take that FPD away? and give it to another village within the town and the Village lose the money?? it is all about the money isnt it??

and who votes on what?? i hope the AG has answers to theses questions.

The town could contract with another provider of fire protection at the time the contract is up. If the new provider has a fire company then its members must approve the deal also.

From General Municipal Law Article 10

§ 209-d. Contracts for outside service by volunteer fire departments

and companies. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no contract

shall be made by a municipality or fire district whereby the services of

a volunteer fire department or company are to be supplied outside of

such municipality or fire district to provide (1) fire protection, (2)

emergency service in case of accidents, calamities or other emergencies,

or (3) general ambulance service pursuant to the provisions of section

two hundred nine-b of this chapter, unless such volunteer fire

department or company consents thereto.

[JFLYNN 681]

Most of the time when you come in here and post, in my opinion, you attempt to give the volunteers a black eye; If you read my post I said that while subjective; nowhere in my post did i mention enhancing or strengthening service in this context. so putting that aside, to attempt to answer your question, granted while the IAFF does in some cases look out for the interests of the public, some legislation such as The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, does nothing for the interest of the public; rather its legislation granting fire fighters and police officers minimum collective bargaining rights by establishing minimum standards for state collective bargaining laws. Tell me, how does that benefit the public? Its a benefit for the "base membership" and nothing more. So thats at least one single piece of legislation proposed that doesn't benefit the public; if you spend more time reseaching, i'm sure you'll find plenty more.

If you read the history of the IAFF you'll find that they were formed for "for the sole benefit of rank-and-file fire fighters in the United States and Canada". Nothing mentioned about the public interest at all. This all comes from a IAFF website of which i have provided a link for your reading pleasure.

http://www.iaff2067.org/history.htm

Likewise FASNY was formed to represent the best interests of the volunteer fireman in the State of New York and likewise I have provided a link for you should you so choose to read it.

http://www.fasny.com/mission.aspx

Notwithstanding the above, I think you missed the whole point of my post; the point i'm trying to get across is that both organizations have their own common goals which benefit their base membership and the importance of having an efficient lobbying base.

Yes, but as career Firefighters we make no bones about the fact that there is a cost for our services. IAFF is an organization which clearly supports bargaining and legislation which will benefit career firefighters. We strive to obtain the best working conditions, pay and benefits possible. Inevitably, if it is shown that our services are not worth the cost, the cost will need to go down or the level of service will need to go up to justify the cost. Examples of this would be Fire Departments expanding into EMS, Haz- Mat, Tech Rescue, etc. beginning in the late 70's as fires went down and pay scales went up. Current examples would be the push for regionalization by many career departments as well as the push for advanced degrees, better physical fitness levels, etc. Therefore, we strive to provide the best service possible and make our arguments to justify the cost. All of this is true with just about anyone in any career, isn't it?

The point of the original post in this thread, it seems to me, is that, with FASNY, there is major hypocrisy. The claim is made that volunteer firefighters provide an acceptable (or even excellent) level of service for very little money (or even for free). Oftentimes, the claim is made that volunteer firefighters / fire departments provide the same level of service as career departments. The public is told that volunteer firefighters are serving the community for free and are scared into believing that a career department would be cost prohibitive. The fact is, if regionalization is allowed, in many (not all) places that are served by volunteer departments, it would be cheaper, all things considered, to have a career department and that career department would provide better service by any measurable standard.

AND, many of you young guys out there would be able to become career firefighters. This isn't fantasy-look around, regional fire departments with full time career personnel providing "all hazards" response- firefighting, EMS, Haz- Mat, Tech Rescue, etc., plus fire prevention, education and investigation (had to put that in there of course) is reality all over this country and in Europe. In places less densely populated and with a lower call volume than Westchester County! New York State is one of the most backward states in this regard and FASNY is trying to keep it that way.

Why don't some of the very many good, intelligent firefighters who are members of FASNY speak up to your leadership and to the politicians to let them know your feelings? You can't all agree with FASNY's stance on this, can you?

[Bnechis 3,961]

A Fire Protection District is controlled by the Town and they can contract to who they want or gives the best cost. Another Fire District, A City Fire Department or a Private Fire such as Rural Metro all can be used within certain parameters.

After Rye Brook's disaster with rural metro the state past a law prohibitting "for profit" FD's in NYS.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

After Rye Brook's disaster with rural metro the state past a law prohibitting "for profit" FD's in NYS.

Can some please elaborate on what the Rye Brook/ Rural Metro situation was?

If there is no for-profit fire departments in New York then how come rural metro operates in Rochester, Syracuse and other NYS communities?

http://www.ruralmetro.com/about_communitiesserved.asp

Is it rural/metro EMS?

[Bnechis 3,961]

Can some please elaborate on what the Rye Brook/ Rural Metro situation was?

If there is no for-profit fire departments in New York then how come rural metro operates in Rochester, Syracuse and other NYS communities?

http://www.ruralmetro.com/about_communitiesserved.asp

Is it rural/metro EMS?

R/M runs fire and/or ems systems the communities you listed have EMS only services by R/M.

R/M was contracted to provide fire protection in Rye brook (late 1990's, early 2000's). After the 1st fire they had it was determined that the level of protection was very substandard and the village discontinued contracting with them.

I was mistaken in stating that for profits were illegal, as I believed that had been past into NYS law.

My research indicates that in 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2007 both houses of the NYS Legislature passed this legislation, but the Gov's (P & S) both vetoed it. It is this year again proposed as A00533 no S bill yet.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Bnechis

[abaduck 123]

I've never been known to keep my mouth shut, even when that might be the best course, so:

1. It's patently obvious to me that there should be one department, Westchester Fire & Rescue Service, for the entire county, staffed by an appropriate combination of career, retained, and volunteer FFs. Will it ever happen? When pigs fly... too many vested interests.

2. What the heck have FASNY got to do with property taxes?

3. If you seriously want to make 'New York State more affordable for people who own real property' as FASNY claim to want, then the answer is obvious: abolish or virtually abolish property tax, and pay for services out of income and/or sales tax instead. It's a much fairer system. That's the system in the UK, and much of Europe. Property taxes still exist in the UK, but they're capped at no more than... maybe $3,000? $4,000? per year for the very largest property. Much less for average property, and even that is mostly waived if you're sick, retired, or on welfare. Why are property taxes - as a concept - sacrosanct? They're not ordained by God you know!

Those who advocate piecemeal reform - a merger or consolidation here, a scheme to shave a little off property taxes there - are trying to fix a fundamentally ill-designed machine by applying some random duct tape. IMHO.

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

R/M runs fire and/or ems systems the communities you listed have EMS only services by R/M.

R/M was contracted to provide fire protection in Rye brook (late 1990's, early 2000's). After the 1st fire they had it was determined that the level of protection was very substandard and the village discontinued contracting with them.

I was mistaken in stating that for profits were illegal, as I believed that had been past into NYS law.

My research indicates that in 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2007 both houses of the NYS Legislature passed this legislation, but the Gov's (P & S) both vetoed it. It is this year again proposed as A00533 no S bill yet.

1996 it started

[ex-commish 490]

Is there an actual study that was conducted to support either side of this issue?

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Most of the time when you come in here and post, in my opinion, you attempt to give the volunteers a black eye; If you read my post I said that while subjective; nowhere in my post did i mention enhancing or strengthening service in this context. so putting that aside, to attempt to answer your question, granted while the IAFF does in some cases look out for the interests of the public, some legislation such as The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, does nothing for the interest of the public; rather its legislation granting fire fighters and police officers minimum collective bargaining rights by establishing minimum standards for state collective bargaining laws. Tell me, how does that benefit the public? Its a benefit for the "base membership" and nothing more. So thats at least one single piece of legislation proposed that doesn't benefit the public; if you spend more time reseaching, i'm sure you'll find plenty more.

If you read the history of the IAFF you'll find that they were formed for "for the sole benefit of rank-and-file fire fighters in the United States and Canada". Nothing mentioned about the public interest at all. This all comes from a IAFF website of which i have provided a link for your reading pleasure.

http://www.iaff2067.org/history.htm

Likewise FASNY was formed to represent the best interests of the volunteer fireman in the State of New York and likewise I have provided a link for you should you so choose to read it.

http://www.fasny.com/mission.aspx

Notwithstanding the above, I think you missed the whole point of my post; the point i'm trying to get across is that both organizations have their own common goals which benefit their base membership and the importance of having an efficient lobbying base.

Really....I'm sorry you feel that way. But everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion although I have to say that I would think by the feedback I get from fellow colleagues on this site that you're are in the minority. But then again I'm not shocked as anytime a professional firefighter questions anything involving the volunteer fire service that is the first quip that comes out. I'm not anti anything. I'm pro service and have no problems calling a spade a spade regardless of what side of the fence it lies. In fact I volunteer where I live. But make no mistake about it, I know how I feed my family and put a roof over their head. The same as I do with my fellow professional firefighters and would never do anything or go against anything that would limit their abilities to do that and to enhance public service. Just because you see things for what they are and don't go along with the touchy feely processes that goes on doesn't make you anti-volunteer. Often it makes you a leader.

Additionally I can read any mission statement out there. Doesn't mean I have to agree with stances of any organization. I do not take part in political fundraising with my professional organization. Despite the fact that they choose politicians that support initiatives for my occupation, they often do not share my opinions and beliefs in other issues. And again I will say that through my experiences...one organization has done more to support initiatives that has bettered the service for many parties.

[Monty 35]

The funny part about this is that the machinery already exists in NYS law to change, disband, or merge fire districts. The current standard of more than 50% of taxpaying residents is too much for some politicians.

Additionally, it seems as though School Districts are exempt from this legislation as well.... What is the point of this legislation if certain types of districts are exempt? I would love to see what the financial outlook is for merging a few school districts together.

I am for anything that merges districts together in the name of efficiency, enhanced services, and consolidating costs..... Too bad Albany will NEVER be able to produce such a law the way they are run.

What exactly is termed a tax paying resident? It is one per household? One adult per household? Two? What is 50%? Of votes cast, or of eligible voters?

Given typical turn out for local elections, school districts etc - I don't think turnout is anywhere near 50%.

I've seen that this change is being driven from a couple of different areas. There was a statewide commission on local government, but then there was also the Gordon Heights Fire District in Long Island that they tried to get disbanded by the current process but have so far failed.

[Monty 35]

Good, informative post. The other thing that is out there I believe are Village Fire Departments. I think they are different from both the Fire District & Fire Protection District. Essentially the Village government (board?) have budgetary responsibility and is the checks & balance for the Chiefs' Office (vs Commissioners and Directors).

I think I might be able to explain a little...

A fire district is a self-sufficient group that provides fire protection. A fire district has it's own commissioners who make all the decision. A fire district creates it's own budget. A fire district levies it's own taxes. A fire district is not directly affiliated with a town or towns.

A fire protection district is very different.

(Trimmed ....)

This may sound like the answer to many people, although here is the catch in Fairview. The reason for the high fire taxes is not because we have a fire district, it is because so much of the district (about 47%) is exempt from paying fire taxes. The tax payers of Fairview would still have high fire taxes because the underlying problem has not been fixed.

So a quick review of your questions:

1. Fire Districts and Fire Protection Districts are not the same.

2. Fire Protection Districts do not have commissioners.

3. Fire Protection Districts are established by the town.

4. The town board votes on whether to keep the district or reorganize.

I hope this all make sense, it is very confusing. I got all this information from the NY Town Law section 184.

I believe that everything I posted it true, however it is all from NYS law and the great thing about laws is, that it all depends on how they are interpreted, so if you view things differently please share them.

[Monty 35]

Digressing from the topic of the post - which I think is very poignant and valid.

In the spirit of equal time, I would say that one case where the IAFF is trying to look out for the best interest of its base membership and not the general public (at least in the short term) is the ban on members volunteering with Fire Departments. And I know there are people here in this category.

I know there are lots of local's that don't pay much attention to this rule, but not so long ago it was a big thing in the Albany press where there are quite a few FF's that volunteer in their suburban communities that were being told not to.

OK. I ask you this. Show me one single piece of correspondence, legislation proposed or even a comment made by any of the unions that represent professional firefighters that looked out for the best interest of the "base membership" that didn't benefit the public when it comes to enhancing or strengthening service.

Maybe now we can get back to the real topic I did see that the form email was designed so that you couldn't change the text - I guess they didn't want people using their mechanism to send out email to legislators with a different viewpoint from the official one.