TRex

If the Stamford Fire Protection Delivery Services are to act as one "co-hesive" entity, why then are the vol. chiefs complaining about not being invited to the table top hurricane drill? Are they not aware that it is one department now as the city voters have indicated they want it to be? It would seem that they are still stuck on the fact that they are no

longer chiefs of separate departments. One department. They are more accurately now district chiefs of separate companies for separate districts. Wake up District Chiefs. I do not think the Director of Public Health and Safety screwed up and over sighted them, like the over sight to pay for new fire engines.

Along those same lines with supposedly one Fire Protection Delivery System, perhaps training for LRFD and its infallible chief should include operations on hydrants. Perhaps they can instruct on HOW TO FRACTURE A PRIMARY WATER MAIN and

ignore that it occurred or that they possibly were responsible for it.

Hello Brothers.

I have seen this up here in the northeast New England. There is at least one smaller combination department that is amid 4 larger city departments. We are not county operated here in CT. However, our small state places a lot of diversification within reach of each community. That department is "on-boarding" costs associated with employing and developing new FF's if they within a prescribed amount of time leave for any reason.

It seems to me that PB city should as you guys pointed out, just provide the incentive with contract enhancements to maintain those that they are losing. I think they are taking a gamble and figuring that it would be cheaper to hold back the enhancements and loose the hiring costs. It looks like to me they are loosing the bet. Good Luck.

TRex.

X,

I would agree that success should be based on sincerity and accuracy; in a perfect world. I believe in that principle. However, if we are to be truly realistic the bottom line is getting the grant, at least for them. If they were sincere and factual in their motivations, they would not have received the award. It irks me that another department probably in CT that sincerely and accurately need the funding may have been denied it.

Their grant writer is successful. Politicians are successful. It is all about perceptions, not truth. However, isn't that the goal, success? I only wish at times that my goal were to be always successful. I am to a fault though, striving to be sincere and accurate. At least as fellow fire fighters and leaders among each other I consider myself successful by being sincere and accurate. There can be no other way in our line of work. Agreed?

C,

I will agree. Your organization certainly does set a good example of how it should work as a 100 % volunteer operation.

I know a thing or two about how the grant process works. One of the courses for the B.S. degree in Emerg. Mang.,was all about FEMA and the grant process. All I can provide at this point other than the new non matching funding requirements is that a panel of "experts" sits and applies their criteria to the answers provided on the app. and in the explanation narrative. I seriously doubt that any claims are actually verified given the enormity of the number of requests submitted. One thing does remain certain though, there will be an accounting of the dollars at the end of the process and that at times is the main concern of the Fed. Therefore, only the bean counters will verify just the numbers, unless of course a complaint is filed. I being a federal tax payer would certainly hope that money is going to places where it actually as needed.

I am having a difficult time understanding how the city collectively has been successful in getting what amounts to back to back SAFERs! I believe there is a question on the application that asks if there has been any other recent grants awarded for that jurisdiction. The last SAFER which was just over a year ago included 8 fire fighters to additionally staff the two engines that primarily respond and are stationed in that district. Does anyone believe they would have been successful if the expert panel knew this fact?

Yes ladies, that is correct. Two fully staffed 24/7 career units, backed by a large support system within the city including the other volunteer companies. I can only imagine that they answered no, otherwise I highly doubt they would have been successful, or perhaps they would have. I wonder if their application indicated this fact any where within it. If not, it might not be a lie, but certainly a misrepresentation. I too am no lawyer, but a taxpayer concerned about money be thrown where it is not needed. Kudos to there grant writer. I am told he is a grant guru. Imagine Cogs, if all of this talent were being bridled and being directed for the greater good of ALL, and not just for ToR! Was any of the personnel offered to Belltown, or Long Ridge?

P.S. Does anyone know of any other CT department that received any SAFER money. As best as I could tell, ToR was the only one.

.

I'm pretty sure this is the point we are at now. Volunteers are not getting out the door to every call and you seem to suggest volunteers are picking and choosing which calls to go to. Someone is going to get hurt or killed when volunteers wait for the size up to determine wether they are going to respond. When the citizens you are there to protect call 911 it is a major incident to them.

Yesterday you lamented that TOR did not have a driver but a crew was there. This topic started in 2008 it's now 2011, who's fault is it that TOR does not have drivers? It's TOR's fault.

I'm not anti-volunteer, there is a place for volunteers in the system but if they are not there 100% of the time what place should they be given?

Alpine Runner;

They are not an asset when they operate under a different set of rules, SOGs, etc., and create confusion with who is Command, and who is not command and do not operate as a unit etc. This in fact creates a hazard, not an asset.

I've seen this elsewhere, however I don't believe it is the whole truth. One thing is that the Fire Department budget will be short these taxes. You could argue that it won't need to staff the apparatus in North Stamford, so it's budget should be less - but even if that were true does that match the lack of revenue? Unlikely, so, that lack of revenue needs to be made up by other residents - and they get a tax increase.

The response I've seen to that is that why should North Stamford residents pay for services they don't use, or for duplicate services. Well, I would say looking at the Christmas fire, they do use the services of SFRD.

Lastly, regarding the Christmas fire, the Mayor was quoted as saying that under the plan they would still use mutual aid. Ok. However mutual aid is usually giving and receiving. How often do the Big 5 give mutual aid to SFRD? I see this as being a very one sided mutual aid pact and so then the South Stamford residents would be paying to send SFRD members to the North .....

Good Point Monty

I think you mean "futile" Capt, but I like your word better.

Thanks G. Boy do I feel dumb.

I am beginning to realize that continued discussion on this Mayors plan is becoming more and more feudal. As we come closer and closer to the full board meeting this month, reliable sources have indicated that the Mayor does not even have the support of the Repubs let alone the full board's support. Thank God there are some clear thinking people on that panel to help keep the lunacy at bay.

Proponnents of the plan, that being the volunteer heads (empty as they may be), better start thinking of another way to maintain their fiefdoms. I think they would better serve themselves and their constituency by trying to smooth over the ripples they've made in any sort of combined effort. The administration may have an alternative and maybe screw with the budget, but facts are the facts, and the truth will prevail, and that is that the volunteer system in Stamford is almost defunct, and what remains should be bolstered and resign themselves to the fact that eventually, one fire dept., one chief, one set of rules, SOPs etc. will be the fact.

Maybe Belltown will become the only volunteer organization that remains.

I wonder if some of the more experienced Stamford guys could recall Incidents where a specific unit was needed but was on another call and unit that could fill in was not sent?

I simply don’t remember areas being left uncovered.

I can't remember such an instance. It is manpower that puts out fires. Even if you pull up with out a pump and you get there quick enough without having to wait for others from home, a water can and other extinguishers and even a quick S&R can still be utilized. I have seen it. If the fire is well involved you are going to loose it anyway.

Cogsy Ol' boy. You too, can right a very intelligible diatribe as well. And as I have stated in the past, Kudos to Belltown in not obscuring the truth and not counting the SFRD members that continue to belong to the Belltown organization in one way or another as active available participants. As we also know they shouldn't be for a number of reasons, but none the less there is history right? I will however say that the comments of the former volunteer to whom you refer seems to have done more than just "sound off". He apparently has alot of background and background information, and is not afraid of stating fact. He does not seem apprehensive of any retaliation either from his employers. I think he provides credible insight, and possibly veiw point that may be of more interest to the real people that actually count, the Tax Paying citizens that are actually interested.

I hope he has nothing to loose in acting like the true professional he is, unlike some other former volunteers that could also have contributed but refused for some reason, (they are on promotional lists as chance would have it as I understand). Did someone say "Tammany Hall" in a previous post?

Cogs,

I am not in favor of the Brown plan as well but it makes more sense than the alternative, as well as answers the mandate that was given by the TASK FORCE controlled by the Mayor, that being a neutral cost alternative. It is not the SFRD's fault that they responded to the mandate as directed. The city probably thought it was not possible. And yes, it does not say for how long, but how long does the cost of the SVFD plan project out over. No numbers after 3, 4 and 5 years are given. And as far as the Mayors plan's effectiveness, time will tell and prove that farce.

As we approach almost a full year of this debate, coupled with budget time and contract negotiations information is surfacing that the full board is not in favor of this joke of a plan, and the support is not there. The plan may be failing, but not to worry, a new contrieved attack on the SFRD may come in the form of budget reallocation, essentially putting the whole mess right back to what it was before the paid consolidation of human resources took place. One step forward and two backwards. Perfect.

Interesting read and very well written too. But ...ah yes the infamous but...there are a few points that could stand a little scrutiny.

Let's start with the taxing district

"It shall be the obligation of such legislative body [in this case the Board of Finance and Board of Representatives] to impose such levy as a municipal levy, and such

levy shall be in addition to the regular municipal levy, and it shall be the obligation of the municipality to collect such a levy for the benefit of such district."

This is absolutley true but what this letter fails to mention is that anyone that will pay this "additional levy" (fire tax) will also see a corresponding reduction in their property taxes. In other words if I pay $5500 annually in taxes now, once this goes into effect I will still pay $5500 overall in taxes but it will be split based on the pre determined mil rate calculation of the cost of fire protection. i.e. $5000 in property taxes and $500 in fire tax. So yes there will be a new tax but not a tax increase.

And now on to the "Brown Plan". Although this has been cited before I guess it bears repeating since it was omitted from the mailing. While the plan is cost neutral the redistribution of SFRD units and the susequent loss of a truck co in no way increases the overall effectiveness of SFRD but diminishes it. It also limits the type of apparatus that will be available to respond in any given area or any given call when needed. There is also the 800 pound gorilla of the fact that the introduction of SFRD has without fail reduced the level of volunteer participation in the fire houses in which they are present. It may not be right, it may be entirely the fault of the volunteers (although I highly doubt that) or it just may be that that's the way it is, but whatever the reasons the fact remains and has been proven that this IS the way it is. Also there is the omission of the comments made here in which a number of ranking SFRD members freely admit they have reservations if not an outright aversion to this plan.

So yes the plan is cost neutral but it begs the question...for how long?

Nice touch in having former volunteers sound off as well. I can say with all candor that the SFRD members that remain as member of the BFD are NOT on active status and therefore are NEVER counted as a part of our active membership. But to be fair there is some truth to some of their statements which fortunately the Mayor's plan does address in terms of centralization of command (1 paid Chief), standardization ect. And we can definitely agree that volunteers are indeed a valuable asset although some of us see that value as being far more than a support role.

Another interesting note is the citing of instances of volunteer "failures" in the mailing and on firetruths.com from areas far afield from Stamford. I find it odd that only the failures (if indeed that is what they were) of volunteers are useful for comparison while the successful operations of other VFDs outside of Stamford are not. As I've been told time and again this isn't city "X" or County "Y" when citing them as models to emulate so then by that logic neither should these "failures" be germain to Stamford.

There is also the many references to Long Ridge and their recent incidents. Were there mistakes made? Yes there were and every citizen has a right to know about them. Part of the problem though is that the resources that were available "up North" are no longer there in terms of the flexibility of responses. An engine is still an engine and SFRD crews are tied to that engine. When a tanker or Truck is necessary but there is no crew to staff it because they are tied to only one rig there will be a problem. Previously when paid personnel were at every station cross staffing was the norm so necessary units could be dispatched as needed, when needed, where needed. This ties into the major failing of the Brown Plan as well..not enough variety of units available "up North" when they're needed.

Remember too that at all of these incident SFRD were there as well.

Other than that it was a very entertaining read.

Cogs

Cogsy Ol' boy. You too, can right a very intelligible diatribe as well. And as I have stated in the past, Kudos to Belltown in not obscuring the truth and not counting the SFRD members that continue to belong to the Belltown organization in one way or another as active available participants. As we also know they shouldn't be for a number of reasons, but none the less there is history right? I will however say that the comments of the former volunteer to whom you refer seems to have done more than just "sound off". He apparently has alot of background and background information, and is not afraid of stating fact. He does not seem apprehensive of any retaliation either from his employers. I think he provides credible insight, and possibly veiw point that may be of more interest to the real people that actually count, the Tax Paying citizens that are actually interested.

I hope he has nothing to loose in acting like the true professional he is, unlike some other former volunteers that could also have contributed but refused for some reason, (they are on promotional lists as chance would have it as I understand). Did someone say "Tammany Hall" in a previous post?

That was certainly an extremely slanted and very carefully written to imply a lot of things that aren't true. I don't have time to go over it paragraph by paragraph, but let's look at the section on the Wallenberg drive fire. That section makes it look like the Volunteers aren't there. It makes it sound like the 29 FFs SFRD sent were all that were there and all that were needed. It doesn't mention that TOR alone sent 24 volunteers between the fire and station coverage. What if they weren't there? How much would they cost? It also says none would have been able to respond to be second fire. Well guess what: THEY WERE! The initial response was 1 SFRD engine, 1 TOR engine, and a Belltown ladder.

That night there was also an MVA. SFRD had very few engines left, and no rescue as it was at the fire along with TOR's. So who made the inital response? TOR engine and Belltown rescue. What if the volunteers weren't there? What is the brown plan was in place and there were even less apparatus downtown? What if something happened downtown?

I also like how it mentions the situation in Roanoke, to try and imply to the Stamford residents believe that under pavia plan, there would be such an abysmal response time. However, everyone in the know, knows that the volunteers would be able to respond with to the scene directly, with paid staff getting the truck out the door immediately.

Say what you want about 786 career guys vs. SVFD career guys, say what you want about having 1 department, but when people try and say that the plan will fail because of lack of volunteers, that's just not true.

Yeah, as slanted as the vollunteers are when they refuse to back up what they claim when they say we have plenty of TRAINED and AVAILABLE people. Why then don't they provide the records of all their claims of sufficient resuorces as requested after over 100 days. Oh, that's right, they are volunteers and should not have to keep such records right. After all they are doing this for nothing. Is there anyone available to supply these requested documents?

That was certainly an extremely slanted and very carefully written to imply a lot of things that aren't true. I don't have time to go over it paragraph by paragraph, but let's look at the section on the Wallenberg drive fire. That section makes it look like the Volunteers aren't there. It makes it sound like the 29 FFs SFRD sent were all that were there and all that were needed. It doesn't mention that TOR alone sent 24 volunteers between the fire and station coverage. What if they weren't there? How much would they cost? It also says none would have been able to respond to be second fire. Well guess what: THEY WERE! The initial response was 1 SFRD engine, 1 TOR engine, and a Belltown ladder.

That night there was also an MVA. SFRD had very few engines left, and no rescue as it was at the fire along with TOR's. So who made the inital response? TOR engine and Belltown rescue. What if the volunteers weren't there? What is the brown plan was in place and there were even less apparatus downtown? What if something happened downtown?

I also like how it mentions the situation in Roanoke, to try and imply to the Stamford residents believe that under pavia plan, there would be such an abysmal response time. However, everyone in the know, knows that the volunteers would be able to respond with to the scene directly, with paid staff getting the truck out the door immediately.

Arent you slanting the real truth as well by not allowing you actual volunteer records be viewed. What are you suppossedly hiding?

Say what you want about 786 career guys vs. SVFD career guys, say what you want about having 1 department, but when people try and say that the plan will fail because of lack of volunteers, that's just not true.

Just a question to the more experienced or knowledgeable firefighters here..... Could there be any (not sure how to word this) issues with career staff speaking out against their boss's plan publicly on their own or as part of a group to undermine that plan other then the union? Could there be ramifications for that individual's career? All legalities aside because we all know how the real world works. Could it be considered insubordination?

FD828,

First, are you refering to the Mayor when you say boss? I think you are. I have no doubt in my mind that repercussions would ensue. That being said, although the local has spoken out against this lunacy in many ways, most of us, as a union, have contributed to the factual information being presented. I just learned this evening, that an informational mailing that I personally contributed to has been distributed. I have not seen it as yet, but I also understand that I am qouted which I was aware would be the case. I gladly contributed. So in answer to your question, I am not afraid to speak up where it counts, when I beleive what I am saying is truthful, logical, and based on factual educated points and opinions. I was just having this conversation with one of the other guys this evening. At the beginning of my career back in the early eighties, I stood up on another issue that was controversial then as well, related to the understaffed fire prevention bureau. The Mayor at that time was infuriated at three of us who were in the office at the time. Our pictures were on the front page of the Advocate. We were eventually vindicated, but during that time I though my promotional prospects were gone before I was even able to get going. Thought I would never do it again. I am a captain now and as I look back, and like I just said, when it is called for and I believe in what I am saying based on sound principles and facts, I would do it again. This time I have more experience, training and qualifications to say what I have said.

Sorry for the long answer to your short question.

Back to moving forward. While this has been a nice diversion it really isn't helping. What happened happened. It's done, so now what? Shall we wallow in it or is anyone ready to move forward together?

It seems that ther is a little back pedalling going on here Cogs. How are those rocks sounding that are hitting your glass house? Have they broken any windows yet?

No one says anything when that loose cannon in SFCO shows up in everyone elses district (except SFRD's district, he wouldn't dare) and assumes command.

Cogs, why hasn't he cancelled any other chief? As far as answering your question, I would like to meet with you because I feel I could add quite a bit of sanity to the lunacy going on here, however, there can be no meaningful dialouge if first you continue to defend that as%$#@! in Springdale. Even the Mayor has refered to him as a little off his rocker and a "thorn in their side on this whole matter". So why don't you try and regain a bit more credibility back and stop defending this guy and call it like it is.

Secondly, it would be a waste of time at this juncture because it is IMO gone past the point of repair. Depending on the BOR outcome next month, it will either entirely shut the Mayor and his plan down, and maybe more intelligent, and experienced professionals will be allowed to input the remedy. And if it goes in his favor, I say let it happen and then the proof will be in the pudding when the brain trust that came up with this plan will be able to actually see what a mess they created. I quite frankly wish and hope that we pull out of there soon. The situation has become a dangerous theater in which to operate, as well as being a frustrating operation at best. It would not be long before everyone will be begging for SFRD to return. Let the volunteers put up or shut up. Let's see the huge volunteer response (excluding Belltown of course) that really is not there.

And if the supporters of the Mayor's plan were smart, they would sanction that moron in Springdale.

I tried like hell to leave this one alone as I am one that truly believes it's in everyones best interest to work together, but I was on scene at this particular call and the actions of the DC were not professional on this occasion. The bottom line here is that there is ONE IC on a scene and in this case it was the Springdale Chief. And yes he does have the authority to release units, hold them or whatever else he decides as the IC in his authorized district, which this was.

Approximately 7-8 minutes into this call 511 put in a recall holding one or two units and that should have been it, but it wasn't...and that was not SFCo's Chief's fault. Upon recieveing the recall the DC decided to remain on scene after making some rather derogatory remarks over the radio on the fireground channel, remarks by the way which were heard by everyone on our crew. So even though he had been released and had no authority whatsoever from that point forward he stayed on scene and appointed himself the safety officer which was neither called for by the IC or necessary as the incident was coming to a close. He was informed that there was already an safety officer on scene which the Springdale Chief had appointed as is his right and authority to do. Yet the DC remained and then approached SFCo's Chief in the driveway of the home and began questioning him about the "quailifications" of the safety officer. A verbal exchange then took place since 511 is under no obligation to be dictated to by anyone in his own district. At this point 511 called for the police to remove an insubordinate FF on scene. I did not witness events from that point forward as we were returned to service by 511 and following his directive left the scene. Was there an "assault"? I don't know but it seems that 511 thinks there was.

Without fail I can agree 100% that this incident was all about personal animosity, but that animosity is not 511's alone and acting upon such animosity is not in the least bit professional no matter who it is that is doing it. We all have our personal feeling about what is going on here and we all have every right to share them, but when those feelings carry over on to the fireground and it doesn't matter who carries them over, it is a dangerous precedent indeed and one that must STOP !!!!!

Cogs

Cogs,

I too was on that call as well and heard the entire exchange as well. I am not exactly sure but, I believe there was more than just one unit held. E8 was first on scene, your T45 was held, my truck was released. I think E7 was held as well. I still contend that if any SFRD unit is operating on a declarred fire ground as he so declared, the on duty shift commander for the city has every right to ensure that his people are either performing as they should and are safe. To that I am sure you can agree. Who was your IC for your company that night? Should't your commander if not on board the rig also have the right to respond as he so often does? Why isn't 411 or 611 or 711, ever told to not respond? Watch where you are throwing your stones. So you see it can be personal on many fronts. He can advise mutual aid companies commanders of his needs or lack there of. But he is borrowing resources that he has no responcibilty for. If s@#! hit the fan on that situation and ff's were hurt, what do you think he would be doing or asking? Where was unit 4? "I am not responcible..your honor".

Lastly, the radio transmission that identified 611 as safety officer was then questioned as to whether 611 was certified to be a safety officer. There was dead silence to that question. Just crickets chirpping. In fact I heard that 611 ran and hid. He is in fact, and dare I say a Bridgeport police officer. WOW!

As an outsider, I can clearly see that was due to a personal animosity.

One more question, does he actually have the authority to cancel and/or dismiss from the scene, the supervisor of another departments employees operating at the scene? It's one thing to cancel or release an engine or truck company, but how can he have the authority to accept the help of individual companies from a department, but reject their "boss"?

FM, it is a gray area. Here in lies the real crux of the whole situation. The vol. leadership is hell bent on being in command of paid people. They were for years when they had their own paid people until as you know all of the paid personnel resources were consolidated. This is a big sticking point on both sides.

Anyway, in answer to your question, the SFCO vol chief has authority to cancel his mutual aid as anyone would have. Proper IC procedures dictates one commander correct? If he is accepting the help then he needs to communicate with that helps commander, not cancel him from the response. SFRD E7 is under the command of the SFRD, although it is operating in the vol. district. Any structure call in Springdale also gets support response from downtown for obvious reasons.

This is where it gets a little murky. Any incident reports generated by the company commander at E7 when E7 responds in that district is automatically classed as an auto mutual aid. E7 is operating in the district in conjunction with SFCO. The current leader there was not active at the time in 1997 when E7 was commissioned. The loose cannon came in to power after the fact, and did not like what was in place, and has been a thorn in the side of that operation ever since.

He can reduce the response, but unless he turns everything around including E7, then he has no right to cancel the SFRD IC. He thibnks he has sole authority over E7, but he does not. He does not understand the concept of Unified Command and refuses to accept the fact that he does not command paid ffs. And in the situation in question, if he turned everything around he would have been by himself. I ignore him when I respond up there. He attempts to give my unit an order, but I have radio trouble, or can not hear him, whatever, and I just go to my IC. Pisses him off big time. Volunteers command volunteers. Career command career. Unity of command with Unified Command. He is the Strategist for Springdale, and commander of the Springdale forces. E7 operates in his district but under the command of the SFRD. A SFRD commander responds on all incidents other than single engine calls. In that eventuality, he then is in charge. Confusing, dangerous, ridiculous. Needs to be fixed soon.

I just have one comment and one question regarding the cancellation of the SFRD Chief.

I think it's completely reasonable for a Chief Officer to respond to an "out of district" call in which his units are operating at. If I read the article right, 21 SFRD personnel were operating at this incident, so it would seem reasonable to have a Chief officer of their own there.

Would the IC have made the same decision if it was a Chief Officer of one of the volunteer departments on the call?

That's just it Fire Medic. The SFRD chiefs are all professional. They would not have cancelled Springdale chief if his department were coming into Stamford. What's more is that this same nut in Springdale responds to almost every other district's (except SFRD of course)alarms fires etc. and is always assuming command until one of the other district volunteers show up.

Frankly, I cannot believe that this utterly frustrating debate is still going on. Time and again, it is proven that this bogus plan the mayor has put forth is nothing but a farce. I ask: what will it take for him to understand that it is not worth the paper it is written on? I'll answer: someone will die. Unfortunately it will have to get to that extreme for these idiots to pull their heads out of their rear ends and realize that going back to the old days will not work in 2011. I say it again, this is not a volunteer/paid issue with me. It's a matter of public safety and the only organization in Stamford who can gaurantee an organized, sufficient response to a fire emergency seems to be the Stamford Fire Rescue Department. Like it or not, that's a fact.

Nothing personal here to my friends in the volunteers, it's just a reality check. I am not a moderator anymore, so I feel liberated enough to let my true feelings fly.

The circus continues...

Frustrating debate for sure. I have stated it here before and I will as succinctly as possible state it again. It is not about the best way, or who can do it better or cheaper. This is simply an attempt to deunionize the fire service in Stamford, and begin the privitization of many essential city services. We are the first because there is already a split. Next will be public works, then the police, and so on. The current administration has said it before that the current union contracts are "onerious". Freddy Flynn"stone" comes with baggage as a union buster. It will be more apparent come negotiations this spring.

Secondly, you being the obvious professional(whether paid or volunteer) who truly cares about the protection of the citizenry we protect need to realize that the general public will no more respond to a fire death than they would to what color your fire truck is to be painted. Trust me. Here is a case in point. Do you remember approximately 10 years ago during another fiscal crisis in the city when then Mayor Malloy proposed reducing the staffing on board a city sanitation truck?

There was a huge taxpayer uprising to the point where the BOR envoked the charter stating that there shall be a minimum number of personnel on board a sanitation truck otherwise it meant that the public would have to drag out their own garbage cans to the street like a majority of the rest of the world. It was expensive to keep that extra guy. The Mayor eventually got it through. The point is, it is apparent that the public is more concerned about the number of personnel on board a sanitation vehicle and what they do then they are concerned about the number of personnel on a fire truck let alone who and how the overall system will operate.

This in no way is to diminish the importance of refuse removal, and its health consequences. But you see, weekly sanitiation operations affects every resident every week. When is the last time every resident realized that they had to rely on its fire service? It is the nature of the beast. It is like an insurance policy. No one likes paying the premiums. Fire fighters are not paid because the taxpayers like us or that a large percentage of them really believe they need us. But when the unfortunate time comes upon them they are happy that we are there, just like an insurance policy.

The difference is how much of a deductable are the willing to take a risk on.

The only people truly concerned about this whole debacle is the union, the volunteers, the BOR and the bean counters, and maybe a few residents. A sad commentary but I believe in my almost 40 years of involvement on both sides, this is an accurate assessment.

Here's an idea...maybe all of the clashing Stamford companies should race to the scene, have a fist fight in front of the house, then the winners of the fight can then have the scene and fight the fire. Sound ridiculous? So does what is coming out of some of these incidents in Stamford lately. Someone needs to get control of this situation before civilians or our own get hurt or killed. If this isn't a call for action, then I do not know what is!

On another note...this alleged "pushing incident" seems to me to be yet another case of The Springdale Chief trying to call attention to himself and starting trouble with SFRD guys. Rewind...cameras in the firehouse, accusing career members of theft, blocking out fire apparatus from "his" firehouse...list is long and distinguished, Absolutely ridiculous and it needs to stop!

I agree Cap. However, on a selfish note, I say give him anough rope to hang himself, and demonstrate to the powers that be what type of person may be involved in the new organization. Better to remain silent and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

While I find this Stamford situation interesting, there are obviously 2 sides to each and every story that we have read. In regards to this article, unless the Union Pres was on scene, how can he say the career chief did not push the volunteer chief? If he was on scene and witnessed the whole arguement, I apologize. It just seems each faction is making this whole situation worse call by call by going to the papers after every incident.

A little background on this issue as of late. This is not the first time this loose cannon running around in Springdale has had an altercation with any authority from SFRD. He is nothing but an antagonistic wanna be. He has had verbal altercations with almost every deputy chief, asst. chief, chief, and a number of different captains including me. The Chief of the SFRD has been keeping a file on the lunatic in Springdale for the past 8 to 10 years.

Now there was going to be a kangaroo court assembled on the part of the complainant, until a number of other witnesses stepped up and demanded to be heard against the lunatic. Then the file compiled by the SFRD was presented and the whole matter is going away.

This guy has been quoted saying that if he is not the pick for chief of the new organization, then Springdale is out of it.

Happy New Year Gentlemen.

First of all Cogs I beleive you are correct in regards to Belltown. It seems that they have always turned out fire fighters. I have on more than one occassion worked with them jointly and in fact sent a communication addressing that issue. They work as a unit, follow a command, respectful of everyones roll. I do not hear much anti sentiment with regards to Belltown. Maybe the large influence of other paid professional involvemnet with that department. So there we can agree. Unfortunately, the same can not be said for the remainder of the volunteers. I am still awaiting an answer to my challenge.

Just to illustrate my point, and that of FD828's, the loose cannon running around Springdale FD as its leader( I can not refer to him as Chief) exemplifies ..I want to be in charge. He has on more than one occassion stated that if he is not the chosen one to be the Chief of the new Stamford Volunteer FD, than Springdale is out of the plan. Secondly, he has no idea of what he is doing, or has respect for the forces that respond. Case in point. Recent OBOA up off of Eden Rd. He was the only Springdale unit, or person that arrived or responded. SFRD responded as ususal. SFRD IC prior to arrival, is turned around by this jerk. Mind you, no SFCO on scene. SFRD IC continues in anyway, as it is his right to do so. No different than the Springdale jerk who finds it necessary for himself to respond to everyone elses calls in the north and attempts to take charge.

The SFRD IC arrives, and it immediately infuriates the Springdale jerk to the point where he requests police to respond to address an insubordinant fire fighter on the fire ground. The SFRD IC than assigns himself as the Safety Officer to which the jerk replies, I have already assigned 611 as safety. The SFRD IC than responds is 611 state certified as a safety officer. No reply, just crickets chirping. Next thing you hear is the jerk from Springdale asking for PD to step it up for an assault. This is reminiscent of 40 yuears ago when there were fist fights infront of burning buildings amongst different vol. companies as to who was in charge and who's fire it was. There was no assault.

Archaic, backwards. FD828 also brings up a good point. Even training and certifications. Follow the example of EMS. Highest certification on scene is in charge.

As far as the Brown Plan, I too, am very respectful of Asst. Chief Brown. His plan was to address a mandate from his administation for a zero cost expansion, next to impossible. Believe me, I am more against that plan than what lunacy is being propsed now. Anyway, how do you think and what irony is being presented by the city's recent for a 10% services reduction. 10% reduction and 8 million addition for fire service. Maybe the SFRD's response is that engines 8 & 9 are closed. Why not? There are volunteers to repond in their place. Then it would be time to put up or shut up.

Thank,You.

Happy Holidays