TRex

Interesting - seemingly one sided perspective.

Quite a mess.

Not sure what the 'Brown Plan' is but it's interesting that there is nothing else in the section about other proposals made to the Task Force. I thought Cogs had presented a plan? - and of course there's been no input requested or allowed from the SFRD leadership or Local 786.

It seems that 3 (Springdale, Belltown, Glenbrook) of the agreements could be terminated by the City unilaterally.

Also, the city charter section says that the BOR can redistrict through an ordinance by 2/3rds majority. So, for the 3 departments, they could have their management contracts terminated, and 3 months later have their fire districts reorganized so it only includes their property

It's interesting that it is a 'fallacy' that there is a new fire tax. Maybe not for the residents in that part of the city. How about those int the A/B/PP who see their 'Mill Rate' increased by about 30%? I don't know what that means but I'm sure it means that those residents pay more. I know there is an argument that says these residents have been paying for services they haven't received - maybe they've been paying more than their fair share? Possibly? But someone has to fund the volunteer departments don't they? As mentioned elsewhere, aren't there SFRD crews stationed in those areas - and certainly available to respond.

It will be interesting to see what the full BOR does with it and whether there are questions raised - or whether the 'recommendations' are accepted as is.

Monty - Interestingly enough, simply put "The Brown Plan" refers to one of our SFRD Asst. Chiefs who provided the city adm. with a proposal that basically covered the entire geographical area of the city with existing personnel resources. No additional cost. You are also correct in asking the question of, why hasn't all the options and been presented to the boards? That is because, the administration is attempting to ram rod this through and down everyones throat. I do not know the reason for this although I have my suspicions. It is truly one sided.

You are also correct in your estimation of "Quite a Mess". And the elected officials who should be straightening this out have mad it worse. I do not mean by picking one side or the other. Remember, no one has recommended abolishing the volunteers, or even suggested it. The volunteers themselves are the only ones who have raised that spectre as a threat if they are placed under one organizational framework. Not even the union has stated it, even when the union is allowed to say anything. Here is a fact for you to digest, our Local 786 president after he directly asked to speak with the Mayor, was answered by the Mayor that he was advised not to speak with the union.

Let me sum it up without going through all the nuts and bolts. The SFRD and its union are doing what they are supposed to do, protect and deal with impacts on our working conditions, the 4 volunteer departments may or may not be doing what they are supposed to be by not being open and honest on the real situations existing in their districts. And the city adm. is not doing what they are supposed to be and providing the citizens or their representative board with all of the TRUE facts, and options without slanting them one way or the other. Politics as ususal.

Facts are; the volunteers current leadership are self serving themselves looking for positions. 58 additional personnel to run a volunteer FD. Doesn't that make anyone wonder, how is that volunteer? It is my observation after many years of being involved is that the public generally does not care about how may ff's are on board, or what color the engines are, or whether the ff's are paid or volunteer, until you start talking money and taxes, especially in this econmic climate. you would think that they would question why aren't we reducing government instead of creating a whole other layer to duplicate what exists already? When the city about 8 to 10 years ago proposed another cost saving measure by reducing the amount of sanitation workers on board a collection truck, the public outcry was a ground swell and ordinances were changed because the reduction meant that residents were now going to have to drag their own garbage cans out to the streets themselves. God forbid! The three and two man manning being proposed is less manning than on a refuse collection truck. The 4 man staffing is the same. The public does not get it. Only we do because it is personal and what we do. The public is more concerned about the number of people on board a trash collection truck than what is on a fire truck.

I have personal interest in seeing the volunteer departments survive. I have history in one of them. However, the leadership is not trying to preserve volunteers, they are trying to become another paid department because they are not part of the one that already exists. If the SFRD or "Brown Plan" were opted for, the volunteers would still have a function. But in their own words, ..."we won't be in charge anymore". This is what it is about. Who is to be in charge. Not what is best for the community. If they are successful in initializing this falacy with 58 more paid ff's, that number will exceed the number of active volunteers. Volunteer Department? I think not. If one of the membes of the vols. is reading this, I dare you to factually prove me incorrect.

There I go again, that da#@ soap box.

Fair enough, no argument there.

Ok I'll try to answer this one, but be forewarned the answer is based on MY understanding of the situation and may be be " biased " .

The residents of North Stamford have been subsidizing the operations of SFRD for some time, as tax dollars from the C and C/S tax districts were allocated to SFRD when they were not supposed to be. Since those funds will be going to a special service district and will be used to fund the new FD exclusively they will no longer be available for SFRD. The residents of downtown will have to make up the shortfall.

For what it is worth, here is my brief dissection of this so called proposal. . I agree with their opinion of one FD is the best way to go. I also agree that it is difficult to get it instituted, but not impossible. The numerous litigations instituted by the volunteers, which one might wonder, How has the obviously huge legal costs been funded? Was it with donated money from constituents for fire protection, or with allocated city tax dollars? Has anyone requested this accounting?

The proposal states that 2 departments would be created. The number is actually 3 with the Glenbrook FD remaining autonomous plus the SFRD, and now the New Stamford VOLUNTEER FD. In this day of shrinking economy and government bodies looking to down size and do with less government, why then is Stamford looking to add another governmental tier or agency when there is one already in place to address the same function?

Mr. Larobina is recommending that a special SERVICE district be established by a vote of the Bd. of Reps. as opposed to a special TAXING district, and states that the difference in the mill rate would be made up by a service fee added on top of the real estate tax bill. Do the residents realize that service fees are not tax deductible on income taxes?

In their attempts to one side the issue, the numbers presented by Mr. Larobina for SFRD to continue fire protection operations in the northern districts would be an additional 117 men based on past contract levels. If this were the case, SFRD would become a 400 man dept. and would be the largest fire dept. in the state protecting the 4th largest city in the state.

In fact the Nat'l Fire Prot. Agcy in general recommends that there be 1/2 a fire fighter on duty for every 1000 pop. In a city of 114000 as we are, that would be 57 men. Currently the minimum on duty staff including the units operating in the north is 52. That would mean that only 5 more men per shift or a total of 20 is all that would be needed minimally. 117 additional seem much skewed.

The difficulty in going the best route is not with the union, however, but with the volunteer leadership. They are the ones who won’t cooperate. And I do not mean to malign all volunteers. I feel that a well organized volunteer augmentated operation would be a great asset to the city and the department as ONE WHOLE, and not being lead by the current selfserving, selfish spoiled infants in place now.

It seems the CT general statues cover this topic already.

Sec. 7-329. Termination of district. Whenever the officers of such district vote to terminate its corporate existence and whenever a petition signed by ten per cent of the total number of persons qualified to vote in the meeting of such district or twenty of the voters of such district, whichever is less, applying for a special meeting to vote on the termination of the district is received by the clerk, the clerk shall call a special meeting of the voters residing within such district, the notice of which shall be signed by the officers thereof, by advertising the same in the same manner as is provided in section 7-325. Not later than twenty-four hours before any such meeting, two hundred or more voters or ten per cent of the total number of voters, whichever is less, may petition the clerk of the district, in writing, that a referendum on the question of whether the district should be terminated be held in the manner provided in section 7-327. If, at such meeting, a two-thirds majority of the voters present vote to terminate the corporate existence of the district, or, if a referendum is held, two-thirds of the voters casting votes in such referendum vote to terminate the corporate existence of the district, the officers shall proceed to terminate the affairs of such district. The district shall pay all outstanding indebtedness and turn over the balance of the assets of such district to the town in which the district is located, if the legislative body of the town authorizes such action. No district shall be terminated under this section until all of its outstanding indebtedness is paid unless the legislative body of the town in which the district is located agrees in writing to assume such indebtedness. On completion of the duties of the officers of such district, the clerk shall cause a certificate of the vote of such meeting to be recorded in the land records of the town in which the district is located and the clerk shall notify the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management.

Very interesting read. I find it hard to believe that Mr. Larobina is not aware of this. More likely he is keeping it quite to continue the slanted opinion. Isn't that what lawyers do?

Stamford Patch Article

Mayor’s Updated Fire Plan Outlines Implementation Costs

Board of Reps' Public Safety and Health Committee will meet later this month or January after reviewing the plan.

12/2/10

http://stamford.patch.com/articles/mayors-updated-fire-plan-outlines-implementation-costs

Lets all just calm down. Again this is a THEORETICAL proposal. Practically speaking I believe the plan will collapse. They can institute easily by not making a taxing district and rather charge a service fee like the WPCA etc. But what the residents need to be aware of is that user fees are not tax deductable like real estate taxes. I also think that the IRS for both the Fed and the State should be made aware of assets being redistributed and have them ensure that the redistribution of values go to the NON PROFIT taking over the protection. I think some questions along those lines should also be put forward.

So now TRFD or maybe all the VFDs are motivated to consolidate by the prospect of personal monetary gain by some or all of their memberships huh? You can of course site the proof of these discussions that led you to concoct this theory, such as the names of those present, dates and places where they took place and how it is that you came to be aware of them...right??

Come on now Cogs. I would hope you by now would know me better than that. Of course I do. Minutes of a meeting to which I have copies of. Names, motion maker, person who seconded. In fact some of the post is directly from the document. Do not be surprised if you do not see a FYI filed. I am holding on to it at the correct moment, at which time I will give it to the approriate people. As a matter of fact I was able to get a copy so easily, I know there are others with it as well.

As I said in the past. This is not about whether or not career or volunteer or a combination of either could do it better, or cheaper. It is about self serving principle players in this and the city using this as a vehicle to satisfy their own new agenda. Geppetto said it, ..meet the new boss.

Did you take the last SFRD hiring test a few months back? I hope so.

Answer me this question. What is the real motivation of the principle players in ToR for wanting this plan to go through when motions are being made to change department constitution dealing with dissolution of their corporation? Particular attention to discussion centered on the reasonable and honorable disbursement of all TRFD assets in the event the corporation is dissolved. Hmmm! $4 million, $5 million divided by how many members equals ???

No need to look back PJ, I am fortunate in that I have an excellent memory in such matters. I know full well what I stated, so even though I would take a job were it to be offered, I highly doubt that that consideration would even be considered. C'est la vie

Cogs

Thanks for watching my back pj. I thought I read that he would be interested if the opportunity presented itself. As far as the top position (if it were to happen) I think may be given to the individual who was seen driving around in the unused Dierector's vehicle a few months agoe.

T, I noticed that I was remiss in addressing this question. My apologies.

As to the colorized text, I take it to mean that no FD, District or municipal administration can arbitrarily change the status quo of a towns fire protection without the consent of all parties concerned. In other words the strong arm tactics of the previous administration and any attempts to continue them are illegal since each district, for better or worse, is an incorporated fire district which has an established fire department.

The VFD consolidation process which has begun here, no matter how unpopular or unpalatable, does at least take this into account.

Cogs

You've got me there. Again, I am not going to attempt to interpret law, but every law is written with some kind of intent. I do not know the intent of this one. However, to sum up the argument, and not to mention what has already been stated in these 46 pages of comment the following points are presented;

Fire fighters are paid to ensure that some kind of fire fighting force responds.

In general, Tax payers care about one thing when it comes to their fire service, What is the bottom line?

and will some one come when I dial 911? They don't care what color the fire trucks are, how many are on it, or who is paid and who is not

I do think however, the tax payer may be a little more interested in how the legal fees that were incurred by LRFCO, nd TRFD were or are being paid. Did they take up a collection or are they using donated money, or city funds? I am amazed that the books having been looked at.

Lastly, a City the size of Stamford responding to over 11, 000 responces by the FD in total certainly can not be protected by an all volunteer force. I think we can all agree on that. Belltown, as I have said, seems to be able to cover their 1.5 square miles adequately, for now. A combination department may be the answer depending on the amount of reliance placed on which combination, mostly volunteer (which we know did not work), or mostly paid. When you start putting up multi million dollar buildings now exceeding 25 stories, my training and experience suggests to me that a combination system even heavily reliant on career staff is not adequate to address fires in these structures.

No matter what type of force ultimately is decided upon, there is one paramount issue. It all needs to be under one command, one set of SOG's, one chain, one standard. The city was divided between two communities prior to the 50's until back then, they figured it was better to consolidate, except of course the fire departments who remained seperate. It does not seem very different today except that there are not enough volunteers to continue. Even with the Mayors plan, the remaining Big 5 are still going to have to give up their autonomy. Otherwise you have consolidated nothing. At least if a harmonious accord between SFRD and the individual fire companies north were met, some identification of their individualities and "esprit de corps" could have been maintained. Instead, you have to erase the slate, and start new with a combined assets and resources committment by all the players to the NEW STAMFORD VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT. There will only be ONE CHIEF for it and command structrue, not 5.

The leaders that are fighting for this make no mistake about it, are fighting not for the system and everyone else, but for themselves, all with one thing in mind, that being they think they are going to be the CHief, ASST. Chief President, Grand EXALTED Ruler, what ever. I heard that P. Sasser, applied for the Director of Health and Safety, but was told, "I have another plan for you. Chief of the new Stamford Volunteer Fire Department." Its the same when the career guys in the vols. were against consolidation. What, have a boss? Share all the OT? Actually fight fires? Are you kidding?

This is no different. Hope you weren't thinking of possibly being considered for a top job in the new Volunteer FD up north?

One last tid bit of info. The entry exam results may be released soon. Where do you think the city will hire the new personnel for up north? Do you know what it costs to develop a hiring list and get people reay to hit the floor? Do you think the City realy cares about protecting the volunteer spirit in Stamford?

WAKE UP.

OK Rexy just what exactly is the impact the Governor will have on all this? As I stated the creation of a taxing district is up to the voters that will be affected by it's creation, and it is the creation of a taxing district that is the cornerstone that will bring this new system into existence.

Here's a little light reading on the subject that I trust is factual since it comes from the State's website:

Sec. 7-301. Establishment of fire department. Any town may provide by ordinance for the protection of property within its limits from fire and for the establishment of a town fire department and for the management, discipline and control thereof by the board of selectmen or, if there is a town council, by the town council, or by a board of fire commissioners of such number, chosen in such manner and for such terms as the ordinance provides. The board of selectmen, town council or board of fire commissioners may make regulations for the conduct of the fire department and may appoint, discipline and remove for cause shown all employees of the department and purchase supplies and equipment necessary for its operation; provided, if the ordinance so provides, the board of selectmen, town council or board of fire commissioners shall enter into an agreement with any volunteer fire company or companies within the town for the protection thereof from fire on such conditions as to financial assistance and the observance of the regulations of the board of selectmen, town council or board of fire commissioners as such ordinance prescribes; and provided no town fire department established under the provisions of this section shall supersede any volunteer fire company which is the owner of any building, fire apparatus or other property without having first come to an agreement with such company with regard to the disposition of and compensation for such building, apparatus or other property. Such town may, at any meeting specially warned for the purpose, make appropriations and lay taxes for the support thereof; but this section shall not be operative within the limits of any city, borough or incorporated fire district which has an established fire department. Nothing in this section shall prevent any town, city, borough or incorporated fire district from appropriating funds to a volunteer fire company or companies for services rendered or to be rendered within the confines of such town, city, borough or district by such fire company or companies, provided such town, city, borough or incorporated fire district shall deem it in the public interest to do so.

and here's a bit more on the establishment of taxing districts

Sec. 7-325. Organization. Boundary changes. Reports. (A) Upon the petition of fifteen or more voters, as defined by section 7-6, of any town, specifying the limits of a proposed district for any or all of the purposes set forth in section 7-326, the selectmen of such town shall call a meeting of the voters residing within such specified limits to act upon such petition, which meeting shall be held at such place within such town and such hour as the selectmen designate, within thirty days after such petition has been received by such selectmen. Such limits shall contain only contiguous property, except any proposed district which is proposed to be established only to plan, lay out, acquire, construct, reconstruct, repair, maintain, operate and regulate the use of a community water system or to construct and maintain drains and sewers or both and which does not exercise any of the other powers enumerated in section 7-326, may contain noncontiguous properties if the properties proposed to be included are, or are to be, served by a common water or sewer main. Such meeting shall be called by publication of a written notice of the same, signed by the selectmen, at least fourteen days before the time fixed for such meeting in two successive issues of some newspaper published or circulated in such town. Not later than twenty-four hours before such meeting, (1) two hundred or more voters or ten per cent of the total number of voters, whichever is less, may petition the selectmen in writing for a referendum, or (2) the selectmen in their discretion may order a referendum, on the sole question of whether the proposed district should be established. Any such referendum shall be held not less than seven nor more than fourteen days after the receipt of such petition or the date of such order, on a day to be set by the selectmen for a vote by paper ballots or by a "yes" or "no" vote on the voting machines, during the hours between twelve o'clock noon and eight o'clock p.m.; except that any town may, by vote of its selectmen, provide for an earlier hour for opening the polls but not earlier than six o'clock a.m., notwithstanding the provisions of any special act to the contrary. If two-thirds of the voters casting votes in such referendum vote in favor of establishing the proposed district, the selectmen shall reconvene such meeting not later than seven days after the day on which the referendum is held. Upon approval of the petition for the proposed district by two-thirds of the voters present at such meeting, or if a referendum is held, upon the reconvening of such meeting after the referendum, the voters may name the district and, upon the vote of a majority of such voters, choose necessary officers therefor to hold office until the first annual meeting thereof; and the district shall, upon the filing of the first report required pursuant to subsection © of this section, thereupon be a body corporate and politic and have the powers, not inconsistent with the general statutes, in relation to the objects for which it was established, that are necessary for the accomplishment of such objects, including the power to lay and collect taxes. The clerk of such district shall cause its name and a description of its territorial limits and of any additions that may be made thereto to be recorded in the land records of each town in which such district is located.

( Any district may enlarge or reduce its territorial limits if the board of directors of the district approves a resolution proposing such an enlargement or reduction and stating the proposed boundaries of the area proposed to be included or excluded, as the case may be, provided: (1) The board of directors of the district shall call a meeting of voters of the area proposed to be included or excluded, which meeting shall be held within thirty days of the board of directors' approval of such resolution and shall be called by publication of a written notice of the same, signed by the members of the board of directors of the district, at least fourteen days before the time fixed for such meeting in two successive issues of some newspaper published or circulated in such town, provided not later than twenty-four hours before any such meeting, two hundred or more such voters or ten per cent of the total number of such voters, whichever is less, may petition the clerk of the district, in writing, that a referendum on the question of whether the area proposed to be included or excluded should join or leave the district be held in the manner provided in section 7-327; (2) a two-thirds majority of the voters of the area proposed to be included or excluded in attendance at such meeting, or, if a referendum is held, two-thirds of such voters casting votes in such referendum, vote in favor of joining or leaving such district; (3) that any area to be added is contiguous with some portion of the existing district, and (4) if the enlargement of the territorial limits of the district will overlap the territorial limits of another district within the town, the legislative body of the town approves such enlargement. If any district enlarges or reduces its territorial limits, the clerk of such district shall notify the town clerk of each town affected by such enlargement or reduction within thirty days after the vote.

©The clerk of each district created pursuant to this chapter or any provisions of the general statutes or any special act, shall report to the town clerk of each town in which such district is located: (1) If created by approval of a petition pursuant to subsection (a) of this section on or after July 1, 1987, within seven days of such approval; and (2) on or before July 31, 1993, and annually thereafter for each such district, irrespective of the date of creation. The first report filed after the creation of a district shall include a list of the officers of such district, a copy of the charter or special act of such district and such other information on the organization and the financial status of such district as the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management may recommend. A copy of the charter or special act of such district shall be included in any subsequent report if such charter or special act was amended after the date of the previous filing. No district, irrespective of the date of creation, created by approval of a petition pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall exist as a body corporate and politic until the clerk of such district has filed at least one report required by this subsection. If a district is located in more than one town, the report shall be filed by the district clerk with the town clerk of each town in which the district is located.

(D) Any fine imposed on and after July 1, 1992, on a clerk for failure to file a report required pursuant to subsection © of this section shall be waived.

See note to section 12-198. Cited. 122 C. 395. District must be a self-contained area. 145 C. 570. Only voters residing within area of proposed district may vote at organizational meeting. 184 C. 200. Cited. 197 C. 82. Cited. 205 C. 290. Cited. 208 C. 543. Cited. 218 C. 144.

Sec. 7-326. Purposes. At such meeting, the voters may establish a district for any or all of the following purposes: To extinguish fires, to light streets, to plant and care for shade and ornamental trees, to construct and maintain roads, sidewalks, crosswalks, drains and sewers, to appoint and employ watchmen or police officers, to acquire, construct, maintain and regulate the use of recreational facilities, to plan, lay out, acquire, construct, reconstruct, repair, maintain, supervise and manage a flood or erosion control system, to plan, lay out, acquire, construct, maintain, operate and regulate the use of a community water system, to collect garbage, ashes and all other refuse matter in any portion of such district and provide for the disposal of such matter, to implement tick control measures, to install highway sound barriers, to establish a zoning commission and a zoning board of appeals or a planning commission, or both, by adoption of chapter 124 or chapter 126, excluding section 8-29, or both chapters, as the case may be, which commissions or board shall be dissolved upon adoption by the town of subdivision or zoning regulations by the town planning or zoning commission; and to adopt building regulations, which regulations shall be superseded upon adoption by the town of building regulations. Any district may contract with a town, city, borough or other district for carrying out any of the purposes for which such district was established.

And here's another note which may impact future developments

Sec. 7-323t. Municipal contracts prohibiting paid emergency personnel from volunteer service. On and after June 5, 2008, no municipality shall enter into a contract that prohibits paid firefighters or paid emergency personnel of such municipality from serving as active members of a volunteer fire department in the municipality in which such firefighters or emergency personnel reside during personal time.

No BS, maybe I'm not comprehending what's the statutes say, if so my mistake and please correct me where wrong.

Thanks

Cogs

ps Don't mind the smiley for some reason that happens with the letter b in parentheses.

OK Cogsy ol' boy, here it is. First let me state that I do not intend on coming off as a fire house lawyer, nor want to take up much of this forums space and participants time in waging a legal arguement that neither of us I think are qualified to do so. However, I have already done the "light" reading to which you refer quite some time ago which includes a review of an article entitled "Towns with in a Town" authored by an attorney who specializes in government law, Allan Cohen, P.C. clearly explains in laymans terms both the Pros and Cons of the law. I will provide a few excerpts from this publishing, both pro and con for the sake of fairness.

Secondly, I hope no one is so naieve as to think that after being Mayor of a city for 14 years that there are not any political allies still on the Democratically controled board of reps. And you may or may not be accurate on the political climate in Hartford, but the fact still remains, the last I time I checked Governor out ranks Mayor. Thats fact.

Thirdly, can you explain the sentence your encitement of Sec. 7-301 that you colorized related to ...Such town may, at any meeting specially warned for the purpose, make appropriations and lay taxes for the support thereof; but this section shall not be operative within the limits of any city, borough or incorporated fire district which has an established fire department. I read this to mean that if a town, city etc. which is the City of Stamford already has a fire department. Does engine 7 having an agreement with SFCO and taxes being assessed the residents of that district constitue SFRD districY? It can be a gray area in the cases of 8's and 9's.

No for the excerpts - What Can Districts Do?

"State law makes relatively clear what districts can and cannot do

"In addition, tax districts cannot completely take over a function already performed by towns without their consent."

"Districts act autonomously and with little oversight by state or local authorities besides annually providing contact information and a basic fiscal report to town clerks. They are not bound by state or local codes regulating ethics, personnel policies, or contract bidding."

"Districts across Connecticut have annual budgets which vary from a few hundred dollars to several millions. They must base the taxes they levy upon the property valuations made by the assessors of the towns in which they are located, but they set their own mill rates. By law, districts have all of the same powers to collect their taxes as towns do and share equal priority with them. Districts must be independently audited on an annual basis. Most are managed by unpaid volunteers, although some have salaried officers, clerical staffs, or maintenance crews."

Benefits for Residents and Towns

Organizing as a special taxing district can produce a number of benefits for residents. In addition to providing the enhanced services which prompted its formation, the taxes imposed to pay for certain of those services are widely considered to be deductible from the residents' own federal income taxes. This deduction is generally understood as applicable only to taxes paid for the types of services which municipalities traditionally provide, such as trash collection and road repairs - not which property owners usually perform themselves, such as private landscaping and pool maintenance. Districts can also benefit towns by preventing a small group of residents from usurping taxes and resources from their neighbors who do not share their needs, and by coordinating with towns or other districts to efficiently concentrate municipal services where they are needed most. As a smaller, more discrete, and more focused unit of government, a district's leaders can be more responsive to the concerns of their constituency.

"Districts enjoy enhanced tools for avoiding budget shortfalls because their revenue is collected in the same way as are municipal taxes - including powerful recovery mechanisms, superior lien priority, and the full authority of government to compel payment. For example, while a residential association organized as a non-stock corporation might only be able to collect unpaid dues through foreclosure or other litigation, the same community organized as a taxing district can usually collect those debts by auctioning property or seizing bank accounts without ever having to file a lawsuit. In addition, unlike a private association, a district's own vehicles, office equipment, and other property in its name are ordinarily not taxable by the town in which it is located. Districts even enjoy "municipal immunity" from being sued for many of its activities"

Potential Drawbacks

"Of course, creating another layer of government may not necessarily be viewed by everyone a good thing. It can detract from the cohesiveness and coordination of local services programs while producing administrative expenses which diminish the other financial advantages. Also, even well-meaning district officers may be unfamiliar with laws regulating district activities, finances, and tax collections. If a district eventually chooses to terminate, (under a statutory procedure similar to that for creating one), the town in which it was located will automatically assume its leftover assets. The town therefore may, for example, have to repair the former district's facilities or bring its roads up to town standards. A few districts have been quite literally abandoned, and some others have been continued by their leadership despite that their residents wanted them to dissolve."

"In addition, the district's officers are effectively government officials who may need a different type of directors' insurance to protect them while performing their duties. Importantly, districts with annual revenues exceeding $250,000 are technically required to have minority political party representation on their managing boards, such that certain residents may be disqualified from office depending on the political affiliations of the sitting officers. This may make little sense for many types of communities – and even require that, as occurred in one case in the 1970s, a republican receiving fewer votes than a democrat must be declared the winner of an election to a board which already had the maximum proportion of democrats. This law is rarely enforced today, but some district elections have become surprisingly political and partisan, involving caucuses and complex nomination rules."

So you see, it may or may not be as easy as you point out to create a district, and may even be more restricting to maintain and run the district. What do you think the board of reps will think when they learn that they will have no say in how the fire protection for the special district is run. How long do you think it will be before the 40 -50 additional personnel decide to organize? What about contract negotiations, what about training facilities, what about vehicle maintainance, what about annual maks fit testing, what happens when the districts forces become overwhelmed, and need assistance? You can not just apply personnel costs to the plan to make it look attractive. The district becomes a completely different Town as far as fire fighting is concerned. How long do you think it will be when the tax payers in the downtown start complaining of the fire resources they pay for are continually being pulled north or be utilized by the district? What do you think the union is going to do if the resources downtown are always being pulled by the district?

I apologize for the length of this reply and will finish with this bit of information. The ISO has recently lowered that classification for the City overall because they previously looked at the down town which was 3 seperately from up north which was a 6 or 7 at least. Now the entire city is a 5.

You are correct, it does not mean that you need a career firefighters 24/7 in every house, or even most of them outside of downtown, if and this is the big "IF" the volunteers show up. since they have not been, then its unfair to the taxpayers who have been told time and time again that they are covered when they are not and unfair and usafe for the UNDERSTAFFED career members who are left holding the bag.

Combination depts. in this region are just understaffed career depts., that justify the understaffing by claiming there are volunteers who fill the void. Thats fine if they actually have the training, the certification and they show up early enough to actually be of any use.

This does not mean there are not volunteers that can and do the job (some very well), but as a whole its been along time since there have been enough of these in No. Stamford.

You are all welcome. I started the posting again because of all the latest developments of late. And thank you Geppetto for clarifying for the

Cogs that the new boss does indeed have an affect on the new plan. FACTS not opinions. Cogs, my last post gave kudos to Belltown for being volunteers that apparently function. You are right, you may not need 24/7 career in every house for now. But that is not what the New Volunteer system proposes.

Pete:

Any chance you can explain how an article about budget shortfalls and the former Mayor's need to consolidate personnel have any relation?

You stated that you have some FACTS that show that there has been no savings under the consolidation of career employees, I was curious to know where the facts came from?

I hope it is not solely based upon some unrelated article about insufficient budgetary funding in the local newspaper.

If you also want to do some research, you will find that those "fiscally responsible" folks chose to significantly reduce the Police and Fire overtime budgets well beyond what the respective Department heads requested and clearly demonstrated would be required.

Given that most staffing issues are driven from contact language (that was agreed upon by City Boards), the Chiefs responsible for budgeting are usually pretty good and determining what would be needed for the upcoming year (factoring in wage requirements, staffing vacancies, etc.) Yet, the BOF choses to significantly underfund the overtime budget.

This is the definition of Manufactured Crisis and this little "blame-game" has been going for years and has little (or nothing) to do with a merger of career employees two and half years ago. It has everything to do with politics and people posturing for useless sound-bites and headlines and using no common sense when it comes to paying for contractually obligated costs. Kind of similar to all of those politicians blaming State employees for their pensions, but for years, the same Politicians failed to fund pensions systems to the amounts that their actuaries told them would be needed.

It apparently can also serve and give play-time for the agenda of those with their definite allergy and prejudice to anything "Stamford Fire Rescue".

Kind of silly for anyone to ignore Department's heads projections by hundreds of thousands of dollars and then criticize the same agencies and managers when the money that was not properly funded to begin with runs out.

Although you were not present, the fiscal records were crystal clear prior to the merger of any career employees that Fire Fighters under the previous two-tiered system were costing upwards (and over) $20,000 annually for the same position north of those heathens downtown.

The process to fix the issue may have been uglier and more contentious than that of one to create a National Health Care System, but please do not malign the history or fact that the old system had significant problems with regard to career employee cost, accountability and management.

Does an opinion based upon the quoted Advocate article also mean that the Stamford Police Department should be split into two Police agencies functioning with the same City? or does the standard just apply to Stamford Fire?

Thanks-

Now that is a PROFESSIONAL responce from an educated, intelligent professional. Mr. Cogs, you are correct about your being twisted by my comments of real fire fighters. Real fire fighters deal with facts, truths, and reality. My professional brother who posted this response to you seems to have just gotten real with you, and placed a challenge at your feet.

My remarks in my post effected exactly what I wanted it to do. To bring out the discussion and shed the light on TRUTH,FACTS,REALITY, things that fire fighters need to adress and react to every day. If they don't, it could get very ugly in the REAL DEAL. I am surprised that someone of your experience out in camp leatherneck Afghanistan does not realize this. I will not take away from you your service for all of us, but come on man, wake up. If this post by my colleague does not wake all of you up, then you all truly have your heads up your A#@$es.

While I am not as knowledgeable on this topic as others here, my understanding is that a lot of this overtime is driven by staffing levels in the contract. I heard that SFRD was about 16 members short when the FF test was first announced earlier this year. I believe it is now about 20 under strength. As such overtimeis used to fill those minimum staffing levels.

Personally I suspect the Mayor is barring any hiring so that if the PLAN goes through, those 40 or so SFRD FF's that would be impacted by the new plan would fill those spots. Maybe if it really turns out that this plan is less likely to go through, then the city can hire to fill those spots and in turn reduce the overtime costs.

As fate would have it, I happen to have been made aware that exactly what was just said is going to happen. Unfortunately, or fortunately which ever way you want to look at it, ten men being readied to hit the fire house floors would not happen for at least 6 months from now. So the OT is still going to be there. And as far as OT, you are correct, the contract drives those numbers, which are not arbitrary numbers.

The current city administration in my opinion has no concept of labor law, and feel they can just reduce numbers because it looks good on paper. Not so. This city is getting larger, not smaller, and its public safety needs to grow along with it. There is no magic to this, just pure common sense. The ones crying are the ones who are not getting any. Sorry. Why isn't the police OT critisized? Thats because they do not have detractors to their operation like the FD does who try to use it as justification for their wild rantings on how it can be done by them cheaper and better.

Organized professionals wake up. The mood now is PRIVITIZATION. If it can be proposed to the extent it is being done with the FD now, what makes you think it can't be done with any aspect of public safety or operation. The ban of misfits and self servers that refer to themselves as the New Stamford Volunteer Fire Department are exactly that, private, like Wackenhut Security or Rural Metro. This is not a new concept. It is a failed concept and that is what will happen here if it becomes reality. There is word for you, REALITY.

Now there's an oxy-moron for you. The new Stamford Volunteer FD. The City of Stamford - 4th largest city in the state with 118,000 people (not including the commuters into the city) equated with Volunteer FD. NEW - all of you volunteers that did not want to give up your autonomy, guess what. In order to have the NEW Volunteer FD, the OLD ones need to disban. So you did not want to organize under one operation comprised of professionals, you want to organize under other non-professionals like yourselves already. Wake the F*@$ up.

A point of fact, volunteer fire organizations make up over 70% of the fire service in the country. Another point of fact, paid or career fire organizations however, make up over 90% of serving populations of over 50,000 people. HELLO McFLY. Look it up NFPA, and the USFA surveys. "Just the facts Mame,..just the facts"

Thank God for the citizens of Stamford that Dan Malloy won the election. God save the fire service.

Well what seems to have been a hot topic for the past 5 -6 months has cooled down some. I wonder why? What with the new Governor supporting real fire fighters and realizing there was a problem a long time ago in the overall fire service in Stamford, I wonder why the so called experts (Whitbread, Myannis, Fahan, Tiettelbaum, Cogs, Marino, Oh and lets not forget the Ace strategists Bennet, and Nau)have stopped weighing in on the issue. Not looking so good for them and the PLAN with the recent gubenatorial results. It ain't going to be so easy. I understand that support for the PLAN is waning.

Kudos to the Belltown FD. They are true volunteers and want to remain such. They are able to muster and turn out people. I give them credit, and they exemplify what is truly the issue. Let the volunteers be volunteers, and the paid be paid. No mix and match. Develop a harmonious agreement and let both sides negotiate for the good of the entire city, not just their territories or districts or fiefdoms what ever. In my view, this whole reorganization starting from over 3 years ago has always been about money, getting the paid human resources under one agreement, command and control as it is supposed to be. I do not recall anyone suggesting that the volunteers be abolished, as they should not be.

Having been one myself some time ago, I am particularly upset with their current leadership and those of the past that are self serving themselves. They are apparently frustrated career fire fighters who could not get a job or did not want one, but want to be IN CHARGE of fire fighters. I do not know if it is not enough for them to command and administrate a true volunteer fire department or do they want to feather their own beds and seek getting a paid adminstrative position or were certain past paid employees of the Big 5 just not wanting to work for anyone but themselves and play the overtime game they did.

The first of the multi - million dollar lawsuits from the debacles that occured in Long Ridge are being filed as I understand. It seems that all the planets are coming into alignment against the self serving volunteer leaders(exception to Belltown FD Chief). The truth will prevail. I hope this sparks more commentary again, both for and against.

I know this guy. He is a frustrated wanna be careeer fire fighter. Smart, good guy, good with numbers, but no expert on fire department organization. If the plan gives north stamford residents more adequate protection, than it suggests that for all these years prior they were getting none. Why not give all the citizens equal protection. Why should it be different between north and south? This is backwards. In 1950 when the Town of Stamford and the City of Stamford combined into one municipality, the archaic thinking of the volunteers then held back progress. The police combined, the public works combined etc. The fire service did not. Not even did the volunteers combine amongst themselves. Each held on to their fiefdoms. That thinking is still present today in the 4th largest city in the state. Where is Pender County NC anyway? Are we comparing apples to apples? I think not. They may have an adequate volunteer base. Fact is the volunteer base up here does not exist. It hasn't for the past 20 plus years. the socioeconomic population has been changing . No one is suggesting elimnation fo the volunteers. Just a unification under one Central organization. Unity of Command, Chain of Command, one SOP. But no, self serving proponents dont' want to be told how and when to do anything. Jumping fire trucks kills the accountability system. Ther is no room for flexibility on the fire scene when it comes to accountantability. His arguements are weak. Thanks anyway Bob. Stay focused on your southern area, let those of us who are still here figure it out.

"The plan selected by the mayor, in my opinion, will give the North Stamford area more than adequate fire protection and flexibility at little or no increase in taxes."

"More than adequate" - what standard does that meet? NFPA 1710, NFPA 1720, ISO, Fire Accredidation, etc.?

"Flexability" - to do what? What if it does not work, is that flexability to hire more without oversight?

"I do not see any difference between a responding apparatus staffed with a Local 786 crew or a Stamford Volunteer Fire Department crew."

so he cant see the difference between a 3-4 man crew vs. a 1-2 man crew.

Vinny Gambini: "Maybe you're ready for a thicker set. You sure? Let's check it out."

"The Stamford VFD plan, as I see it, will provide more flexibility in the types of apparatus that can respond to an incident..... The SFRD firefighters do not switch from one apparatus to another."

Can anyone list any major dept. that routinly jumps from rig to rig? Can it be that the team work that develops when assigned to a specific rig is better?

In baseball do the pros switch from catcher to outfield? Wouldn't this make the team more flexable?

"If they are assigned to an engine they stay on that engine. A serious road accident requires an engine and a rescue, and you're likely to get a better mix of firefighters and apparatus responding simultaneously under the SVFD concept."

So 1 ff on an engine and 1 on the rescue is better than 6-8 on an engine and rescue. Or does this flexability mean we take the rescue and leave the engine back? Hope we do not need it.

"Cost is another item that appears to be in question. Under the SVFD plan, the staffing levels will not be much different than the previous volunteer department staffing levels other than the paid chief's position."

The big question: Was the previous staffing enough? Can you show that the response of career & volunteers has met any accepted minimums?

"Thus, the historically low cost the taxpayers have enjoyed, by virtue of having their fire protection supplemented by volunteers, should not change."

True, as long as enough trained volunteers show up in a timely manor. This has not been happening, maybe it was when the author was chief.

"Volunteers are always eager to be trained to drive and operate fire apparatus, and they reach the highest levels of proficiency. For decades, this has greatly multiplied the numbers of apparatus rolling out to calls with zero cost to the taxpayer. The best example would be any one of the damaging storms that hit North Stamford. I can remember times when every piece of Turn of River Fire Department apparatus was deployed at separate locations, all manned by volunteer drivers and crews, with everyone working together as professionals to get the job done, regardless of who was getting paid and who wasn't."

Back in the good old days, this was the case. Now it appears that many of the active members are no longer showing up, maybe because they moved away. But they still know those that are left behind can do it.

This is not about getting paid or not, its about getting enough trained firefighters to an incident, the current depts are not getting the job done.

I know this guy. He is a frustrated wanna be careeer fire fighter. Smart, good guy, good with numbers, but no expert on fire department organization. If the plan gives north stamford residents more adequate protection, than it suggests that for all these years prior they were getting none. Why not give all the citizens equal protection. Why should it be different between north and south? This is backwards. In 1950 when the Town of Stamford and the City of Stamford combined into one municipality, the archaic thinking of the volunteers then held back progress. The police combined, the public works combined etc. The fire service did not. Not even did the volunteers combine amongst themselves. Each held on to their fiefdoms. That thinking is still present today in the 4th largest city in the state. Where is Pender County NC anyway? Are we comparing apples to apples? I think not. They may have an adequate volunteer base. Fact is the volunteer base up here does not exist. It hasn't for the past 20 plus years. the socioeconomic population has been changing . No one is suggesting elimnation fo the volunteers. Just a unification under one Central organization. Unity of Command, Chain of Command, one SOP. But no, self serving proponents dont' want to be told how and when to do anything. Jumping fire trucks kills the accountability system. Ther is no room for flexibility on the fire scene when it comes to accountantability. His arguements are weak. Thanks anyway Bob. Stay focused on your southern area, let those of us who are still here figure it out.

Yes, what stoke of brilliance. Let's run firetrucks with just one person on board. As long as something that is big and red and makes lots of noise shows up, that should be sufficient.

Also known as the "S and S" operational policy.

SCOUT it out and SCREAM for help if you find something.....service at its best.

It's 2010.........do you know where your responsibilities are?

What is interesting about LRFCO's responce to the board is that they have and continue to rely on a department that also responds light to structure calls. It is my understanding from members at the NY Department that on chronic alarms just a chief officer responds to this area due to the road conditions present to get there. Their apparatus are to large to negotiate these roads in a timely fashion. WOW, that is something to rely on! Can someone verify this if it is true or not?

Thank You

Another Long Ridge Fire response scrutinized

Jeff Morganteen, Stamford Advocate

August 27, 2010

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Another-Long-Ridge-Fire-response-scrutinized-635106.php

Heard from a number of reliable sources that the votes are not there for the full board to approve this hair brainded plan. Job well done by getting the TRUTH out (Stamford Fire Truths . ORG) and quelling the lies from Bennent the rest of the non professionals like him.

Hi all. I am new to the board. I heard from someone today that there is alot of good reading going on here. I am going to jump in here with both feet and just add my point of view from where I have watched this for a long time. I have been involved with the system in Stamford for over 35 years starting as a volunteer, then became a paid driver for one of the departments, served as a chief for that department for two years and have started my 31st year with Stamford Fire Rescue. As most of you may already know, and some of you may have figured out who I am, this is not a new problem.

This problem began a long time ago and it only has become worse. I know, when I worked as a paid driver in ToR I pulled up to jobs alone waiting for my counterpart from the other station and hopefully, a volunteer would arrive soon. And back then they did. Most of those volunteers are now career personnel. The fact of the matter is that the socio-economic make up fo this city (which I was born and raised in)has been ever evolving, from a manufacturing town, then as a bedroom community for NYC to what it is now as a metropolis for world headquarters. It has grown from the 6th to 5th , and now the 4th largest city in CT. What happened to the people who started here? I know there are still a lot of you still living here but the ratio has changed drastically. 2 maybe 3 out of 10 people who reside here now are originally from here, and I dare to say for the most part do not know what there fire department really is or how it is run. You are not getting the volunteer participation that is needed anymore. that is not anyones fault. It is just the way it is. Volunteers are dedicated, but so are career members.

When I began doing this stuff there were more volunteers than there were paid in each of the Big 5 then. It grew to a point where there were more paid members than volunteers. Most of those volunteers were off duty career, more than likely violating FLSA. So at what point does a volunteer FD no longer be considered volunteer when there are more paid members than there are volunteers? Springdale Fire Company used to be one of the most advid anti paid departments in the city. Their past leadership of 20 + years ago were always angry at ToR for consistently asking for more paid personnel at yearly budget hearings. I even had a past chief from Springdale get in my face for always asking for more paid men. He told me that I was killing the volunteers. I told him my responcibility was to the personnel already working for their safety, and the people we were entrusted to protect. He stormed off. Never heard from him again. I think he died.

There is one descriptive word that I have not read in these posts as yet. PROFESSIONAL. Meaning; Of or pertaining to a profession, or calling; conforming to the rules or standards of a profession; following a profession; as, professional knowledge; A person who prosecutes anything professionally, or for a livelihood, and not in the character of an amateur; a professional worker.

You don't neccessarily need to be paid to be professional, nor do you need not to be paid to be an ameteur. It really boils down to attitudes. So I will put this question out to all of you and end this post before it becomes a novel. Which of these two descriptions do you feel you fit into, Professional, or Ameteur? I think that those of us that feel this plan is a good one are ameteurs who are looking to feather their own beds. I further feel that the volunteer chiefs that realized what was needed like Glenbrook's Chief Passero, and (ironically) Springdale's past Chief J. Hoyt (who I was not refering to earlier) are examples of non paid professionals. I can't think of any paid ametuers, Oh wait a minute I am sorry I can think of maybe 6 or 8. They had a clandestine secret meeting a week or so ago at an empty volunteer station. (WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE).

Make no mistake about it. This is a political payback or a strong attempt to begin the process of the city getting out of the fire protection business. Like some of the posts already have raised the spectre of RURAL METRO. And for those of you who think this is a good plan because you are trying to get a back door job, what are you going to do when the new tax district (if it is formed) hires chiefs or administrators from elsewhere who have some kind of credentials. Does this plan specifically state who will be hired, and what qualifications will they need to possess. What qualifications do the current so called chiefs who support the plan possess? "Yesterday I wanted to be chief, today I are one?" Good Luck.