Consolidation in the Fire Service

[Bnechis 3,961]

Here is a very important question for Captain Bnechis, Chief Flynn, Chief Fitzpatrick and NOW Commissioner Chung of White Plains. If a Consolidation/Regionalization of Fire Services in Westchester County, into, lets say a Northern Westchester County Fire District and a Southern Westchester County Fire District, the question I have to those above (and all others) is WOULD and/or SHOULD the City of White Plains AND the City of Yonkers be included in such a Regionalizaiton/Consolidation plan, PROVIDED that both cities would ONLY benefit by the increased service provided WITHOUT any reductions in Manpower and Equipment? (Yonkers FD is the CENTERPIECE for Special Operations in Westchester County and with such, in my opinion, no compromise should be made to existing services within YFD, especially given the fact that with BOTH the Ridge Hill Project currently underway and the Proposed Yonkers Downtown Development seriously being considered as a reality, YFD would be undermanned by say 2 to 3 engine companies and 2 ladder companies (ie: 301, 302, 305, Ladder 76, and Ladder 77).

Again, I defer to the Professionals (Bnechis, Fitzpatrick, Flynn and Chung) and any other Fire Management Professionals in Westchester County, could and better SHOULD White Plains and Yonkers be included in the end result of such a Regionalization Plan within Westchester County?

The one thing that the study implied was that there are greater efficiencies as the coverage area increased. Yonkers would not be hurt since they already meet the standard, but it is not clear that they would be drimatically helpped either (granted we did not study the coverage with them. White Plains currently operates with all 3 man companies which would have to be increased to 4 man companies. As we move forward we would be willing to include any community that borders this project.

[LTNRFD 266]

To get the 10 depts. in the study today you would need to call 6 different dispatchers.

Barry how would you need to contact 6 different dispatchers to get the 10 departments in the study ??????

Eastchester, Greenville, New Rochelle, Pelham, Pelham Manor are now primarily dispatched by 60-Control. 60 has the ability to dispatch Fairview, Hartsdale, Larchmont and Scardsale and they due primary dispatch now for these departments when they receive cell phone 911 calls and mutual aid/automatic mutual aid calls. That leaves Mt. Vernon, so in theory IF ALL 10 departments needed to be dispatched to the same incident, 1 set of tones (which could take a little time to tx.) and 1 phone call and 10 departments would be dispatched. Now having specific rigs assigned to the 10 department response is another story.

[philmoore 0]

I had mentioned that political change was in the air and it would drive this, here is what occured this week that might affect FD consolidation:

Feb. 11, 2010 "Mandell sets three goals for village" - The Journal News

Liz Feld is stepping down from the Larchmont Village Board at the end of her term on March 31, after serving four years[ as mayor and another four as trustee. Running for her position in the March 16 elections will be Josh Mandell. He is running unopposed for Mayor.

How would this effect the consolidation for the county? If those 3 depts. (vom, vol, tom) consolidate, what would outcome look like? Isn't one all volunteer, one combination with career chief, and one combination with volunteer chief?

[61MACKBR1 222]

Captain Barry Bnechis, Chief Flynn, Chief Fitzpatrick and others: - Would it then make sense, in order to have a really efficient plan in place to present to the County, to include White Plains and Yonkers (as well as say, Hastings, Dobbs Ferry, and Ardsley) in order to have a all incorporated Southern Westchester Fire Region, as part of the over all "Master Plan"?

Not to take anything away from the Current Capabilities of the Special Operations Divisions within New Rochelle, Eastchester, Greenville, Fairview and White Plains, but understanding the capabilities, equipment and knowledge (Chief Fitzpatrick) that the Yonkers Fire Department Special Operations Division has, would it also make sense, if Yonkers were to be included in such a Southern Westchester Fire District Regionalization Plan, that they (Yonkers) head up the Special Operations Division for this New District?

Your thoughts and comments?

The one thing that the study implied was that there are greater efficiencies as the coverage area increased. Yonkers would not be hurt since they already meet the standard, but it is not clear that they would be drimatically helpped either (granted we did not study the coverage with them. White Plains currently operates with all 3 man companies which would have to be increased to 4 man companies. As we move forward we would be willing to include any community that borders this project.

[PEMO3 523]

The other problem that everyone is missing is the public. Explain to the average Joe that not having a "town" FD but a regional FD is better. While everyone here can see the benefits far out way the pitfalls, and there are some, the average citizen will only see one thing: my tax dollars are going from town A to subsidize town B and when I need help, the town A trucks and manpower may be in town B and not there for me. Regardless that town A right now can't get out to help in time to start with. To really work it needs a multifaceted planned approach that not only covers a detailed study and plan by the people that actually do the job, not a group of elected officials without a clue but also a comprehensive education program that would get the agencies on board first then educate the public why it is a better approach. Only after your have the support of the personnel and the tax base will it ever have a chance to get through the elected official red tape.

[helicopper 1,050]

How would this effect the consolidation for the county? If those 3 depts. (vom, vol, tom) consolidate, what would outcome look like? Isn't one all volunteer, one combination with career chief, and one combination with volunteer chief?

The outcome would very likely look like whatever they want it to. It could still be a combination department but would have the benefit of a larger tax base, more personnel, and access to additional resources that were not previouly available.

That's one of the nice things about doing this now on our terms before it gets rammed down our throats legislatively. You can decide what/how you wnat to do things.

[61MACKBR1 222]

Doesn't every Property Owner in Westchester County pay taxes both the the local municipality that they reside in as well as a County Tax? If part of the Property Taxes paid goes to the County, then the way it could be explained would be now the portion of your taxes that you currently pay for Fire Service will now be paid to the County.

I believe that the proper way to "Communicate" this to ALL citizens of Westchester County would be for those Fire Service Professionals (Bnechis, Fitzpatrick, Flynn, etc, etc, etc) to "Collectively" put this "MASTER PLAN" (for both the Southern Westchester Fire District AND the Northern Westchester Fire District) and have town/city/village FORUMS and invite citizens to sit in on the presentation and have these Professional Senior Fire Officials explain in "Common Man/Women Language" (so that everyone can understand) why this is being proposed, the impact (Positively) it will have on their Fire Service/Emergency Response as well as the relief that they could see from a Tax Payers prospective.

I'd bet that if they were to see/hear this with their own eyes and ears, AND if they had the SOLID backing of all City/Town/and Village Officials as well as the New County Executive, that it would be POSITIVELY RECEIVED BY ALL.

I totally agree with Chris' statement that by leaving this in the HANDS of the Senior Level Fire Management Professionals in Westchester County to work on "PRO-ACTIVELY" rather than wait for the "Hammer to Come Down" and be forced to make decisions "On the Fly" with input coming from those "Not In The Know" in a "RE-ACTIVE" manner, is the "WAY TO GO" - Let's get it done NOW rather than waiting for LATER!

The other problem that everyone is missing is the public. Explain to the average Joe that not having a "town" FD but a regional FD is better. While everyone here can see the benefits far out way the pitfalls, and there are some, the average citizen will only see one thing: my tax dollars are going from town A to subsidize town B and when I need help, the town A trucks and manpower may be in town B and not there for me. Regardless that town A right now can't get out to help in time to start with. To really work it needs a multifaceted planned approach that not only covers a detailed study and plan by the people that actually do the job, not a group of elected officials without a clue but also a comprehensive education program that would get the agencies on board first then educate the public why it is a better approach. Only after your have the support of the personnel and the tax base will it ever have a chance to get through the elected official red tape.

[helicopper 1,050]

The other problem that everyone is missing is the public. Explain to the average Joe that not having a "town" FD but a regional FD is better. While everyone here can see the benefits far out way the pitfalls, and there are some, the average citizen will only see one thing: my tax dollars are going from town A to subsidize town B and when I need help, the town A trucks and manpower may be in town B and not there for me. Regardless that town A right now can't get out to help in time to start with. To really work it needs a multifaceted planned approach that not only covers a detailed study and plan by the people that actually do the job, not a group of elected officials without a clue but also a comprehensive education program that would get the agencies on board first then educate the public why it is a better approach. Only after your have the support of the personnel and the tax base will it ever have a chance to get through the elected official red tape.

I think you overestimate the public and their interest in all this. If we show them that their taxes are remaining stable BUT they are receiving a reduction in their homeowners insurance because of the improved ISO ratings, I think they'll be on board with it.

61Mack is right too, there should be a lot of public education to show people that this isn't a burgeoning government but rather the streamlining and improvement of existing services.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

Izzy, you are right, but the point is that the city finally made a decision in the right direction. There are tons more bureaucratic hurdles that we need to collectively jump through to get this process off the ground, and it still might never get done, but we're trying. The key is that EVERYONE has a seat at the table. The city, the districts, the union, the volunteers, the taxpayers association. Exclude somebody and the entire process is going to go in the crapper.

Interestingly enough, were just discussing the issue of consolidation in my Fire Protection Law class a few days ago over at UNH. Regionalization works wonders down South, because that's all they know. Schools, DPW, Police services, sanitation, etc are by-and-large county run services. Up here in the Northeast we aren't used to this, and our "home rule" issues (and egos that hide behind them) get in the way of what might be a more efficient system.

We did, as a group, come up with some issues that may come up in a consolidation effort:

1. I'm a taxpayer in town A, why should my tax dollars go to paying for firefighters in town B, where the land values are lower and they don't pay their fair share?

Of course, this is a stupid argument, it should be for the good of the region as a whole, but for an area NEW to rationalization of services (WCPD nonwithstanding, because alot of the municipalities have town/village/hamlet/whatever police) people are selfish enough to ask these questions.

2. The "County Fire Department" closed the firehouse that was next door to my house because it was deemed "not efficient" enough. Now I have to wait longer for the fire department because they have to come from a station X miles away.

Again, not a very legitimate argument, because I would hope the "county department" would keep in mind response times in their strategic planning, but this IS going to come up when we inevitably shut down some of the more redundant operations present in such a large area.

Now, I'm not saying we SHOULDN'T consolidate, but we need to prepare for these types of questions and problems if we are going to take it seriously. This is going to come up in a board meeting, and being prepared with an educated, thoughtful and non-insulting answer is key to selling this change to the public. After all, most people never expect to need the fire department, so their feeling is going to be "why should we pay for all this work, when I'm never going to need it?"

[helicopper 1,050]

We did, as a group, come up with some issues that may come up in a consolidation effort:

1. I'm a taxpayer in town A, why should my tax dollars go to paying for firefighters in town B, where the land values are lower and they don't pay their fair share?

Of course, this is a stupid argument, it should be for the good of the region as a whole, but for an area NEW to rationalization of services (WCPD nonwithstanding, because alot of the municipalities have town/village/hamlet/whatever police) people are selfish enough to ask these questions.

2. The "County Fire Department" closed the firehouse that was next door to my house because it was deemed "not efficient" enough. Now I have to wait longer for the fire department because they have to come from a station X miles away.

Again, not a very legitimate argument, because I would hope the "county department" would keep in mind response times in their strategic planning, but this IS going to come up when we inevitably shut down some of the more redundant operations present in such a large area.

Now, I'm not saying we SHOULDN'T consolidate, but we need to prepare for these types of questions and problems if we are going to take it seriously. This is going to come up in a board meeting, and being prepared with an educated, thoughtful and non-insulting answer is key to selling this change to the public. After all, most people never expect to need the fire department, so their feeling is going to be "why should we pay for all this work, when I'm never going to need it?"

If you're looking at a regionalization/consolidation of departments, argument #1 doesn't apply because you're not paying for Town A or Town B, you're paying for the "regional fire department". In the grand scheme, I am almost certain that people will receive more for their tax dollars than tney currently do.

Argument #2 would be answered with maps, response times, and an explanation of response times. If you look in the study completed for the Westchester departments, there are justifications and rationales for why some stations would stay open and some would close.

[helicopper 1,050]

The discussion thus far has been focused on the 10 career departments that are part of the Pace study.

What about in the volunteer sector?

Just looking at a County map, if the FD's were consolidated/regionalized to the City/Town level we would from 57 fire departments to just 20 (this counts the regional department we've already been talking about). Without that regionalization, there would be about 24.

Wouldn't that improve and streamline fire operations in Westchester County?

[Bnechis 3,961]

How would this effect the consolidation for the county? If those 3 depts. (vom, vol, tom) consolidate, what would outcome look like? Isn't one all volunteer, one combination with career chief, and one combination with volunteer chief?

My point with that post was that consolidation maybe coming to Larchmont regardless of what depts it consolidates with. The Mamaroneck (Town & Village) and the vilage of larchmont are talking about a number of different consolidation areas. What is interesting is they did not include VMFD in the FD consolidation. My guess is they are strong enough politically that no one wanted to go there. There have also been many public discusions about TMFD taking over and getting rid of LFD including firing all career members. This has been proposed in the local paper by a group of volunteers that quit LFD and want to punish the career members for pushing to get a career chief. The 6 or so studies that have been brought to the table only talk about how much money could be saved, and no consideration for FD capabilities.

Captain Barry Bnechis, Chief Flynn, Chief Fitzpatrick and others: - Would it then make sense, in order to have a really efficient plan in place to present to the County, to include White Plains and Yonkers (as well as say, Hastings, Dobbs Ferry, and Ardsley) in order to have a all incorporated Southern Westchester Fire Region, as part of the over all "Master Plan"?

The County has nothing to do with any of this and there has been no interest expressed on anyones part to include them. The 100% volunteer departments are not included in this planning because the gap is to great. When NYS has one standard for all firefighters and they believe that NFPA 1710 is the minimum standard that should be meet, then they could be included.

Not to take anything away from the Current Capabilities of the Special Operations Divisions within New Rochelle, Eastchester, Greenville, Fairview and White Plains, but understanding the capabilities, equipment and knowledge (Chief Fitzpatrick) that the Yonkers Fire Department Special Operations Division has, would it also make sense, if Yonkers were to be included in such a Southern Westchester Fire District Regionalization Plan, that they (Yonkers) head up the Special Operations Division for this New District?

YFD helped the rest of us get up to speed, they are the head of WSOTF and would continue to be so.

The other problem that everyone is missing is the public. Explain to the average Joe that not having a "town" FD but a regional FD is better. While everyone here can see the benefits far out way the pitfalls, and there are some, the average citizen will only see one thing: my tax dollars are going from town A to subsidize town B and when I need help, the town A trucks and manpower may be in town B and not there for me. Regardless that town A right now can't get out to help in time to start with. To really work it needs a multifaceted planned approach that not only covers a detailed study and plan by the people that actually do the job, not a group of elected officials without a clue but also a comprehensive education program that would get the agencies on board first then educate the public why it is a better approach. Only after your have the support of the personnel and the tax base will it ever have a chance to get through the elected official red tape.

Very well said. We have looked carefully at that and you are 100% correct. When speaking with one of the council members from a smaller community, that concern was expressed, that his rigs would be in the cities covering them, why should his taxpayers subsidize the cities? My answer was, have you ever had a fire that you did not call mutual aid? I asked him if he new that the cities tax payers have been subsidizing his dept for years. He later told me he never considered that. He also never considered that 2 - 5 firefighters would not be able to get the job done at a working fire, much less one in a large multiple dwelling.

[Bnechis 3,961]

We did, as a group, come up with some issues that may come up in a consolidation effort: 1. I'm a taxpayer in town A, why should my tax dollars go to paying for firefighters in town B, where the land values are lower and they don't pay their fair share?

Rye Brooks politicians used this argument when the broke away from Port Chester. "We pay more in tax and the they use the services more" so they split and brought in Rual/Metro. So they went from paying 60-80% (I dont remember what the % was) to paying 100% and getting very little service. Don't some property owners in town A pay more than others in town A? do they get the same level of service or do they get more because they pay more?

2. The "County Fire Department" closed the firehouse that was next door to my house because it was deemed "not efficient" enough. Now I have to wait longer for the fire department because they have to come from a station X miles away.

We need to teach the public that fire stations and fire trucks do not fight fire or respond to emergencies. It takes firefighters. The main reason that stations are closed in a consolidation are there are too many empty fire stations or the building has not been maintained/is at the end of its life and is no longer safe to use.

After all, most people never expect to need the fire department, so their feeling is going to be "why should we pay for all this work, when I'm never going to need it?"

Everytime I hear this I have to explain the economic value of a fire department. This is something that the fire service is very poor at doing. Now if you have a poor ISO rating and high tax this one does not work well, but in our case:

The average home owner in NR pays $425 per year in tax that gets to the FD. we have an ISO of 2. If we give back the $422 and get rid of the FD, that property insurance will go up $1,200 - $1,400 per year. That means if we never do another call we save that property $800 - $1,000 per year. We also make development more competative, if it is cheaper for a company to come to us than go somewhere else.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

Chris and Bnechis, I absolutely agree with what you are saying, I'm just bringing up the points that the voters/taxpayers might not SEE those things as relevant to them. The truth is the public at large doesn't see any problem with the service, because they just don't know better. All they know is how many mils they pay in the taxes, and that eventually a big truck shows up if and when they call. But like I said, nobody ever EXPECTS to use the fire department, so to try to justify the initial costs of a new regional organization would be a fight, simply because of the fact that people will say "I don't care, because my services are fine now, I don't use them and I don't want to pay any more for them." Response time maps are great, but it sounds like everyone is assuming all taxpayers and voters are educated in these things, when nothing could be further from the truth. There's a difference between someone saying that a truck is five minutes out, and them being able to look down the street at their local station. Think about it, anytime somebody goes to close a fire station we have this problem, even IF the company isn't being shut down and response times are under the acceptable margins, there is almost ALWAYS a community outcry.

Anyway, I'll stop playing devil's advocate now.

[61MACKBR1 222]

My point with that post was that consolidation maybe coming to Larchmont regardless of what depts it consolidates with. The Mamaroneck (Town & Village) and the vilage of larchmont are talking about a number of different consolidation areas. What is interesting is they did not include VMFD in the FD consolidation. My guess is they are strong enough politically that no one wanted to go there. There have also been many public discusions about TMFD taking over and getting rid of LFD including firing all career members. This has been proposed in the local paper by a group of volunteers that quit LFD and want to punish the career members for pushing to get a career chief. The 6 or so studies that have been brought to the table only talk about how much money could be saved, and no consideration for FD capabilities.

The County has nothing to do with any of this and there has been no interest expressed on anyones part to include them. The 100% volunteer departments are not included in this planning because the gap is to great. When NYS has one standard for all firefighters and they believe that NFPA 1710 is the minimum standard that should be meet, then they could be included.

BARRY - If a Southern Westchester Fire District would be developed and "put in place" wouldn't you say this new district would be dispatched and managed out of 60 Control in Valhalla, under the direction of "say" a New Fire Service Division within the existin Westchester County Department of Emergency Services, headed up by a TEAM of Fire Service Manaqement Personnel, from such "former" departments like New Rochelle, Yonkers, Mount Vernon, White Plains, etc? Some "TEAM" needs to take charge of the "Management Side" of running such a "Southern Westchester County Fire District" (in concept, you could still have say Cell Chiefs that would be in charge of specific areas within the district, but taking orders and direction from the memebers of this New Fire District Management Team)?

Thus, I would think that the County, in some way, shape or form, needs to be involved in this plan. Don't you think?

Your thoughts?

[bubbasfd 0]

Well, I read through the forum and from what I gather a consolidation as outlined would seem to make a lot of sense. Hopefully everyone will try and reach an agreement so it will move forward. I was curious about one post concerning Larchmont. Village Board member Josh Mandell is running unopposed for Village Mayor. In talking to many members of that department I'm not so sure where they stand. Under Mandell's control, the department has already lost two career positions and the rumor is that the Chiefs position is in jeopardy. The Village, in appointing a career Chief, went to court to defend its position. Stating that the department needed full time accountability. Maybe all the Volunteers who left are coming back. If anyone has any other information about Larchmont I would like to hear it.

[PEMO3 523]

I think you overestimate the public and their interest in all this. If we show them that their taxes are remaining stable BUT they are receiving a reduction in their homeowners insurance because of the improved ISO ratings, I think they'll be on board with it.

61Mack is right too, there should be a lot of public education to show people that this isn't a burgeoning government but rather the streamlining and improvement of existing services.

Chris I agree both you and 61Mack. My only point was to get this done the public and the fire service both have to be on board or our local elected officials will find a way to derail it when they see the tax dollars are pointed to someone wallet other than their own.

[Dusie 8]

While the members of this board understand and get the benefits of a consolidation, is there anything actually being done to implement this concept?

[dragonrescue 28]

Chris and Bnechis, I absolutely agree with what you are saying, I'm just bringing up the points that the voters/taxpayers might not SEE those things as relevant to them. The truth is the public at large doesn't see any problem with the service, because they just don't know better. All they know is how many mils they pay in the taxes, and that eventually a big truck shows up if and when they call. But like I said, nobody ever EXPECTS to use the fire department, so to try to justify the initial costs of a new regional organization would be a fight, simply because of the fact that people will say "I don't care, because my services are fine now, I don't use them and I don't want to pay any more for them." Response time maps are great, but it sounds like everyone is assuming all taxpayers and voters are educated in these things, when nothing could be further from the truth. There's a difference between someone saying that a truck is five minutes out, and them being able to look down the street at their local station. Think about it, anytime somebody goes to close a fire station we have this problem, even IF the company isn't being shut down and response times are under the acceptable margins, there is almost ALWAYS a community outcry.

Anyway, I'll stop playing devil's advocate now.

If a consolidation is to take place, the public must be educated first! Good luck in trying to make that happen. We can't even get them to understand the importance of having working smoke detectors in their homes!!!!!!

Edited March 2, 2010 by dragonrescue