Fire Departments Get the Ax

[dadbo46 50]

Below from this month's edition of "American City and County."

Fire departments get the ax

Aug 1, 2009 12:00 PM,

By Ed Brock (edward.brock@penton.com)

Cities trim down fire protection services to balance budgets

Declining revenues have forced many cities to turn to what is usually a last resort when trying to balance troubled budgets: cutting public safety services, such as fire protection. But firefighters say that, while fire departments are expensive, cutting them to save cash may carry a steeper price in loss of lives and damage to property.

Find this article at:

http://www.americancityandcounty.com/pubsa...0908/index.html

Edited August 27, 2009 by jack10562
Added quote tags

[efdcapt115 1,511]

From the article:

"In July, Boston eliminated two of its 11 fire districts and implemented rotating brownouts for three out of 34 engine companies and one of 22 ladder companies, based on absences."

This sounds like a slightly different version of what I read about "roster staffing" when it was first implemented at FDNY. Instead of browning out a company, to cover open slots at companies, they had firemen riding around the city on public buses with their turnout gear, cutting the staff one place to fill another. Talk about a nickel-dime operation.

So they talk about cuts to libraries, parks, recreation........and then cut right to PUBLIC SAFETY? Talk about playing with fire.

Where are ANY cuts coming out of the CITY HALLS? No talk about eliminating redundant political posts, or staff there we see. Where are any cuts (besides California) coming out of these ridiculously expensive, sometimes failing school systems?

And then the Fire Departments in lower Westchester get together with an efficiency plan; and what are the public officials doing about it?

I wonder how long you'd have to hold your breath for the school districts that cover the same area as the Westchester FD concept, to come out with their own consolidation plans or ideas for efficiency. On their own, going to a consultant, etc. Still trying to hold your breath? Me neither.

The way things are going in this country, FD work is definately going to start heating up. You get enough unemployed people out in the streets, young guys with nothing better to do than kick a can around, then the unscrupulous landlords are going to come out like vultures. I pray that I'm wrong but I forsee a HUGE spike in arson jobs on the way.

Anybody remember the lecture from FLSTP about the socio-economic conditions that lead to "The War Years?" History tends to repeat itself.

Stand ready brothers.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

And now comes this news out of Binghamton NY: Commission recommends closing Engine 6, 4th busiest in the city. Really, the stupidity is just befuddling.

http://news10now.com/content/top_stories/4...mp;ap=1&MP4

[Guest]

From news 12

http://www.wbng.com/news/local/55233587.html

[ajsbear 11]

Back to the 70's all over again.

[firebuff08 29]

Here is the problem. The fire service has for years done a very poor job of conveying to the public WHY a certain number of firefighters are needed to protect the community and even with all the layoffs across the country it continues to do so.

The vast majority of the public and most elected officials believe, mistakenly, that the fewer fires that occur, the fewer firefighters that are needed. They make that mistake because they can only see things as they know them. Where they work, in a factory, or a restaurant, etc., if there are fewer customers and less work, then fewer workers are needed. They can not comprehend that it takes a certain number of firefighters to extinguish a single fire, safely, while also rescuing persons who may be trapped. So even if there is only ONE fire per year, it will take the same number of firefighters to extinguish it as it would if there were several fires in a year.

Where I live I have gone before the local fire commission multiple times to request additional staffing when other citizens and members of the commission were calling for cuts to an already understaffed department. Each of them was making the point that the district is small and has few fires and the number of fires has gone down substantially over the years.

So I asked them to accompany me to a Board of Education meeting to make that same argument relative to High School athletic teams. I used their argument, the school district is small and the teams play far fewer games than professional teams do. I proposed that perhaps the football team should play with 7 or 8 players on the field. And maybe the baseball team should play with 5 and the basketball team should play with 3 on the court. Every one of them shot back that you can't do that. They all said it takes a fixed number of players to play each game. You must have the same number of players on the field as the opponent. To which I replied, exactly my point regarding the fire service. It takes a fixed number of firefighters (players) to beat the fire (the opponent). Most of them understood the analogy.

The other problem the public has is why are there so few people on a shift. Again this relates to the fact that 60 percent of the public can only understand things as they personally know them and where they work, most of the employees are there at the same time...5 days a week. They just can not get their heads around the concept that equal numbers must be there, not only 24 hours per day but 7 days per week. One citizen actually suggested increasing shift coverage by going to three 8 hour shifts. Of course he forgot that weekends have to be covered as well because where he works no one works on weekends.

I believe the fire service needs an ongoing education campaign to drum it into thick public skulls that a certain minimum number of firefighters MUST be on duty at each station and that a certain minumum number of stations MUST be staffed to effect an effective and timely response should a fire occur.