Greenville,NY Fire Department (Orange) DISBANDED

[suffernH&Lbuff 117]

I was scrolling through Facebook just now and saw this post, from the Greenville Fire Department. It seems like so many local fire departments are disbanding lately, first Port Chester Career, and now Greenville. According to a source, the trucks were locked up in a chain link fenced in area at the firehouse, and that if members respond to any calls, they will be prosecuted and charged. PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF MONIQUE HOLOWACH. 

[EMT111 149]

I have heard rumors that there's a new fire department in Greenville and they were given all of Greenville's apparatus and equipment

[COH Bulldog 82]

What happened with the other apparatus they had? Did they sell those off?

[EMT111 149]

I think the brush truck/mini-pumper is over at the ambulance bay in the spare bay. Supposedly the new FD is building a fire house next to the ambulance bay, and the apparatus is being kept in the fenced in area until the fire house is built

[velcroMedic1987 330]

Prosecuted for what if they respond to calls?

 

[fire2141 33]

What happened?

[10512 214]

It sounds like there is much more to this story.

...and it is comprised of five members?

...and there is a new Fire Department?

...there is much more to this story.

Edited June 2, 2016 by 10512

[AndyC3J 190]

The "five individuals" in question refers to the commissioners of the Greenville Fire District.    There are (or were) 20+ members of the department.   

[FireMedic049 597]

4 hours ago, velcroMedic1987 said:

Prosecuted for what if they respond to calls?

 

I don't know what the exact charge would be, but it would be something along the lines of impersonating a public safety official since they are no longer recognized as such.

[vtach39680 23]

4 hours ago, velcroMedic1987 said:

Prosecuted for what if they respond to calls?

 

Trespassing?  Unauthorized use of the emergency equipment / vehicles. Just guessing of course.  

[jacko1026 7]

And so it begins...the domino effect...

[SECTMB 612]

I don't think this is a domino effect.  From what I could pick up from reading a few newspaper stories, the Fire Commissioners for the Greenville Fire District and members of the Greenville Fire Department have fallen out of favor with each other.  The Fire Commissioners answer to the problem was to form another Fire Company, Mountain View Fire & Rescue to serve the town and build a new fire station to accommodate the new company.  One story mentions that some members of the Mountainview Company are 'disgruntled' ex-members of Greenville Fire Dept.  

 

I'm sure there is much more, more than I care to spend the time researching.  However, this appears to be, IMHO, a case of the general citizenry taking a back seat to the wants and wishes of a few protecting their fiefdoms and power.

[suffernH&Lbuff 117]

UPDATE: Mountain View Fire Company has taken over fire protection for the Town of Greenville. They are now operating with Greenville Fire District's former Apparatus .

[EMT111 149]

http://m.recordonline.com/news/20160602/greenville-fire-department-deactivated

[nfd2004 750]

7 hours ago, EMT111 said:

http://m.recordonline.com/news/20160602/greenville-fire-department-deactivated

 

 

 As I read this story, ONCE AGAIN, the innocent people suffer through no fault of their own. Poor fire department leadership is again demonstrated as the cause.

 

Unless the fire service picks leaders who are not involved in protecting their own self image, and care more about the people they are assigned to protect, this kind of story will be repeated over again.

 

Question now is;  "who will be next" ?

[fdskier 1]

22 hours ago, jacko1026 said:

And so it begins...the domino effect...

Huh? Please explain..

[dwcfireman 656]

Is the station of the Greenville company owned by the company or the district?  I'm trying to understand why the district would allow apparatus to sit outside in the elements while they await a new home.

[SECTMB 612]

8 hours ago, nfd2004 said:

 

 

Unless the fire service picks leaders who are not involved in protecting their own self image, and care more about the people they are assigned to protect, this kind of story will be repeated over again.

 

 

This is the same problem at every level of every government agency from local to national.  We can't seem to find 'leaders' more concerned with the people than with themselves.  Very sad, and I don't see it changing, ever.  

 

[FireMedic049 597]

"We have 31 fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters, 22 of which are also interior qualified,” said past assistant chief and 53-year member Bob Harford. "

 

I know there's differences from state to state regarding training and certification, but how can a department claim a member to be a "fully qualified, completely trained and certified" firefighter when that person is not "interior qualified"?

 

When did being "interior qualified" as a firefighter become a bonus skill set rather than the standard? 

[v85 212]

As far as the leadership issue goes. Commissioners are elected by the general public. So if anything it is the public who needs to pick better leaders. Although the fire service doesn't often inform the public that there are commissioners elections

[16fire5 693]

3 hours ago, v85 said:

As far as the leadership issue goes. Commissioners are elected by the general public. So if anything it is the public who needs to pick better leaders. Although the fire service doesn't often inform the public that there are commissioners elections

 

How do we know the Commissioners didn't make the right decision for the public they're sworn to serve?  

[EMT111 149]

6 hours ago, dwcfireman said:

Is the station of the Greenville company owned by the company or the district?  I'm trying to understand why the district would allow apparatus to sit outside in the elements while they await a new home.

According to what I found old news paper articles, I believe the station was owned by the fire company/department, and then the fire district was paying rent to store equipment and whatever else there, which was a source of contention between the two

[AFS1970 504]

13 hours ago, FireMedic049 said:

"We have 31 fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters, 22 of which are also interior qualified,” said past assistant chief and 53-year member Bob Harford. "

 

I know there's differences from state to state regarding training and certification, but how can a department claim a member to be a "fully qualified, completely trained and certified" firefighter when that person is not "interior qualified"?

 

When did being "interior qualified" as a firefighter become a bonus skill set rather than the standard? 

 

I don't know the department involved so I am just guessing here. I will also add that i think any division between interior and fully certified is likely splitting hairs to beef up the rolls. However as a former volunteer, I am still fully trained and certified, however since I grew a beard right after leaving and haven't had the required type of physical in years of even gone near a drill field, it would be beyond a stretch to say I was interior qualified. Not that I couldn't get back into that state, but I couldn't be listed that way now.

 

I have never really understood the terms interior and exterior firefighter, simply because both the FF1 & FF2 classes I took covered brush fires and structure fires, So I am not sure how you successfully pass the class without being trained in both. I do think there is room for training in non suppression support rolls and for the most part certifying agencies have let this pass them by. However I would not call support personnel firefighters.

[SECTMB 612]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are an exterior firefighter when you can still perform duties such as driving, organizing, setting up and supporting fireground equipment and operations but are not physically up to wearing SCBA, advancing an interior line or bailing out if need be, etc.

 

Or to put it another way, you can still help out and be of use even if you are older and maybe too out of shape to go inside to extinguish the fire.  That's not necessarily a knock, there are alot of functions to be performed at a fire and it takes a team effort.  Not every player can carry the ball. Somebody has to set up the play, hand off and block.

 

They didn't have the distinction between interior and exterior when I joined in the early 70's.  It came much later.

[Bnechis 3,961]

48 minutes ago, SECTMB said:

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are an exterior firefighter when you can still perform duties such as driving, organizing, setting up and supporting fireground equipment and operations but are not physically up to wearing SCBA, advancing an interior line or bailing out if need be, etc.

 

Or to put it another way, you can still help out and be of use even if you are older and maybe too out of shape to go inside to extinguish the fire.  That's not necessarily a knock, there are alot of functions to be performed at a fire and it takes a team effort.  Not every player can carry the ball. Somebody has to set up the play, hand off and block.

 

They didn't have the distinction between interior and exterior when I joined in the early 70's.  It came much later.

So then let's call it what it really is...

 

you ou have Firefighters and you have Firefighter Helpers.

 

i see too many departments that claim how many members they have, but they won't admit to themselves or the public they are sworn to protect when they do not have enough interior "firefighters" to actually do a search or make a real attack.

[FireMedic049 597]

 

1 hour ago, SECTMB said:

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are an exterior firefighter when you can still perform duties such as driving, organizing, setting up and supporting fireground equipment and operations but are not physically up to wearing SCBA, advancing an interior line or bailing out if need be, etc.

 

Or to put it another way, you can still help out and be of use even if you are older and maybe too out of shape to go inside to extinguish the fire.  That's not necessarily a knock, there are alot of functions to be performed at a fire and it takes a team effort.  Not every player can carry the ball. Somebody has to set up the play, hand off and block.

 

They didn't have the distinction between interior and exterior when I joined in the early 70's.  It came much later.

I think you and AFS1970 may be missing the point.  

 

I'm not questioning the value or appropriateness of having/using members in a VFD who are not interior qualified for whatever reason.

 

The description used was "fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters" which to me would describe members who are interior qualified and exclude members who previously were, but are not currently able to operate interior whether due to age, physical limitation, having a beard or whatever (i.e. not qualified).

 

I was commenting on the thought process that results in a (former) chief officer describing 9 members of the department who are not interior qualified as being fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters.

 

I would think that using "fully qualified" to describe a firefighter would imply the ability to perform a vital, core component of the position, like interior operations.

 

Like I asked, when did interior operations become a bonus skill set for firefighters rather than the standard?

[AFS1970 504]

FireMedic049, I hope I was able to convey the same point. I don;t think you should call people that can't go into a fire firefighters. I was just guessing at how the speaker was claiming someone who could not go in was "fully" certified but niot interior qualified.

[huzzie59 75]

"From Tooth To Tail".  Are the supporting personnel in an army still called "Soldiers"?

Or only the ones firing the bullets?

 

[nfd2004 750]

If not enough certified "INTERIOR FIREFIGHTERS" show up, who gets to go in and fight the fire or conduct searches in the early stages ? What is Plan B if that's the case. ?

 

How does that affect the "Two In/Two Out Rule" ?

 

 

[fdalumnus 165]

52 minutes ago, huzzie59 said:

"From Tooth To Tail".  Are the supporting personnel in an army still called "Soldiers"?

Or only the ones firing the bullets?

 

 

Weren't they called REMFS ?

 

Rear echelon mother (you know the rest)