Geppetto

Update on Stamford Merger

2,106 posts in this topic



Op-Ed: Charter revision: Partnership between the career and volunteer firefighters

Stamford Advocate

Jay Sandak

October 26, 2012

http://www.stamforda...the-3985472.php

"Undoubtedly, there are a great number of details that will have to be worked out. That is the function of a plan that will have to be formulated under this new structure.

As everyone is committed to a quality fire service for our community, the commission is confident that a plan can be created and adopted which will take into consideration all of the interests of both the career and the volunteer firefighters and allow the Stamford Fire Department to be a true partnership".

Based on the unending volley of accusations, intentional and unintentional misrepresentations, and a history of animosity from all "sides" I am doubtful that a long lasting "true partnership" can be had without concrete stipulations in the Charter to ensure it. I hope I am wrong and in truth would like nothing more than to be proven so.

Edited by FFPCogs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unifying fire services to be put to a vote

Kate King

Stamford Advocate

November 4, 2012

http://www.stamforda...p#ixzz2BHE1QNaB

I thought these three comments of opposition were some of the more noteworthy.

"I think it would be workable with one fire chief with representation from career, volunteers and the public," Belltown Fire Department Chief John Didelot said. "The bottom line with this whole situation is we want people to vote `no' so the opportunity is presented to bring all the stakeholders to the table and work this out in an amicable way rather than shoving it down everybody's throat."

I see this statement as a matter of "putting the cart before the horse". From everything I've read on this situation, there seems to be support on both sides for the general concept of a single Fire Chief, single Fire Department model and the City Charter has been the primary hurdle for the creation of this "unified department". The purpose of the Charter Question as I understand it is to essentially remove that "road block" by asking the citizens if they want to maintain the status quo or "reorganize" the delivery of fire protection services into a single Fire Department with a single Fire Chief and consisting of both career and volunteer firefighters.

To me, that's the logical first step in this process. As I understand it, even if all parties were 100% on board with creating this "new" Fire Department, the matter would still have to go before the citizens to approve changes to the Charter to allow it to happen. So, if the Charter has to be changed regardless in order to get to the end point, then why would you spend time "working out the details" when there's no guarantee that you'll have the legal authority to put that plan into action?

Maounis said many volunteers would likely leave the departments if the referendum passes, forcing the city to hire more firefighters at a greater cost to taxpayers.

"They are going to be pushed aside to be second-class citizens, so to speak," he said. "I think there's a very good chance that a good portion of the volunteers will leave if this passes. If the volunteers leave, the taxes will go up."

Coppola said a system where an outside fire chief exerts control over the volunteer fire departments would never work.

"The volunteers will go away," he said. "They won't be as motivated because they'll be reporting to someone else. You think we're going to take a backseat to anyone else after all these years of fighting fires? That's not going to happen. Not in Belltown."

To me, these two statements clearly show where the volunteer side's focus is and brings into question their actual "committement" to the people that they have been serving. If they are so dedicated to protecting their districts, then why would they even entertain the notion of quiting over this Charter Question? If they are so worried about this change resulting in a tax increase, then why would they act in a fashion that would likely result in a significant tax increase in order to replace them? If they are so convinced that the union supports this only because they want to get rid of the volunteers and increase their membership numbers, then why would the volunteers quit and basically hand the union exactly what they supposedly are after? If they actually have no intention of quiting, then it's basically nothing more than fearmongering to try to influence the vote.

Edited by FireMedic049
Bnechis and 16fire5 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought these three comments of opposition were some of the more noteworthy.

"I think it would be workable with one fire chief with representation from career, volunteers and the public," Belltown Fire Department Chief John Didelot said. "The bottom line with this whole situation is we want people to vote `no' so the opportunity is presented to bring all the stakeholders to the table and work this out in an amicable way rather than shoving it down everybody's throat."

I see this statement as a matter of "putting the cart before the horse". From everything I've read on this situation, there seems to be support on both sides for the general concept of a single Fire Chief, single Fire Department model and the City Charter has been the primary hurdle for the creation of this "unified department". The purpose of the Charter Question as I understand it is to essentially remove that "road block" by asking the citizens if they want to maintain the status quo or "reorganize" the delivery of fire protection services into a single Fire Department with a single Fire Chief and consisting of both career and volunteer firefighters.

To me, that's the logical first step in this process. As I understand it, even if all parties were 100% on board with creating this "new" Fire Department, the matter would still have to go before the citizens to approve changes to the Charter to allow it to happen. So, if the Charter has to be changed regardless in order to get to the end point, then why would you spend time "working out the details" when there's no guarantee that you'll have the legal authority to put that plan into action?

If "the cart" is not "put before the horse" in this case there will be no cart for the horse to pull. Without clearly specified and definitive Charter mandated representation for all ( career, volunteer and elected citizens) there is absolutely no guarantee, or impetus for that matter, of it being granted down the road when the process of "working out the details" begins. That is akin to signing contract without knowing exactly what the terms of that contract are before signing it and then expecting to change those terms once it takes effect. Would you do that? I would hope not. To do so would be irresponsible at best. Prudence demands that the details be worked out and the specifics determined BEFORE any changes are made so that ALL are aware of them and can make an informed decision.

Edited by FFPCogs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coppola said a system where an outside fire chief exerts control over the volunteer fire departments would never work.

"The volunteers will go away," he said. "They won't be as motivated because they'll be reporting to someone else. You think we're going to take a backseat to anyone else after all these years of fighting fires? That's not going to happen. Not in Belltown."

There are thousands of examples across the country where volunteers report to a career chief. It can work and will work for the volunteers who want to serve. If your sole motivation is preserveing your fifedom then this is bad but unfortunatly it's worse for the taxpayers.

Geppetto, crk830, SmokeyJoe and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If "the cart" is not "put before the horse" in this case there will be no cart for the horse to pull. Without clearly specified and definitive Charter mandated representation for all ( career, volunteer and elected citizens) there is absolutely no guarantee, or impetus for that matter, of it being granted down the road when the process of "working out the details" begins. That is akin to signing contract without knowing exactly what the terms of that contract are before signing it and then expecting to change those terms once it takes effect. Would you do that? I would hope not. To do so would be irresponsible at best. Prudence demands that the details be worked out and the specifics determined BEFORE any changes are made so that ALL are aware of them and can make an informed decision.

I disagree that this is akin to signing a contract without knowing the terms. As I understand it, the Charter Question is about coming to a "fork in the road" and choosing which path to take. In this case, the decision is essentially "status quo" or "one department, one chief".

I think you are looking at this Charter Question from too much of a personal perspective based on this response. The "details" you and those in opposition are concerned with appear to be more about where you would "fit" into the "one department, one chief" option. Although I'm sure that there would be some exceptions, the public probably has little concern with what sort of "seat at the table" the firefighters on both sides would have on this path. While your concern is valid, it is one that in my opinion should be addressed once the decision to go down that path has been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While your concern is valid, it is one that in my opinion should be addressed once the decision to go down that path has been made.

And so it shall be. The people have spoken, so now, after a 30 day pause, it is time to get down to the business of making it work.
Seymour likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cogs- I believe you called 60-40. Pretty close!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And so it shall be. The people have spoken, so now, after a 30 day pause, it is time to get down to the business of making it work.

Good Luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cogs- I believe you called 60-40. Pretty close!

Yeah but I still didn't win that damn pool... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Luck.

Thanks. We're all adults here....well most of us. We have alot of work to do, and all that's important now is that we get cracking and give Stamford the fire service it deserves..

Edited by FFPCogs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its about time......1966 posts and 99 pages to get to consolidation.

Good for the City of Stamford

helicopper likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank goodness. Maybe now we can move on and the residents of Stamford can get proper cost-effective protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete,

I said something to this effect on the CT forum but I'll do the same here. You've made a lot of arguments for not consolidating over the years, I can't say that I agree with most of them, but I respect your ability to make those arguments. That being said, I respect even more your willingness to bury the hatchet and move forward with the decision made by the people you serve. We've all seen guys who toss in their stuff after a firehouse decision goes the way they don't like it, but so far it seems like you're handling this as a true professional. Tip of the helmet for that.

I wish ALL of Stamford's Firefighters the best of luck, and I hope that they become a model of combination fire service for the rest of the nation. You have the opportunity to create something new and exciting here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, let us celebrate the fence-sitting wind socks.......it is better to sway with he wind then pick a side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete,

I said something to this effect on the CT forum but I'll do the same here. You've made a lot of arguments for not consolidating over the years, I can't say that I agree with most of them, but I respect your ability to make those arguments. That being said, I respect even more your willingness to bury the hatchet and move forward with the decision made by the people you serve. We've all seen guys who toss in their stuff after a firehouse decision goes the way they don't like it, but so far it seems like you're handling this as a true professional. Tip of the helmet for that.

I wish ALL of Stamford's Firefighters the best of luck, and I hope that they become a model of combination fire service for the rest of the nation. You have the opportunity to create something new and exciting here.

And like the CT forum I will thank you here as well.

I must say that many here seem to think I'm against consolidating career and volunteer, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. I stand behind my beliefs and will always defend them vigorously, just as I expect others to do the same and truth be told I still think a more equitable and proactive partnership could have been created, but we have all had a chance to have our say and the people decided. No matter our opinions we must never forget that we all we serve them, not the other way around, so as a fireman in their service I must now follow the path they have chosen. The choice is made, there's nothing more to do than just do what needs doing...serve our citizens to the best of our abilities.

Will Stamford become a model combo FD? I don't know but I sure as hell hope so and I intend to do all I can to ensure that's what happens.

Stay Safe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its about time......1966 posts and 99 pages to get to consolidation.

Good for the City of Stamford

If all it takes is 2000 posts and 100 pages, why hasn't a Westchester consolidation topic been started. Bet we could hit those numbers fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If all it takes is 2000 posts and 100 pages, why hasn't a Westchester consolidation topic been started. Bet we could hit those numbers fast.

Ok I'll take 4200 posts and 300 pages in that pool.

helicopper likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I'll take 4200 posts and 300 pages in that pool.

Always the optimist?

What king of odds are you giving?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck to the new "Stamford Fire & Rescue Department". While there will be "growing pains" I hope everyone works together to do the right thing. I wonder what EMTBravo is going to do with all the forum space!????!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cogs,

I just hope that more will think along the same lines as you as apposed to fighting this every step of the way. You are correct, the people have spoken, now lets get it done.

SageVigiles likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck to the new "Stamford Fire & Rescue Department". While there will be "growing pains" I hope everyone works together to do the right thing. I wonder what EMTBravo is going to do with all the forum space!????!

Tim: I believe, it will actually be known as the "Stamford Fire Department" again...."Rescue" was to be dropped as part of the Charter Proposal.....

Who is working on the new patch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck to the new "Stamford Fire & Rescue Department". While there will be "growing pains" I hope everyone works together to do the right thing. I wonder what EMTBravo is going to do with all the forum space!????!

Oh don't worry something tells me there's plenty of b!tching and moaning to go... :P

Bnechis likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire merger leaves unanswered questions

Kate King and Martin Cassidy

Stamford Advocate

November 7, 2012

http://www.stamforda...ons-4017693.php

Many unanswered questions to say the least. Quite frankly while I am optimistic I also remain a bit leery simply because so many details have not been addressed. I do know that the intention is to meld everyone together with input from all the stakeholders and I do hope that is exactly what happens. I forsee major problems if either tries to dictate policy unilaterally without the input of the other. In theory this should not happen by virtue of the granted appeals process before the Fire Commission. I suppose that if there is any disagreement it will be a matter of both "sides" arguing their case before that Commission and a decision being rendered based on the validity of those arguments. That is the theory anyway. The cynic in me though thinks that there is the very real potential that the Commission will become just another political pawn filled with lackeys....but make no mistake, I want nothing more than to be wrong!!

If it were up to me I would like to see more of a confederated model, with each department maintaining autonomy while adhering to a standardized set of citywide SOP/Gs and a response matrix based on closest staffed unit reponse, be it career or volunteer. I think that was the intent of the revision commission, at least that's what I was told by them. I can say that I will continue to advocate and work for integration across the board and the means to achieve it. Both career and volunteers offer benefits and a wealth of experience that CAN make this the best damned combo department, if we work together to ensure it. So while obstacles will most definitely block our path, as professionals let us not be one of them.

I extend my hand to my new partners and can promise this:

Respect me and I will respect you

Work WITH me and I will work WITH you

Stand with me and I will stand with you

I look forward to our future and all that it offers!!

Stay Safe

Edited by FFPCogs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.