RES24CUE

This could be a fire where nothing much went wrong. Or it could be a fire where nothing at all went right. The outcome is that firefighters showed up to a well involved fire where residents had self-evacuated, could not make an interior attack, and performed surround-and-drown operations while they watched the building burn down. We don't know if they had 5 members show up or 50 members show up. We don't know if it took them 5 minutes or 25 minutes to arrive on scene. That was my whole problem with this article. It seems like this article is praising a group of individuals for unfavorable outcomes and potentially shoddy performance. "Great job showing up and watching a house burn down."
This gives the volunteer fire service, the residents, and the public a false (poor) sense of what is expected and what is favorable. The volunteers now know that they get a pat on the back regardless of whether or not the building is saved. The residents gain a false sense of security since the newspaper has just told them how great their local department is (that just allowed one of their neighbors houses to burn down without mounting a coordinated interior attack). The public now thinks that the volunteer fire service does a great job (when we all know that most volunteer departments are seriously lacking in manpower, training, and professionalism these days). I would imagine that this fire was not much different than the Vista helmet cam fire where everyone bashed them on this very website for their poor performance (we saw the article that they Huffington Post wrote about how great they were). This article is complete bullshit. Write an article when rescuers make a save. Not when a bunch of losers watch a house burn down.
Don't mistake me for a career firefighter who love to bash volunteers. I am not a career fire fighter and have never been one. I spent 10 years in the volunteer fire service as a Firefighter, Lieutenant, and Captain and quit because I believe that the volunteer fire service is a façade and a waste of taxpayer dollars where members are more concerned with social functions than they are with training and firematics.

"A group of firefighters attempted to enter the house but were forced to turn back because the heat was so intense. Steltz called it the hottest fire he has ever experienced. “There was a lot of heat, a lot more fire than usual,” he said. No one was hurt. Residents Anne Impellizzeri and Dan Wright escaped injury but lost all their possessions."
I love creative writing!
"A group of firefighters attempted to enter the house but were forced to turn back because the heat was so intense."
Surround and Drown! "Steltz called it the hottest fire he has ever experienced."
And the only fire he has ever experienced! (and yes I read that he was a past chief - still a possibility!) "No one was hurt. Residents Anne Impellizzeri and Dan Wright escaped injury but lost all their possessions."
The building was unoccupied upon arrival - No risk of life present! This is bullshit...you can twist anything to make it worthy of publishing!

They probably only invited reliable resources. You know, the kind that can be trusted upon to show up when there's an emergency. Not just send a few pimply faced kids and a plumber with no recognized training on a half empty rig if they even decide to show up at all...

They probably only invited reliable resources. You know, the kind that can be trusted upon to show up when there's an emergency. Not just send a few pimply faced kids and a plumber with no recognized training on a half empty rig if they even decide to show up at all...

They probably only invited reliable resources. You know, the kind that can be trusted upon to show up when there's an emergency. Not just send a few pimply faced kids and a plumber with no recognized training on a half empty rig if they even decide to show up at all...

They probably only invited reliable resources. You know, the kind that can be trusted upon to show up when there's an emergency. Not just send a few pimply faced kids and a plumber with no recognized training on a half empty rig if they even decide to show up at all...

More wasted taxpayer dollars. This is why they keep closing firehouses and reducing crew sizes. If we keep entertaining this garbage NYC is going to become Detroit.

This makes me want to puke. It's no longer about who is better suited for the position, it's a numbers game. I work in NYC and I'm buying an extinguisher, a water can, a bailout bag, and a AV-3000 with an escape canister just in case a truck full of these know-nothing cry-babies shows up in front of my office building for a working fire.

This makes me want to puke. It's no longer about who is better suited for the position, it's a numbers game. I work in NYC and I'm buying an extinguisher, a water can, a bailout bag, and a AV-3000 with an escape canister just in case a truck full of these know-nothing cry-babies shows up in front of my office building for a working fire.

This makes me want to puke. It's no longer about who is better suited for the position, it's a numbers game. I work in NYC and I'm buying an extinguisher, a water can, a bailout bag, and a AV-3000 with an escape canister just in case a truck full of these know-nothing cry-babies shows up in front of my office building for a working fire.

More wasted taxpayer dollars. This is why they keep closing firehouses and reducing crew sizes. If we keep entertaining this garbage NYC is going to become Detroit.

$69 Million withdrawn from ATMs in exotic vacation locations using pre-paid welfare debit cards...
Millions withdrawn from Las Vegas Casino ATMs, ATMs in Hawaii, ATMs on Cruise Ships, and ATMs in South Beach, Miami.
We work hard and pay our taxes while these savages have the times of their lives at our expense...
See video below:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/_wElqMl5TJM?rel=0

The liberals refuse to enforce our immigration laws....then claim that the immigration system is "broken." What's BROKEN is the welfare system. It invites fraud....and fraud is what it generates.
They should go back to the commodities system where those who qualified could pick up food boxes once a month. The boxes did not contain rib steak, frozen mashed potatoes, or McDonald's coupons, they contained rice, flour, "government cheese", canned pork, bread, etc. It was designed to keep the needy from going hungry without any frills. It also helped the farmers who provided the commodities to the government.
As a fairly affluent society, we have an OBLIGATION to help those who are unable to help themselves. But that obligation does not extend to those who use and abuse the system.

$69 Million withdrawn from ATMs in exotic vacation locations using pre-paid welfare debit cards...
Millions withdrawn from Las Vegas Casino ATMs, ATMs in Hawaii, ATMs on Cruise Ships, and ATMs in South Beach, Miami.
We work hard and pay our taxes while these savages have the times of their lives at our expense...
See video below:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/_wElqMl5TJM?rel=0

This is a little off topic but may offer a little insight into why the radio strap is so important for use with FD operations. It is a lengthy report (I don't recommend a full read but it is at least worth a skim...has lots of pictures too!!!) on a study done by the Fairfax Fire Department after they had a number of radios damaged by heat when carried on the front of a firefighter (usually facing the fire). They had a few particularly bad malfunctions...one in which a mic melted when clipped to the loop above the radio pocket and stuck in the open position. This essentially terminated all fireground communications on their fireground frequency.
After the study they concluded that the best way for a firefighter to carry a radio is on a radio strap under the firefighter's coat with the radio behind the firefighter and the coat lifted so that the antenna/majority of the radio are exposed. This left the radio protected from heat, out of the way, but did not hinder reception/transmission due to covering the antennae. (See pictures on the report as I know this may be confusing when transferred into text).
See the link below to view the full document. (from vententersearch.com)
http://www.vententersearch.com/supplemental/fairfaxradioreport.pdf

The fire department with which I was previously affiliated used these hydrant flags to mark the hydrants. This way if there was a fire before we had a chance to dig them out, then our members (sadly I would say most of our own members did not know the exact positioning of all of our hydrants and we only had 18 hydrants in our small hydranted district) or our mutual aid departments could find the hydrant in the rare case that they were completely buried. Just a tool that can help, not an excuse for not clearing your hydrants. These were pretty easy to install (remove 1 bolt and attach around the top rim). However, I don't know how practical they would be in a district with hundreds of fire hydrants. As I said we only had 18 hydrants and it took a few guys working at a leisurely pace a few hours on a lazy, sunny fall Saturday to get them all installed. This could take weeks and cost thousands in a place like Yonkers, Mt. Vernon, New Rochelle, White Plains, etc..

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

From my experience, every time there is a major issue at hand that could potentially be of some type of embarassment to the fire department or the fire district, the commissioners say that it is somehow related to a personnel issue (Obviously!!! How else would the department be embarassed if not by the actions of an individual or group of individuals) and that it must be discussed in a closed door meeting. They then return to the floor and any questions asked regarding the issue are deflected by saying that "it is connected to a personnel issue and connot be discussed for fear of litigation" (exactly what was said in the aforecited article by the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners). Then, if a newspaper or reporter asks any question about a personnel matter, the Commissioners buy time by saying that the reporter must FOIL them. Then after they get the FOIL request, they defer to the same tactic and say that they can't discuss personnel issues.
SO WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC ATTEND? I was a 10 year member of the emergency services community (5 years as an Officer) and it didn't take me longer than a year to stop going to those meetings because all of the pertinent matters are discussed behind closed doors. The commissioners were talking about things that directly impacted me as a firefighter and I got fed up and wrote those meetings off as a waste of my time. Why should John Q Taxpayer feel any different? Just like everything else with politicians, they hide behind smoke screens, generalities, and procedure until taxpayers who have legeitimate questions about their emergency services get fed up and determine that its not worth their time to figure seek the answers that they desire. They then curse the Department, the Chiefs, and the Commissioners under their breath and tell their entire circle of friends within the community over dinners and drinks about their awful experience with the Fire Department (they generalize) and what bad corrupt people they are. Then neither they nor their friends within the community attend, vote, or volunteer (or donate).
I think some people in this business (no reflection on you Bnechis or FFPCogs as I truly appreciate your posts/views) have a tendency to say "why is the public doing this to us?" instead of "What are we doing to make the public think of us in this light?" and "How are we driving people away?" The emergency services can blame the kids who grew up with a silver spoon in their mouths; they can blame the businessmen who have no time for their community; they can blame the economy for creating stagnant conditions that require people to work so hard that they have no time to volunteer; they can blame video games. BUT IN MY OPINION, THEY SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND ASK THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO MAKE PEOPLE NOT WANT TO ATTEND, VOTE, OR VOLUNTEER. After all, how is your retention rate? Most places can't even keep the people that are interested to begin with.
Just like your reputation within the department, it takes 10 "atta boys" to get rid of one "oh s***." Does your organization have 10 equally weighted positive articles published (or stories/rumors spread around the community) about it for every 1 negative article that has been published about it in the recent past. I can tell you with complete certainty that the organization with which I was previously affiliated absolutely does not. The emergency services are not getting a bad rap out of thin air.

It seems like there has been great debate recently about consolidation. The volunteer side of the business is trying their best to avoid forced consolidation with other neighboring departments to reduce the costs to the taxpayer caused by overlap of services/equipment. Volunteers argue that free labor saves taxpayer dollars (salaries/benefits/pensions) and that the long history and tradition of the volunteer fire service should supersede the seemingly decreasing quality of the services that we are seeing in many local departments (multiple dispatches, low manpower, etc.).
The paid side of the fire service believes that consolidating fire departments and hiring paid firefighters will reduce costs and increase service and consistency. They argue that municipalities could close a number of firehouses strategically and staff remaining departments with full-time paid firefighters. They contend that doing so would reduce costs to the taxpayer because they would be able to maintain the same response times as volunteer departments with fewer firehouses and pieces of fire apparatus (spares, specialty pieces, etc.). Regardless of the cost, the quality of service to the taxpayer would undoubtedly increase because residents would be guaranteed to receive a consistent response by well-trained, professional personnel regardless of time of day.
NOW...THE FIRST PART OF THIS WAS MERELY AN INTRO AND NOT THE TOPIC THAT I PRESENT WE DISCUSS. I KNOW THAT THIS ARGUMENT IN AND OF ITSELF IS A HIGHLY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE THAT WE HAVE SEEN BEATEN TO DEATH COUNTLESS TIMES ON THIS SITE!!!
It has been my observation that many Northern Westchester fire departments are self-consolidating with other departments in recent months...
Bedford Fire Department gets dispatched with Bedford Hills, Mount Kisco, and Katonah Fire Departments Automatically upon a report of any type of structure fire (Chimney, Oven, etc.).
Vista and South Salem FIre Departments are on an automatic mutual aid for any inside smoke investigation/reported structure fires within either one of their districts.
Most recently, Golden's Bridge Fire Department is on automatic mutual aid with Croton Falls Fire Department for all Firematic Calls within their fire district.
All of these mutual aid agreements occur upon the REPORT of an incident prior to any CONFIRMATION.
Now, regardless of the monetary aspect of the debate, it seems as if many of the departments that would be the first to be placed on the chopping block if consolidation did occur are consolidating themselves in order to get the job done. These departments are increasingly forced to consolidate their services due to dwindling manpower and an inability to staff pieces of apparatus in a timely fashion and on a regular basis.
Now, I come from the volunteer side of the business and it was a passion of mine for 10 years. However, it seems to me that if you are going to send twice the number of rigs (all with half of the seats empty) from multiple fire departments to the same call to get the job done, then why don't they just put the firehouse in the middle, ride the same rig, and fill all the seats.
Is this what is slowly starting to happen?
Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?