Bnechis

No one here suggested including the villages. They said include all areas that are outside the villages (i.e. unincorporated area). The biggest thing that will prevent consolidation is if the tax rates will raise in one district while dropping in another. The taxpayers who will experience the raise (even if the consolidated dept. will save overall $$$ &/or improved service) will vote no. What has been pointed out is if those contract areas were included, this might even the tax rate enough to make it happen. Many public employees are very weary of politicians who have already been proven in court to not tell the truth and who are willing to throw the FD under the bus to hide the fact that they have major problem in their own operations.

If the town pays village X $100,000 for fire protection and village X gives $50,000 to the fire department, how does that save the taxpayers lots of money? It saves the village taxpayers money, does not provide the level of protection they are paying for (since they don't give it all to the FD) and cost the town taxpayers who are subsidizing it.

Because he knows that Edgemont will not vote for it, he is just hoping that Fairview & Hartsdale will.

What he was getting at is the town pays more $$$ in fire protection money to the villages, than the villages give to the fire departments for providing the service.

Just saw another article on this that said the head of public works is also against this as the garbage trucks will have trouble with this plan as well. Apparently the Supervisors idea is to widen the sidewalks, pushing parking towards the street and making the street area narrower. While the talk has been about making engines smaller, another issue is what happens when you reduce the space for ladder jack spread? California already severely restricts the weight per axle which is why you do not see tower ladders, large tankers or even larger tanker delivery trucks (for fuel delivery). So if they do this; 1) they will have a problem with FD vehicles, 2) they will have a problem picking up the garbage, 3) they may have a problem with deliveries to homes & stores.

Its also possible that Feiner's claim that Chief LaGudice made an Anti-Semitic statement about him, which the Journal News (which openly supports Feiner) later reported did not happen and that Feiner made up that he read it in a court transcript caused the chief to resign, which forced the board to accelerate the time table resulting in the promotions.

Prior to the Quint/Midi RFD ran 4 man Engines & 4 man ladders. The administration claimed that the switch would allow them to run the less expensive midi's on many calls and the quints, while more expensive than standard trucks of the day would run less, thus last longer. The staffing switched to 2 on a Midi and 6 on a quint, so in the double companies their was no change in overall manpower. Around 1980 they bought 3 Sutphen mid mount towers, but when they arrived they did not have the funds, so they sold 1 to New Rochelle (TL-11). On paper the system sounds great. Till administration says we use to run 4 on a ladder and now its 6, so lets drop back to 4. So a net loss of 25% (from 8 to 6) in those double companies. Years later, they were trying to go back to standard truck / engines because the chiefs said it worked better. So any apparatus cost savings were lost. But the city ended up with a smaller FD.

Not exactly. Henrico works a 56 hour work schedule (average). I find it hard to follow. They work 24 on 24 off for 3 rounds, then they get and additional 24 off. Then 2 rounds with an additional 24 off, Then I think it goes back to the start.

Because our culture demands that it must be someone else's fault. Nobody takes responsibility for anything and we should not expect the parents or guardians to take responsibility for the fire or the lack of warning. It must be someone else's fault.

Western Europe has a very different approach to fire than North America. 1st they do not use wood to build with, they do not have trees to waste on homes. That's why they came to America in the 1600-1700....for our forests. In France I was surprised to see the telephone poles are concrete. The construction methods also tend to have less void spaces. I was surprise seeing external plumbing on the rear of most homes. So their fires are basically content only and need much less fire flow to handle. Another difference is the difference in our freedoms. In the US the government (fire dept) can not come into my home and inspect it, so if I am unsafe, that's my right. And where are most of our fires? Private dwellings. But in many countries in Europe they inspect private homes, because the community safety is more important than personnel freedoms. Another difference is having a fire is considered a shame on your family. Another issue is most major US cities are along a coast (ocean or great lake), many in Europe are along rivers, inland from the coast (Paris, London, Berlin, etc.) so less winds. Another difference is water supply. The hydrant systems in many European city's could not support the LDH or large pumps of ours. The systems there are designed for faster hook up for content fires. In Paris for example the water mains are 6 inch and run under the sidewalks. The hydrants are carried by the pumps (engines) every 100' their is an access plate. you kick it with your heal it pops open, you drop the hydrant in, 1/4 turn and open the valve. Its pre connected to 150' of 3in supply (approx.) hose. the access plates are staggered so on the other side of the street they are in-between the others. So the rig is never more than about 30 feet from a hydrant box. So another reason for smaller rigs, is they do not need hosebeds. Are they more maneuverable? Yes Would they work here? Yes Would they be more effective on initial responses here? Yes. Would more conflagrations with total loss of any highly developed areas occur here? Yes. Would insurance premiums here skyrocket here, due to an inability to meet the needed fire flow? Yes. Finally, European FD's have other systems for moving large volumes of water during major incidents. they use large trailer or POD pumps and draft out of canals. they use 6" supply lines for this and often use hydraulic pumps. Lots of lessons here for depts. that do not have hydrants.

Thanks. Now before you look at Europe, one must consider a number of San Francisco issues 1st. The Hills, the construction (Very high number of wood frame, compared to most major cities). And very windy (being on a peninsula that has one of the windiest bays in the world on one side and the Pacific Ocean on the other. Then look at the history of burning 1/2 the city down after an earthquake, and the next one could happen any day. Week before the Loma Prieta Earthquake in 1989 the City of SF determined that a fire boat was too expensive to have and they could sell the "Phoenix". SFFD said it was critical, but the administration knew better. When the quake occurred all water mains in the marina district were cut. The fire boat became the only water source and prevented a conflagration. Shortly after that, the city purchased a 2nd boat (used) from Vancouver Canada. So even if this sounds like a good idea. It can change to a very bad one in 30 seconds. SF is a city that needs big pump capacity and powerful rigs to get up and over those hills. I got to ride with SFFD Rescue 2 & Ride on the Phoenix in the early 1990's. It was like being on a roller coaster in the back going up and over those hills. Part II - Europe (tomorrow).

If it meets the needs of the department, great. But you should never buy apparatus to fill the needs of other departments. You get what you need and you make it work as best you can for them. Years ago I worked on an engine replacement project for a dept. in another county. The chief wanted a 3,000 gpm engine (replacing a 1,000 gpm unit). The commissioners were concerned that it was not needed. I was interviewing the chief and asked what the best hydrant in the district was (1,200 gpm), did they have a multi looped hydrant system and if they had any drafting locations (no). I asked how was he going to get 3,000 gpm to put into the pump in his town? He said they wanted it because if they had the biggest pump in the county, everyone would call them mutual aid and his ff's would get more experience. I asked if he understood he was asking to spend enough for 2 standard engines and then was going to strip the community of it and personnel on a regular basis? He said he never thought of it that way and dropped the idea.

So like I said before, Its up to the municipality. If they do not understand how a large portion of their public safety is set up, operates and costs, then shame on them.

1) That's up to the village/town to determine, just like any other purchase. 2) Your 1st due engine ( in a dept. with only 2 engines) blows a motor. You only run 50 calls a year and only 1 working fire every other year. Have you set a precedent that it needs to be repaired/replaced? (answer in #1 above).

The dual lock system is designed so 2 different depts. can have their own key to a box they might go to. But only one needs to be used to open it.

We have found that after the 1st automatic alarm to the FD, they are very willing to put them in. Must be because its cheaper than using the other FD keys.

NYS DMV (not DOT) laws generally recognize emergency vehicles (those allowed to have red lights/siren) as official (read: municipal) vehicles (most fire & PD) and ambulance services. Their is no recognition of public utilities (that are not governmentally owned) as emergency vehicles. Realistically the type of vehicles they are responding in, will only get to us a few minutes faster with RLS. And the real issue is each crew is covering a very large area. Since the public is not willing to pay higher utility rates, this will likely remain unchanged.

The 2nd picture is 211 South 4th street. When the current station 3 was built, this was turned into the Ambulance building & traffic Division. Was a total dump. Rumor was it was unsafe for firefighters, so they stuck EMS there. We had to barricade the 3rd floor door, as it was a shooting gallery. The junkies would sneak in from the apt building behind it. I worked 5 or 6 overdoses up there. It stopped when the Feds seized the apt building. A fire finally forced EMS into a trailer outside station #3

How can it be a secret if it drove past everyone from Nebraska to Conn.?

And they had trouble moving them because they were being treated &/or transported for smoke inhalation, so they took the EMS resources for the public and us away.

LOL. ask again in October. They generally don't start to bend metal till 90-120 before delivery. The upfront time is the waiting line and the time for the manufacturers to acquire all the components.

You are correct, but if you take the hose out, the lesson is clear, get out, because you have no means to stay and fight.

There are many types of calls that we have removed from our runs, because they place us &/or the public at extra risk, without any benefit. Define a credible source? There are many scenarios that without training is the source credible? We have a strict policy that EMS can not stop an FD response to a MVA. We still regularly hear EMS say you are not needed and are surprised when we show up. They are then reminded that we appreciate them advising us that they do not need assistance with the medical aspects of the call, but we have other responsibilities that they are not looking for at an MVA. The authority is with the agency. I am not questioning the officers, they were dispatch, they need to go. The issue I have is what calls does any agency not need to go on? Yes hindsight is 20/20. But the reality is many have for taking a risk that they may or may not even understand the risk. Yes, but were they or should they be dispatched to the point of origin? Many communities have removed them (as allowed in the NYS Uniformed Fire Prevention & Building Code) because they are unreliable ( on inspection, I have rarely seen ones that have not dry rotted or been vandalized) and more important than training, occupants or anyone else using them places themselves in grave danger because of the toxic gases. That's why without SCBA we teach GET OUT!

I was involved 20+ years ago with an NYPD ESU officer who was killed in a fire response. It was a devastating event for many (my partner was his friend and the officer knew when he was to be intubated, he would not speak again. so he asked my partner to say goodbye to his family for him. The next day my partner quit EMS). Since this is not the 1st time NYPD officers were critically injured while "operating" in a structure fire, I am surprised to find that the NYPD does not have a policy. In my experience many police depts. including NYPD actually have a policy, its unwritten, but its very effective (sadly in a negative way). Police officers that attempt rescues are often given awards, sometimes promotions. This sends a very clear message to the members. This action is rewarded. Many years ago we had a fire in an animal hospital & the FD rescued an attendant and a police officer (who had tried to make the rescue). A few months later their was 2 articles in the news paper (on the same page), 1) the officer receiving an award and detective badge, 2) the NYS Labor dept. was fining the PD for failing to follow the law in protecting the police officer. My heart goes out to the officers and the families, but sadly this will happen again, because law enforcement in general believes they must respond to every call and do "something".