Mansion Fire in North Stamford

[x152 179]

You are correct. Operationally, the patch doesn't make much of a difference. Having experienced, career personell around 24/7 to work with the volunteers is what they want, and what happens in the end, regardeless of the patch. Unfortunately there are many nuances that make it more difficult for the volunteers to work closely with someone with a SFRD patch, mostly related to union regulations. Again, the problems have nothing to do with the individual members, and mostly to do with the union. I hope that is the response you were looking for.

Ok cool, I'll take it. Thanks for clearing it up, I hate being stepped-on for no good reason.

By the way; much of the "union" scare is not valid. Having dealt with this issue first-hand, they are many people talking like experts on the subject and usually what they say is 100% false. What is impeding interoperability is not a contract, it is egos.

Later-

[FD828 77]

You are correct. Operationally, the patch doesn't make much of a difference. Having experienced, career personell around 24/7 to work with the volunteers is what they want, and what happens in the end, regardeless of the patch. Unfortunately there are many nuances that make it more difficult for the volunteers to work closely with someone with a SFRD patch, mostly related to union regulations. Again, the problems have nothing to do with the individual members, and mostly to do with the union. I hope that is the response you were looking for.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. You think the problems mostly have to do with the union?? Get real! The "union" did not ask for any of this mess, the CITY is the driving force behind all of the changes. The union did what it had to do to save jobs and ensure the firefighter's safety. If the CITY says we are putting an engine in TOR firehouse the guys assigned there will do their jobs to the best of their ability in a professional manner. The union has absolutely no say in day to day operations or where anyone is stationed. If you speak with the firefighters both career and volunteer that work with each other on a daily basis, they will tell you that they are working well together and even train some together. I am not saying that there are not some people on both sides that have negative feelings for the other side, or that there are no problems to be worked out, but for the most part the guys/gals that are doing the work are doing it professionally together. It is the "powers that be" that are making this harder then it should be. Stop making this out to be the big bad union vs the volunteers cause it is not. We are all just pawns in a big game that is putting everyones (residents and firefighter's) lives, property and livelihoods in jeapordy.

[Alpinerunner 61]

I'm going to stop posting on this because it's gotten too far off topic and I don't want to negatively affect relations on the ground. And it's ruining my Friday.

[JTF429 37]

I have to add my 2 cents. How can you say this is not a career vs volunteer thing. North Stamford is like the island of misfit toys. SFRD was canceled because they are career staff because of all the nonsense going on. The only way a combination system is going to work is if both sides can work together. Maybe when the vollies go to FDIC they should spend some time taking classes instead of seeing how many lights they can fit on there rigs. Yes that is a shot and it IS NOT INTENDED TO ALL VOLUNTEERS. There are some volly departments that are great departments. They train, take classes etc, etc. But many of them have Chiefs whose egos control them. Problems lying in wait is what kills firefighters. That's what they have in North Stamford; a huge problem lying in wait. I pray to God it doesn't kill anyone. Watch how fast God forbid there is a LODD. Everyone all of a sudden becomes brothers. Brotherhood is not a sometimes thing.

[TRUCK6018 50]

Long Ridge has attempted to explain this as that they only wanted to cancel the City (worthy of additional questioning on that line),

I don't understand why dispatch would have thought otherwise.

Per the audio of the incident:

Chief: 712 to dispatch, thank you very much, cancel all units except Long Ridge to this call.

Dispatch: Are you on the scene sir?

Chief: Negative, we have enough guys. Cancel everybody but Long Ridge.

That's twice in two separate transmissions that he said cancel everyone but Long Ridge. How could anyone know that he meant only cancel the city?????

Edited May 15, 2010 by TRUCK6018

[Geppetto 31]

Editorial - Stamford Advocate

Fire problems are threatening safety

Friday, May 14, 2010

...This is not the first time that fire service dysfunction - six autonomous departments; feuding volunteers and professionals -- has been blamed for a house destroyed by flames. But it darn well should be the last....

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/default/article/Fire-problems-are-threatening-safety-487213.php

[DR104 141]

This situation happens for both volunteer and career. There have been incidents where career departements call in mutual aid from across the county (westchester) before even thinking about calling in volunteers 2 minutes away. Until we can settle the differences that divide us we will not be able to provide safe and effective fire prevention.

Thats because you will never know what you are going to get when you call volunteers.(Time of the alarm day of the week) With a paid dept calling Ma from a paid dept u know you are going to get 3-4 interior firemen and an officer.

[nfd2004 750]

I'm going to stop posting on this because it's gotten too far off topic and I don't want to negatively affect relations on the ground. And it's ruining my Friday.

Sorry about this topic ruining your day. But I sure agree with "FD288". I've been involved in similiar issues for my 30 years on another dept with very similiar problems.

Both my brother and I were volunteer firefighters back in the 1970-1975/76 in Fairfield, Ct. We worked well together with the career guys. As I understand it the volunteers still man a rig at that Stratfield Firehouse Station 3. They also man a rig at Station 4 in Southport. I'm sure there's been problems along the way, but it has worked since the 1970s and still works today. The career firefighters were basically our bosses, and I really was able to learn a lot during those years. We had a Volunter Chief, Asst Chief etc, but they were accountible to the Career Chiefs, and were more of Administrators with the Volly Dept/Company. Our training sessions was conducted by a Career Captain once a week. The system worked out well, and we all got along great. Most of my volunteer friends later became career firefighters in various depts. I'm very thankful to the Fairfield/Stratfield Dept for all they did for me.

On the other hand, when I went on the Norwich, Ct Fire Dept as a Career Firefighter, I soon found out that I had entered a "War Zone". People hated me for what I did. We have Two Career Stations, and there are Five Volunteer Stations. The Volunteer stations run as totally seperate depts, similiar to Stamford. I thought it would be the same as Fairfield. I was sure wrong on that. I could write a book (maybe I should) called a "Tale of Two Cities". Fairfield vs Norwich, Ct Career/Volunteer Fire Depts.

So Stamford, you are not alone. Although 100 miles away, I can relate to the problems you face. If this mess you have ever gets straightened out, maybe Norwich can follow your footsteps.

[helicopper 1,050]

This situation happens for both volunteer and career. There have been incidents where career departements call in mutual aid from across the county (westchester) before even thinking about calling in volunteers 2 minutes away. Until we can settle the differences that divide us we will not be able to provide safe and effective fire prevention.

How about we first settle the difference in training requirements for volunteer and career firefighters? This has been beaten to death and since I don't have a horse in this race, I'll try to sum it up with this: until these disparities in staffing/training/accountability are resolved, we'll never be able to bridge this divide.

I also think that they have thought about calling in volunteers and consciously decided not to because they don't know what they'll get.

Two minutes? As the crow flies or once the apparatus is staffed or what? People can manipulate these arguments in a variety of ways to suit them but there is no way to get an unstaffed apparatus on the road and to a scene in another jurisdiction in two minutes.

Getting back to the case here in Stamford, two legal terms leap to mind: RECKLESS and NEGLIGENT. Either or both can sustain legal action and that is pretty damning audio to support the case. Thank goodness nobody was hurt or killed in this incident.

[LTNRFD 266]

Does someone have the entire audio of the dispatch to this fire. I can not totally understand what happen here because the audio tape is only about 3 minutes long. According to the Stamford Advocates article it took LRFD 7 minutes to have the 1st unit on the scene.

"An alarm company reported the fire at 8:50 p.m. Monday. Three minutes later, the Long Ridge assistant chief canceled all responding units except for Long Ridge. At 8:57 p.m., the first Long Ridge unit arrived and reported the roof was on fire. That's when Turn of River units and city engines were called back to assist Long Ridge, arriving nearly 19 minutes after the first report."

The audio does not have the TOR units being dispatched. The first indication of TOR is 6-7 'canceling the city truck'.

What I would be interested to find out was there any other information that the dispatcher relayed to the responding units that we don't know about. Was the tape just edited to remove dead air, or was info edited also.

The time of the units being cancelled by 712 is consistent in the article by the Stamford Advocate and the audio tape that they provided. Is this a true picture or one that was edited by the paper? Has anyone heard the entire 7+ minutes?

[helicopper 1,050]

As a friendly suggestion, If you feel that your not "safe" with "these guys" protecting you, then why do you continue to live there? Move to a place where you can feel that you have protection you are comfortable with. That's what i'd do if I felt as you appear to feel.

While I'm sure that everyone who lives in Stamford would love to have a fully paid department, it all comes down to finding money to pay these fine gentlemen for their services, which means more tax dollars from those who either cannot afford to pay increased taxes or resent having the government dipping into their wallets yet again. Given the current state of the economy, this isn't feasible at this time.

That's neither friendly or a constructive suggestion. People should move because their fire department(s) are dysfunctional? People have a legitimate expectation that they will receive competent and timely service for the taxes they pay. In this case, the homeowners pay $27,800+ dollars a year to Stamford. It is not unreasonable for them to expect basic services for that amount of money. They sadly didn't receive them and your solution is that they should move? Come on.

Instead of the taxpayers moving out, how about the elected, appointed, and ad hoc officials in Stamford get their collective acts together and solve the problem. Fix it once and for all so that when the next fire call comes in you don't get this poor response. Taxpayers in the City of Stamford should get a standard response from the police or fire department regardless of where they live. It's in the City of Stamford, it should be the same and not predicated on outdated fire districts who are essentially their own "kingdoms". By the way, that's only derogatory if they act that way.

There are plenty of examples of good combination FDs in the United States and Stamford really doesn't need to reinvent the wheel. They just need to stop putting their own interests and egos ahead of those they're allegedly sworn to protect.

[lad12derff 283]

This situation happens for both volunteer and career. There have been incidents where career departements call in mutual aid from across the county (westchester) before even thinking about calling in volunteers 2 minutes away. Until we can settle the differences that divide us we will not be able to provide safe and effective fire prevention.

Can you clarify upon your statement. Besides Lake Mohegan, what career depts in Westchester can't rely on mutual aid from another career dept. New Rochelle touches Pelham, Larchmont, Eastchester, TMFD and Scarsdale. With Mount Vernon and Yonkers a stone throw away. White Plains and Fairview, Hartsdale and Greenburgh. Port Chester and Rye. I think Westchester is pretty well covered and think your statement is pretty off base.

[gamewell45 258]

That's neither friendly or a constructive suggestion. People should move because their fire department(s) are dysfunctional? People have a legitimate expectation that they will receive competent and timely service for the taxes they pay. In this case, the homeowners pay $27,800+ dollars a year to Stamford. It is not unreasonable for them to expect basic services for that amount of money. They sadly didn't receive them and your solution is that they should move? Come on.

Instead of the taxpayers moving out, how about the elected, appointed, and ad hoc officials in Stamford get their collective acts together and solve the problem. Fix it once and for all so that when the next fire call comes in you don't get this poor response. Taxpayers in the City of Stamford should get a standard response from the police or fire department regardless of where they live. It's in the City of Stamford, it should be the same and not predicated on outdated fire districts who are essentially their own "kingdoms". By the way, that's only derogatory if they act that way.

There are plenty of examples of good combination FDs in the United States and Stamford really doesn't need to reinvent the wheel. They just need to stop putting their own interests and egos ahead of those they're allegedly sworn to protect.

Chris, I have to respectfully disagree with you. I don't know about you, but personally I happen to value my life. If I'm living in an area where I feel that I or any member of my family is in an unsafe situation you bet I'm going to move out of there to a place where I can feel safe. Its friendly advice because as emergency service personnel we are supposed to place a value on human life and safety of our citizens, which in this particular case was the thrust of my post. Furthermore it was constructive because it wasn't a condemnation of him living there, rather a positive piece of advice which would fix his immediate concerns of feeling safe where he resides. Its all how you read into it.

That being said, you mention that homeowners in Stamford pay $27,800+ per year in Stamford. To me that's an outrageous sum of money and while you are correct that its not unreasonable for the taxpayer to expect a basic service for what they pay, nonetheless you will get what you pay for and obviously the elected politicians in Stamford feel that's what your entitled to receive at this point. If that's unacceptable, then vote out the politicians and replace them with ones that will march in lockstep with what the residents of the city want. But in the meantime the poster I originally responded to made a claim that he felt unsafe where he lived; I made a basic common-sense suggestion to him. Its what any normal human being would do if he/she felt that they were living in an unsafe situation.

There are many examples of good combination, volunteer and paid departments around the US. Most of them are doing the best they can given the constraints and particular financial circumstances that the country currently finds itself embroiled in. As members of the emergency services, sometimes some of us may think that cities/towns/villages have an inexhaustible source of monies; we need to be cognizant of the fact that we are living in very rough times tax dollar wise and at the same time be realistic in our goals.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

This issue isn't a career or volunteer one, its one of egos.

That being said, the main problem with the whole Stamford situation is the State and City Charter system that Connecticut has. By changing the language in the charter, Stamford could easily re-align the outlying companies (TOR, LR, etc) to fall under the command of the Fire Chief of the City of Stamford. But the problem is getting the citizens off their butts and involved in the process. There are two ways to do that, emphasize the financial problems with the system or wait for a crisis. I'd prefer the former over the latter.

In West Haven we are dealing with the same situation, just without the "cancel our rivals" mentality. Three separate fire departments with their own chain of command, none of which reporting to the city. Why? "Because that's how we've always done it." That's Bravo-Sierra and we all know it. The fire service needs to start changing to provide better service for the CITIZENS, not for ourselves. Is Stamford ready for a 100% career department? Maybe, I don't know their call volume. Will the citizens support that financially? Probably not, I'd be willing to bet almost definitely not, in this economy. So work with what you have, and be constantly improving the system to adapt to what the city needs. The "tradition" argument just doesn't cut it anymore, it wasn't good enough for riding the tailboards, it wasn't good enough for not wearing the SCBA, and its not good enough for this. Consolidate, and do it soon.

[helicopper 1,050]

Chris, I have to respectfully disagree with you. I don't know about you, but personally I happen to value my life. If I'm living in an area where I feel that I or any member of my family is in an unsafe situation you bet I'm going to move out of there to a place where I can feel safe. Its friendly advice because as emergency service personnel we are supposed to place a value on human life and safety of our citizens, which in this particular case was the thrust of my post. Furthermore it was constructive because it wasn't a condemnation of him living there, rather a positive piece of advice which would fix his immediate concerns of feeling safe where he resides. Its all how you read into it.

That being said, you mention that homeowners in Stamford pay $27,800+ per year in Stamford. To me that's an outrageous sum of money and while you are correct that its not unreasonable for the taxpayer to expect a basic service for what they pay, nonetheless you will get what you pay for and obviously the elected politicians in Stamford feel that's what your entitled to receive at this point. If that's unacceptable, then vote out the politicians and replace them with ones that will march in lockstep with what the residents of the city want. But in the meantime the poster I originally responded to made a claim that he felt unsafe where he lived; I made a basic common-sense suggestion to him. Its what any normal human being would do if he/she felt that they were living in an unsafe situation.

There are many examples of good combination, volunteer and paid departments around the US. Most of them are doing the best they can given the constraints and particular financial circumstances that the country currently finds itself embroiled in. As members of the emergency services, sometimes some of us may think that cities/towns/villages have an inexhaustible source of monies; we need to be cognizant of the fact that we are living in very rough times tax dollar wise and at the same time be realistic in our goals.

The amount of taxes paid was not a generalization for Stamford, it was for the victims of this particular fire specifically. They paid 28K expecting to receive basic services including fire protection and they were let down by the very people sworn to protect them. To me that is an egregrious breach of the public trust.

You're right, people do need to get involved but as long as the public is misled by those in authority who misrepresent their capabilities or thwart efforts to have real systems because of egos and attitudes we're going to continue to have these problems.

These problems in Stamford predate the current economic crisis so that isn't a valid excuse. The good examples have been around for a long time, in some cases just as long as our fractured/dysfunctional services but we have done little to change. Yes, times are tough and we have to be a cost-effective as possible. So tell me, how are 5-6 FD's in one City or 59 FD's in Westchester County cost effective?

We have broken dysfunctional systems and people just keep going hoping for the best. It's absurd!

The time is right to really fix things. People just need to step up to the plate and be willing to make hard decisions. And we in the emergency services have to embrace the changes in name of progress and not resist them simply because they're changes.

[LTNRFD 266]

Does someone have the entire audio of the dispatch to this fire. I can not totally understand what happen here because the audio tape is only about 3 minutes long. According to the Stamford Advocates article it took LRFD 7 minutes to have the 1st unit on the scene.

"An alarm company reported the fire at 8:50 p.m. Monday. Three minutes later, the Long Ridge assistant chief canceled all responding units except for Long Ridge. At 8:57 p.m., the first Long Ridge unit arrived and reported the roof was on fire. That's when Turn of River units and city engines were called back to assist Long Ridge, arriving nearly 19 minutes after the first report."

The audio does not have the TOR units being dispatched. The first indication of TOR is 6-7 'canceling the city truck'.

What I would be interested to find out was there any other information that the dispatcher relayed to the responding units that we don't know about. Was the tape just edited to remove dead air, or was info edited also.

The time of the units being cancelled by 712 is consistent in the article by the Stamford Advocate and the audio tape that they provided. Is this a true picture or one that was edited by the paper? Has anyone heard the entire 7+ minutes?

Maybe Mary Woods can help locate the missing 4 minutes of audio ?????

[gamewell45 258]

Maybe Mary Woods can help locate the missing 4 minutes of audio ?????

Probably tough to do since she died in 2005, but its a noble thought.

[gamewell45 258]

The amount of taxes paid was not a generalization for Stamford, it was for the victims of this particular fire specifically. They paid 28K expecting to receive basic services including fire protection and they were let down by the very people sworn to protect them. To me that is an egregrious breach of the public trust.

You're right, people do need to get involved but as long as the public is misled by those in authority who misrepresent their capabilities or thwart efforts to have real systems because of egos and attitudes we're going to continue to have these problems.

These problems in Stamford predate the current economic crisis so that isn't a valid excuse. The good examples have been around for a long time, in some cases just as long as our fractured/dysfunctional services but we have done little to change. Yes, times are tough and we have to be a cost-effective as possible. So tell me, how are 5-6 FD's in one City or 59 FD's in Westchester County cost effective?

We have broken dysfunctional systems and people just keep going hoping for the best. It's absurd!

The time is right to really fix things. People just need to step up to the plate and be willing to make hard decisions. And we in the emergency services have to embrace the changes in name of progress and not resist them simply because they're changes.

Chris, agreed that they paid 28k expecting to receive basic services. So the question is then, what in their mind (the homeowners) were basic services, in particular fire protection? And another question is, what level of service does the fire department provide for the 28k? I'm sure you'll agree that no matter what you pay in fire taxes, you'll get uniform protection regardless of how much you pay. Then the final question is; what does the city/town/village feel is an equitable level of protection for the monies spent on taxes? I think its all subjective when it comes down to it.

As far as the problems predating the current economic crisis not being a valid excuse, you can go back 50 years and point the finger, but the problem still exists and the truth of the matter is that until the recession is over, forget about making any meaningful changes in the system that require money, even if it was touted to be cost neutral, the public has very little trust in government at this time and will take time to rebuild it. I"m sure we both agree, if you read the papers which I'm sure you do, you know as well as i do of all the layoffs and givebacks being requested of all public sector employees. There's just no money out there right now and that's a fact everyone in the public sector is going to have to accept as painful as that may be.

As far as 5-6 fd's in a city and 59 departments in Westchester being cost effective; I don't live in either a city nor Westchester County, so I really can't make a statement on that.

Finally, I agree that we need to work on making positive changes and while evolution in the fire service is inevitable, people need to be open minded about change and embrace sound, thoughtout decisions that are made.

[nfd2004 750]

These problems in Stamford predate the current economic crisis so that isn't a valid excuse. The good examples have been around for a long time, in some cases just as long as our fractured/dysfunctional services but we have done little to change. Yes, times are tough and we have to be a cost-effective as possible. So tell me, how are 5-6 FD's in one City or 59 FD's in Westchester County cost effective?

I certainly agree with that. Where ever these multi fire depts exist, the best thing that can happen is to combine services under ONE AUTHORITY. As it stands, not only do these seperate depts have their own Chiefs, Asst Chiefs, etc running their own show the way THEY see fit, but also each dept has to have its own fully equipped dept. When it comes to saving money, more is NOT better. A huge savings comes from much less fire apparatus, gear, equipment etc. Thousands of dollars could also be saved. It doesn't make sense to run 5-6 totally seperate fire depts in a city that really should have only one. (or a county that should have one). Or to pay the cost for all this equipment for each of these totally seperate depts. "One dept, One Leader, One Budget".

I am not advocating doing away with any volunteers. But having them be accountible to one boss who runs the entire one dept. As I posted earler regarding the Fairfield, Ct dept. It does work. But the egos must disappear.

[MH0109 1]

This whole situation has me completely dumb founded. WTF is all I can think to say about this situation. I have served in this profession for 23 years to this point, both as a very active volunteer and now a very involved career member in my current department. I am appalled at what is taking place in Stamford with this career vs. volunteer nonsense. This has to be the final straw in the battle as far as I am concerned. This chief officer has gone too far and after a complete investigation on this fire, he should be removed from the fire department. We, in the fire service, took an oath to protect LIFE and PROPERTY. This officer violated that oath, and therefore should be removed. He returned auto aid career companies to a reported fire while not even on scene-GROSS Negligence. I also read that three members were hurt at the scene, as they successfully burned the roof off a seven thousand (7000) + square foot home because of EGO. No excuses necessary on this issue, period. He was wrong in returning any company before the arrival of units, period. This action is on tape-no one can hide the fact it happened. I can now see that the citizens in the north end of Stamford should be concerned for their safety. One destroyed home can be replaced, but what is next from the EGO ridden volunteers companies that return manpower? Stop the career vs. volunteer battling, before you kill someone…. He returned highly trained personnel, members were injured at this incident, and he should be held accountable for it. We in the service have heard that size-up starts long before the incident. Strategic and tactical decisions on the fireground are made on the FIREGROUND, not before arrival to the scene. Returning units before arrival of trained personnel goes against the basic fundamentals that the most junior member in the fire service are taught. The members of LRFCo should be ashamed of themselves over this incident. The other volunteer departments that continue to battle with the city departments need to take notice of this incident and this battle needs to stop. Someone needs to get these groups together and figure out how to work side by side. I want to emphasize that I am not bashing anyone personally. I will not take sides in the battle of whom or what service is best in Stamford, CT as I do not live there. They need to figure that out themselves, but this incident has shown a complete disregard for the mission of the fire service as a whole.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

This is something I posted in another forum on the issue, which I'll share here. It was in response to someone talking about combination departments in a semi-positive light.

Originally Posted by (Name Omitted)

That being said, I don't think that every career department should place all volly's in the same light. On the other hand there are a bunch of career departments that work seamlessly with volly's. Therefore us volly's shouldn't pass judgement on career departments. I know that this is all a pipe dream, however it is my $.02. I understand that there will always be animosity out there, but any time that these issues spill out of the firehouse there needs to be serious reform.

As a member of one of those combination departments where career works EXTREMELY well with volunteer, I somewhat agree with you. But it starts with expectations. What do you expect your volunteers to be able to do? What steps are your volunteer organizations taking to ensure they can provide adequate coverage at ALL times? Because there are some really creative ways to do so OTHER than just hiring part-timers. (Hint: There are ALOT of fire science students out there between UNH and the community colleges who would love to help out other departments)

Those who claim that there will always be animousity between career and volunteer ARE the problem. There doesn't have to be, stop accepting the problem and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Everybody needs to lighten up and stop feeling so threatened by change that they freak out and circle the wagons every time a new initiative comes up. But it goes both ways, the volunteers need to respect the fact that the career department is in command (at least in most department by SOP) and the career departments need to recognize that the volunteers are (generally) there to help and stop crying the "DEY TOOK ER JOBS" song.

I for one think it starts with training. As Sun Tzu said, "For how you train, so shall you fight" if your career and volunteer staff train together on a regular basis, you will work together. If you put up walls between the two sides, that will come out on the fireground. Respect, humility, training and common sense is whats needed to fix most of these problems.

That being said, the issue in Stamford is that of a charter revision. If the state and city charters could get amended, the volunteer departments AND the career department could be folded into one chain of command and one set of SOPs, which would make sure everyone is one the same page and stop knuckleheaded decisions like this one from being made.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Chris, agreed that they paid 28k expecting to receive basic services. So the question is then, what in their mind (the homeowners) were basic services, in particular fire protection?

I believe that most homeowners have no clue as to what level of fire protection that the recieve. That being said (particularly in the north east) they drive past multiple bay fire stations with many brand new custom fire trucks, and 1 or 2 mile in every direction another station what should they expect? Has the chief's told the community what they are capabile of and if they have any problems in delevering service?

And another question is, what level of service does the fire department provide for the 28k?

See the pictures of this house without a roof

I'm sure you'll agree that no matter what you pay in fire taxes, you'll get uniform protection regardless of how much you pay.

In Stamford it looks like those that pay the least get the most. Its clearly not a uniform level of service.

Then the final question is; what does the city/town/village feel is an equitable level of protection for the monies spent on taxes? I think its all subjective when it comes down to it.

Yes its subjective, but what is equitable is not the same as what is politcally acceptable. So far it appears that the politicians are more concerned with keeping the volunteers happy than worrying about what is an equitable level of service.

[jayhalsey 6]

So this 28k that people are talking about. That went to LRFC?

[FIRECHIEF63 55]

It seems that only one thing and one thing only should be done after this incident. His lack of proper judgement and not allowing the automatic aid to respond into the fire as he cancelled them prior to arriving and making a proper size up caused injuries to 3 firefighters.

GET RID OF THIS ASST. FIRE CHIEF and he should have criminal charges brought upon him for his lack of safe actions and getting these 3 firefighters hurt at this fire scene.

Immediately remove his rank and suspend him for this lack of proper competence.

Edited May 16, 2010 by FIRECHIEF63

[helicopper 1,050]

So this 28k that people are talking about. That went to LRFC?

A portion of that 28K did go to the LRFC, exactly how much wasn't published on the Stamford website. But the exact amount is immaterial. The point is that this family paid a sizable amount of money in taxes and expected to receive basic services in return. Unless negigence is a generally accepted basic service, I think this family was short-changed. Meanwhile, city dwellers paying 1/10th that amount in downtown Stamford receive a standard response 24/7/365 without all this drama and the emotional and ego-driven decisions to cancel responding apparatus.

The concept of engendered reliance also comes into play here. Fire departments have certainly cultivated an environment where the public relies upon them and to fail to provide the service(s) expected creates additional liability.

[Geppetto 31]

Originally in the Sunday paper;

Angela Carella: Fire flap flares again

Stamford Advocate

Monday, May 17, 2010

...A plan to do that is set to be released this week.

"It's not going to be, `OK, does everybody like this?' It's going to be, `This is the way it's going to be.' That's the only way to resolve it," Pavia said. "Will the volunteers be 100 percent happy? No. Will the city be 100 percent happy? No. Will the union? I don't think so. But, given the legal constraints and Charter constraints and everything else we have to deal with, it's a pretty good plan that will achieve one thing, the most important thing: reliable fire service citywide."

After fire wrecked another North Stamford home in October 2008, the city hired a consultant to examine what happened. The consultant found there was confusion, delay in establishing command, delay in calling for backup, delay in establishing a water supply, and that, 12 minutes into the blaze, only three firefighters were there.

"This is it," Pavia said. "Enough of the nonsense."

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Originally-in-the-Sunday-paper-Angela-Carella-490042.php

Edited May 17, 2010 by Geppetto

[Remember585 815]

What were the extent of the FF injuries, and from which department were those that got hurt?

I don't think legal action should be taken against this AC, but I do think he needs to be disciplined, especially because I am 99% sure a lawsuit will come from the homeowner. A black eye like this hurts that department, and it will cause wake effect problems for other departments in that area, as residents read about this and start wondering what coverage they get.

I said it in my earlier post, nobody should cancel any apparatus until you are on the scene, size things up and determine if you have enough resources. I get my stones broken once in a while for calling help "before it's needed" but you can bet your a** I'll never be short-handed due to my ego!

[jayhalsey 6]

A portion of that 28K did go to the LRFC, exactly how much wasn't published on the Stamford website. But the exact amount is immaterial. The point is that this family paid a sizable amount of money in taxes and expected to receive basic services in return. Unless negigence is a generally accepted basic service, I think this family was short-changed. Meanwhile, city dwellers paying 1/10th that amount in downtown Stamford receive a standard response 24/7/365 without all this drama and the emotional and ego-driven decisions to cancel responding apparatus.

The concept of engendered reliance also comes into play here. Fire departments have certainly cultivated an environment where the public relies upon them and to fail to provide the service(s) expected creates additional liability.

So they did get some money from the city and arent operating on a $0 budget?

[TSull 33]

So they did get some money from the city and arent operating on a $0 budget?

I have worked in 4 career departments and have volunteered in 4 departments so I feel I have a little insight into the fire service. The fire service in Stamford needs to be streamlined. One department with one budget with one person in charge reporting to the mayor and the board of fire commissioners. I have posted this idea in other forums but maybe it can be looked at again. I know it is not the perfect example but why can't Stamford be set up the way Danbury F.D. is? One department that covers the entire city with both career and volunteer companies? Danbury has 6 career engines (3 on each), 1 (4 on rig) career ladder truck, and shift commander on duty. The city has 12 volunteer companies spread throughout the city. When there is a call at a given address, 2-3 career engines, the career truck, and the shift commander are dispatched with the corresponding volunteer company whose district the call is in and sometimes additional volunteer companies are dispatched. When the volunteers respond, they respond as a company and fall into the response matrix as a company and report to the IC. Several of the Danbury volunteer companies have specialized what their service is and in my opinion have made themselves more integral to being involved and called upon. The career training officer is in charge of all required training. I know it is not a perfect system and I am sure people will argue from both sides whether or not Danbury's setup can work in Stamford but if Danbury can do it with what they have, Stamford can do it with what they have. And Danbury did add the 6th engine not too long ago after many years of pushing for it.

[LTNRFD 266]

Again I will ask. Does anyone have the audio for the entire time from dispatch to on the scene. The Stamford Advocate's article states that the time of dispatch to the on scene time is 7 minutes. The audio tape is only 3 minutes long. What info is on the other 4 minutes. Could it have info that directed 712 to turn around all but the LRFD units? Could it have had info that confirmed the working structure fire before 712 returned the other companies? Or was the tape just edited of dead air?

The Stamford Advocate's article reported that the alarm was called in by an alarm company, yet the first dispatch was for a chimney fire. How was this info about the chimney fire obtained? Did the alarm company call the location and speak to the resident and did the homeowner advise that there was a chimney fire or that the roof was on fire? Or did the fire dispatcher receive a second source call reporting the chimney fire?

I think everyone here is making judgement on this fire without all the facts. I'm not saying that LRFD was right or wrong, I just don't think ALL the facts are on the table.