Consolidation in the Fire Service

[helicopper 1,050]

There have been many threads lately where the issue of consolidation/regionalization have been discussed. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the issue objectively and without it being associated with a specific incident or agency to avoid personal and emotional responses though I'm sure there will still be many among us who react that way. If we're all truly in this for the public, we should be able to rationally and professionally discuss the matter and promote what is best for the public, not ourselves.

Here is one source on the subject: http://www.pace.edu/pace/dyson/research-and-resource-centers/academic-centers-and-institutes/michaelian-institute/michaelian-institute-and-westchester-fire-chiefs-evaluate-consolidating-services/

Given the study's findings, it is hard to dispute that regionalization and consolidation would not be a good thing for the targeted departments. By extension, one would have to conclude that there would also be benefits to other regional approaches and consolidation.

NFPA 1710 is pretty clear in its recommendation (requirement) that there be a staff of four on an engine or a ladder - six if "In jurisdictions with tactical hazards, high hazard occupancies, high incident frequencies, geographical restrictions,

or other pertinent factors as identified by the authority having jurisdiction, these companies shall be staffed with a minimum of five or six on-duty members.

How many "career" FD's in Westchester County meet NFPA 1710? Is it just Yonkers or do others make the grade?

On the volunteer side, NFPA 1720 describes the staffing and response time criteria for volunteer agencies. Do the volunteer FD's in Westchester meet this standard? Would they if districts were consolidated and a regional approach was used?

The Michaelian study summarized the findings (please read the full report for the details):

Financially there is a tremendous savings too. "A consolidated district would be able to meet these standards with the existing roster of 604 approved (599 of which are filled) positions. However, if the 10 departments attempted to meet these standards individually they would require 504 additional positions at an annual cost ranging from between $40 million

and $52 million." (from the Michaelian study)

40-52 million dollars is a lot especially given our current fiscal crises and the layoffs and other issues affecting some of these departments. But there's more that can be saved...

The ISO ratings for the 10 departments in this study range from a 4 to a 2. It is feasible that consolidation would result in an initial ISO rating of two for the entire district and it is conceivable to achieve an ISO rating of one once a consolidated district is in effective operation for a period of time. Consequently, homeowners and businesses could see reductions in their insurance premiums, which would in turn will help communities in the district become more affordable.

Interesting case studies from the report:

January 25, 2005 Yonkers, New York

On Tuesday, January 25, 2005 at approximately 6:54 pm Yonkers Fire Department received a call

for a fire at 100 Carol Avenue (overlooking Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx). The call was for a

fire in apartment 1A. This building is a seven (7) story 100 ft. by 100 ft. ordinary apartment

building. Ordinary construction means that the exterior walls are masonry, in this case brick, but

all interior walls, floors and the roof are wood. There are close to 1,000 of this style building in the

10 communities in this study, with no community lacking this type of construction. These

buildings were generally built between 1920 and 1960, they have numerous shafts and other spaces

for hidden fires and they are not protected with sprinkler systems. They are notorious for very

rapid fire spread.

When the first Yonkers fire units arrived on scene, they reported a working fire with people

coming down the fire escapes. The battalion chief requested another engine. This was at 6:59pm.

Over the next 10 minutes, the battalion chief ordered a 2nd, 3rd and 4th alarm. Within 23 minutes of

arriving he had requested a 5th alarm, a recall of off duty members and mutual aid.

Within 25 minutes of requesting the 5th alarm. All firefighters were evacuated as fire had taken

hold of the 1st through 4th floors. In the first 45 minutes of this fire approximately 100 civilians

were rescue via both ground and aerial ladders. This herculean effort to remove these civilians

could not have been accomplished in any other Westchester community and the Yonkers Fire

Department’s response prevented this incident from becoming a massive fatal fire. In fact only

minor injuries were reported.

Over the next two and a half (2½) hours the fire continued to expand and the fire went up to nine

(9) alarms with 22 engines and 11 ladders from Yonkers and mutual aid from Eastchester,

Fairview, Greenville, Mt Vernon, New Rochelle, Pelham, Pelham Manor and FDNY (NY City).

Bringing the total units on the scene to over 30 engines and 14 ladders. Recalled Yonkers

firefighters were able to man three spare engines and two spare ladders to cover the rest of the city.

By 10pm the building had collapsed and was declared a total loss. The lesson that everyone in

Westchester learned that day was without being able to place a high number of well coordinated

firefighters on the scene within the first 30 minutes this fire would have set a new record for the

number of lives lost. Mutual aid was useless in saving lives at this incident as it would have taken

too long to arrive. All of the departments in this study have the potential for this incident, but none

have the resources.

Hundreds of similar size and constructed apartment buildings exist in every district in this study.

None of the departments can adequately handle a similar fire, even with mutual aid. In the event a

similar fire scenario develops with the subject districts, the potential for loss of life exists without

the ability to place dozens of apparatus and fifty to one hundred firefighter’s on-scene, performing

in a coordinated fashion in less than fifteen (15) minutes. Current mutual aid arrangements within

the 10 departments provide approximately 30 firefighters and 12 officers if all departments are

called. They would respond with a total of 12 units (engines and ladders) with a response time of

10 to 20 minutes. Yonkers was able to place approximately 49 firefighters and 19 officers on the

scene in that time frame.

There are also similar structures throughout the rest of Westchester County, not just the study area, so the question should be asked everywhere "can you adequately respond to such a fire in your district/department?"

On April 4th 2006 Mt. Vernon had three unrelated working fires at the same time:

A suspicious fire in an occupied supermarket located at 220-230 South Fulton Avenue was

reported at 16:26 hours (4:26 pm). Upon arrival MVFD found a heavy fire condition in the rear of

the store with many people still exiting through the front door. Unknown if or how many people

might still be inside and store personnel wrestling a possible arson suspect in the front of the store.

MVFD had all units fully occupied for over two hours at this incident.

At approximately the same time (16:51 hours; 4:51 pm), a well-involved fire was reported in a

three story, two family home located at 133 Franklin Avenue. New Rochelle Engine 23 and

Pelham Manor Tower Ladder Three arrived to find a very advanced fire and requested a 2nd alarm.

New Rochelle Ladder 12 responding via another street to the rear of the home witnessed a victim

jumping from an upper window. Greenville Engine 151, Pelham Engine 5 and an engine and

ladder from Yonkers were the primary units on this incident.

As NRFD Engine 23 was arriving at the 133 Franklin Avenue Fire, Mt. Vernon received a call for

a reported house fire at 358 Union Avenue, with people trapped on an upper floor. Because all

remaining mutual aid resources had only moments before been committed to the second fire, when

this fire was reported additional mutual aid was requested to respond directly from their home

stations to the fire scene. This caused a very troubling dispatch: Fairview was requested to send a

ladder directly to the scene, with a report of people trapped on upper floors. Fairview’s Ladder is

more than 12 miles from the scene and would take about 20 minutes to arrive. If people were

trapped they had less than three minutes to live. Meanwhile, at least seven ladders that were closer

never responded. New Rochelle had two ladders in-service less than four miles away, Eastchester

had one ladder available 3.5 miles away, and Pelham had an available ladder two miles away. So,

why weren’t any of these ladders sent? A basic flaw in the mutual aid plan is that each department

will send only one or two apparatus because its primary responsibility is to protect the taxpayers of

its home district. New Rochelle had already sent an engine and a ladder to Mount Vernon. There

were still two ladder companies sitting in New Rochelle Fire Stations waiting to help people in

New Rochelle, while people were potentially trapped in a fire less than 4 miles away. In larger or

regional departments, the closest available resources are dispatched (i.e. the Pelham, New Rochelle

or Eastchester Ladders) as opposed to those resources that may be farthest from the incident (i.e.

Fairview) which, in a consolidated district, are sent instead to cover the empty fire stations.

Fortunately, this was a minor dryer fire and prior to Fairview’s arrival, Eastchester Engine 29 and

Ladder 16 were released from the South Fulton fire and were able to respond and handle this

incident.

March 9, 2008 Pelham, New York

Pelham experienced a fire in a commercial property located at the intersection of Lincoln Avenue

and First Avenue containing a convenience store and a large dry cleaner store. Pelham responded

with two engines, one ladder and the chief. Mutual aid was provided by several departments:

Eastchester provided one engine and a chief; Mount Vernon, New Rochelle, and Pelham Manor

each provided one engine, one ladder, and a chief; Greenville provided one ladder, and the Town

of Mamaroneck provided one engine to cover the Pelham Fire Station. In a properly staffed

consolidated department with unified command and established response protocols, this fire would

have required fewer resources traveling less distance.Consequently, these scenarios illustrate

critical problems of mutual aid, including but not limited to,

lack of unified command, lack of member accountability, and lack of company integrity. These

are problems that endanger public safety and substantially increase the risk of injury, death, and

damage to firefighters, the public, and property. Additional concerns with mutual aid involve the

span of control under a chief in a mutual aid response, the ability and/or willingness of mutual aid

partners to respond when needed, and the differences in policies, procedures, and equipment

among the mutual aid fire departments.

Given all this information, why is there an argument against regionalization? Sure, there are challenges but they are not insurmountable.

[IzzyEng4 427]

I think one consideration that should also be looked at is the home-rule acts established under state laws. Now having that said, does an separate incorporated village, borough, city or town have the right to be able to provide under their government and taxes public safety agencies? Should these autonomous governments also be allowed the right if they don't provide public safety under their charters of incorporation the right to contract for protection with another town / district agency?

What about the consolidation of several agencies withing an incorporated town? If there are semi-autonomous entities with in that incorporated town, and they also provide for public safety and the incorporated town does not, is it really feasible to go through trying to unify the agency in question under one authority?

You can have all the NFPA / IAFC recommendations available to throw out there to provide the information of proper staffing and response but if you don not first look at the right to home-rule which is granted by the powers of the state first, then the transition cannot be smooth. But at the same token, home-rule cannot be utilized as something to block progress either.

There are instances where consolidation has worked great. For example look at North Hudson Regional Fire Rescue. You had something like four boroughs, two villages and a town, whose "areas" varied in size from 1 square mile up to 6 (rough estimate) with possible the most populous area per square mile next to Brooklyn combine their fire-rescue services. This case it worked combining (I think) 6 separate fire departments into one entity.

In the City of West Haven, CT, you have three separate fire districts that were created before West Haven was incorporated as a town and later a consolidated town and city. Under its current charter, the City of West Haven does not have language to provide a fire department. This is undergoing a change as the voters in the city have passed a resolution to place the language in during their charter revision. Now the three fire districts were established at separate times. One was created when West Haven center was a incorporated borough withing the Town of Orange and the Allingtown and West Shore districts (then also part of the Town or Orange) were created in the early 1900s under a special act of incorporation through the state legislature. Now when they combine, if and when it does happen many years down the road, the three districts have to be consolidated under the city's amended charter, thus a plan has to be made to consolidate all career personnel and the volunteer entities under a new fire department administration.

On the other side of the spectrum, when can consolidation be too big and cumbersome? Can consolidation of the same services cause more problems and headaches than having separate entities? What about span and control issues, how will they be handled?

I think there are a lot of things that have to be looked at fist before everyone gets on the consolidation band-wagon. If a state government has the authority to allow the right of self-governing and with that right, the municipal entity has the right to provide under its charter services for the public, then residents have that right. But its up to the residents have to determine that. Some may like the fact they have their own public works department, fire department, police department since they see their tax dollars go directly to that entity rather than getting thrown in a large general fund for a consolidate area and their money being spent else where within that larger town or district.

I really think for any sort of consolidation plan, the overall picture of the right of self-government has to be looked at first before even trying to consolidate manpower and cutting apparatus and stations (if it gets to that). Its a long road, it can be a good thing or might be detrimental.

[IzzyEng4 427]

I forgot one thing, as well as to my post above, to even think about consolidation, everyone has to work together first in a good mutual aid system before even thinking about trying to combine forces.

[Mac8146 61]

Interesting in the quote used for Yonkers on Jan. 25, 2005 it states FDNY as part of the mutual aid, this did not happen at this fire on Caryl Ave. FDNY responded at approx. the same time as Yonkers, FDNY received reports of fire in VanCortlandt Park and sent units to the location. Upon arrival FDNY found the fire was on Caryl Ave and they did respond to that location. However FDNY was not used at this time which I may add was a an error in judgement due to the location of this fire being on border of both cities. It takes a while for Yonkers units to respond to the southern most area. FDNY was sent back to Bronx and at no other time was FDNY on this location. I was saddened to watch the 11 O'Clock news and see the entire building involved in fire. FDNY for the record had a 3Engine and 2Ladder plus BC response for the box, manpower that most definetly would have helped early on.

[Bnechis 3,961]

There have been many threads lately where the issue of consolidation/regionalization have been discussed. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the issue objectively and without it being associated with a specific incident or agency to avoid personal and emotional responses though I'm sure there will still be many among us who react that way. If we're all truly in this for the public, we should be able to rationally and professionally discuss the matter and promote what is best for the public, not ourselves.

Well said, Thanks Chris. Unfortinatly it has become very clear that many are not in it for the public. To many politicians are afraid of lossing power, same for the unions, volunteers, and some of the chiefs (I say some, because they supported the study). Now I have always said that consolidation is in the best interest of the members (as well as the public). Arriving with enough ff's to be safe, requiring enough officers to supervise (thus also promoting more officers)and not having to fight for table scraps (tax base)is in every firefighters best interest. With the issues that are affecting many of the depts in the study (Budget cuts, layoffs and forced ellimination).

"We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately" - Benjamin Franklin (How ironic that he was a fire chief).

What is coming down the road over the next 3-5 years will shape the fire service, if we do not lead this change, it will roll right over the top of us.

Given the study's findings, it is hard to dispute that regionalization and consolidation would not be a good thing for the targeted departments.

But, I am sure that many will try hard to dispute the idea. I believe that consolidation is coming, I do not know if it will be during my career, my lifetime or my childs, but it will happen. Then we will look back at this time in the future and question why we did not fight harder to make it happen sooner.

NFPA 1710 is pretty clear in its recommendation (requirement) that there be a staff of four on an engine or a ladder - six if "In jurisdictions with tactical hazards, high hazard occupancies, high incident frequencies, geographical restrictions,or other pertinent factors as identified by the authority having jurisdiction, these companies shall be staffed with a minimum of five or six on-duty members.

How many "career" FD's in Westchester County meet NFPA 1710? Is it just Yonkers or do others make the grade?

Yonkers is the only dept that meets the 3ff/1of per rig and 16 ffs/of on a 1st alarm, but that does not meet NFPA 1710. The standard also says that staffing is based on a 2,000 sq ft structure without a basement. Based on that YFD is under staffed and all other depts. are in worst shap than YFD.

On the volunteer side, NFPA 1720 describes the staffing and response time criteria for volunteer agencies. Do the volunteer FD's in Westchester meet this standard? Would they if districts were consolidated and a regional approach was used?

They are not even close and almost every thread here has shown that. Yes they would, but we would not want that because ____ (fill in BS reason here) & pound on ones chest at the same time.

There are also similar structures throughout the rest of Westchester County, not just the study area, so the question should be asked everywhere "can you adequately respond to such a fire in your district/department?"

If that fire occured in any of the other 57 departments in Westchester we would make the cover of every magazine in the country. THe only difference from one dept to another would be the body count. This is when the public will start asking questions of their fire chief and this is when the "we did our best" will be tested in the court of public opinion.

Given all this information, why is there an argument against regionalization? Sure, there are challenges but they are not insurmountable.

Because it cant work, I will no longer be king, just because it works everywhere else does not mean it will work here, We dont needed it since everything here is perfect, We cant work with them they have yellow trucks....etc....etc...

[Bnechis 3,961]

Interesting in the quote used for Yonkers on Jan. 25, 2005 it states FDNY as part of the mutual aid, this did not happen at this fire on Caryl Ave.

I wrote the info in the study based on the official fire report that was given to me by YFD.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I forgot one thing, as well as to my post above, to even think about consolidation, everyone has to work together first in a good mutual aid system before even thinking about trying to combine forces.

3 years ago the Province of Quebec ordered 100's of its FD's to merge. They mad it simple since they collect & redistribute the taxes. In talking with fire officers from Montreal, they said they had never done Mutual aid before the consolidation they said the biggest challanges included different types of equipment, no common radios, different terminology and here is the best one, 25% of the departments only speak english while the majority only french.

They claimed that as of last March it was working well.

If they can get past those issues and we already do work together, we should have no problem.

The big issue in most consolidations (like No. Hudson or Quebec's) it was forced on the FD's by the oversight governments. We are proposing to do this on our terms.

[R1SmokeEater 359]

Interesting in the quote used for Yonkers on Jan. 25, 2005 it states FDNY as part of the mutual aid, this did not happen at this fire on Caryl Ave. FDNY responded at approx. the same time as Yonkers, FDNY received reports of fire in VanCortlandt Park and sent units to the location. Upon arrival FDNY found the fire was on Caryl Ave and they did respond to that location. However FDNY was not used at this time which I may add was a an error in judgement due to the location of this fire being on border of both cities. It takes a while for Yonkers units to respond to the southern most area. FDNY was sent back to Bronx and at no other time was FDNY on this location. I was saddened to watch the 11 O'Clock news and see the entire building involved in fire. FDNY for the record had a 3Engine and 2Ladder plus BC response for the box, manpower that most definetly would have helped early on.

-Yes, right. No FDNY/County m/a on Caryl (Saw the 27Bn wander over) The NY units mentioned seemd to be from 85 BxRvRd job.

Edited February 15, 2010 by R1SmokeEater

[Mac8146 61]

FDNY did respond to the Bronx River Road job, also used up on Oak Street fire that had multiple DOA's. These are the only incidents other than FF Joyce funeral coverage that FDNY has been in Yonkers in the last few years as far as I remember.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I had mentioned that political change was in the air and it would drive this, here is what occured this week that might affect FD consolidation:

Feb. 11, 2010 "Mandell sets three goals for village" - The Journal News

Liz Feld is stepping down from the Larchmont Village Board at the end of her term on March 31, after serving four years as mayor and another four as trustee. Running for her position in the March 16 elections will be Josh Mandell. He is running unopposed for Mayor.

June 4, 2009 - "Mayor Liz Feld has selected a financial investor and political newcomer, Josh Mandell, to fill the vacancy on the Village Board of Trustees.......Mandell Will Be Fire Commissioner. Mr. Mandell joined the Larchmont Fire Department in July of 2007, a few months after the board’s appointment of a paid chief precipitated the resignation of many long-term volunteers. Mr. Mandell is now certified as an interior firefighter. As fire commissioner, Mr. Mandell said his primary responsibility will be to “insure the safe and efficient operation of the department by offering the assistance, consideration and support of the Village Board,” To that end, ”I’d like to work with the chief and others to insure the community enjoys the same local services our citizens have always enjoyed,” he said.

Another issue that may confront the new fire commissioner is allocating resources for the department. ”They need to either hire more personnel or recruit more active volunteers,” said Mr. Wiener. “You need to have enough people to safely fight the fires – for the residents and for the firefighters. I hope Josh will have the time to evaluate this in a more expeditious manner.” http://www.larchmontgazette.com/news/political-newcomer-is-new-vol-trustee/

"With government budgets tight and revenues shrinking, consolidation of services has assumed a position of great urgency among elected officials in the area. The Larchmont Village Board took up the topic at their Monday, July 7 meeting with announcements about a new local committee and discussion of a newly released study on merging ten fire departments in Southern Westchester." "Studying Consolidation: Locally and Near By..........Larchmont’s newest trustee, Josh Mandell, announced that the Town of Mamaroneck and the villages of Larchmont and Mamaroneck had formed a Tri-municipal Shared Services/Consolidation Study Group to identify efficiencies and cost savings. They will explore ways in which sharing services or consolidation of some functions can achieve these objectives. (See also: New Tri-Muni Group To Study Possible Consolidation.)"....."Mr. Mandell also pointed to the Pace University’s study on the consolidation of fire services, which he said raises more questions than it provides answers. The study looked at how a higher level of service could be delivered more efficiently by merging departments and districts across ten Southern Westchester communities, including Larchmont Village. The report did show how consolidation can achieve better service, said Mr. Mandell, but the costs are not yet clear. A second phase of the study, expected within 9 months, will provide further financial analysis." http://www.larchmontgazette.com/news/vol-taps-new-former-trustee-for-consolidation-group/

[61MACKBR1 222]

Capt Bnechis and Chris have summed this all up in a very precise and professional manner. Consolidation is the only way "Proper and Adequate" Manpower will be available, based upon Government Fire Studies, within Westchester County. The concept of a Southern and Northern Westchester Fire District have been discussed for a very long time, with Capt. Bnechis, Chief Fitzpatrick and others within both the Paid and Volunteer Fire Services in Westchester County, help.

Unfortunately, as has been said above, EGO's, Political Pull, Unions, Volunteer vs. Paid Turf Wars/Battles, etc, have come in the way of making this plan work for the betterment of both the FIRE SERVICE and the PUBLIC.

"The Maddness Has To Stop and Stop NOW !!!"

Great Post Chris and Great Work Capt. Bnechis.

[JAD622 40]

"We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately" - Benjamin Franklin (How ironic that he was a fire chief).

I think he was one of our MANY Chiefs!!!!!!!

[JFLYNN 681]

Interesting in the quote used for Yonkers on Jan. 25, 2005 it states FDNY as part of the mutual aid, this did not happen at this fire on Caryl Ave. FDNY responded at approx. the same time as Yonkers, FDNY received reports of fire in VanCortlandt Park and sent units to the location. Upon arrival FDNY found the fire was on Caryl Ave and they did respond to that location. However FDNY was not used at this time which I may add was a an error in judgement due to the location of this fire being on border of both cities. It takes a while for Yonkers units to respond to the southern most area. FDNY was sent back to Bronx and at no other time was FDNY on this location. I was saddened to watch the 11 O'Clock news and see the entire building involved in fire. FDNY for the record had a 3Engine and 2Ladder plus BC response for the box, manpower that most definetly would have helped early on.

The entire building was involved in fire from 10 minutes after our arrival.

Yes, FDNY did not go to work at this fire and in hindsight a 3 and 2 response from FDNY would have been very helpful. The problem is as mentioned in the PACE study, mutual aid plans are drawn up by County...so our civilian dispachers who are supervised and controlled by Police (no uniformed Fire Supervisors at all) would not think to request an FDNY response until all county resources are used up, even if a fire of this magnitude, bordering the Bronx, would seem to be the ideal case for an FDNY response into Yonkers. The Battalion, and later Deputy Chiefs on scene had their hands full with numerous reports of people trapped and rescues being made, as well as at least one, maybe more MAYDAYS, so they would not have had the time to worry about who was coming early on, they were just requesting what they needed and hoping to get it from somewhere.

The FDNY BC who at one point approached the Yonkers first due Battalion Chief, I am told, did not offer the 3 and 2 from FDNY or even tell our Chief that they were staged, but he did offer some "suggestions" that the highly experienced Yonkers Battalion Chief did not feel were helpful. Apparently, when the first due Yonkers Battalion Chief, who was understandably quite busy, did not give the FDNY Chief his full attention, the FDNY Chief decided to leave.

We very much appreciate the times we have received mutual aid and many other types of invaluable assistance from our brothers in FDNY. It is understandably hard at times for members of FDNY, with basically unlimited resources, to understand the operations of a smaller, albeit, capable and experienced department such as Yonkers.

[JFLYNN 681]

I wrote the info in the study based on the official fire report that was given to me by YFD.

BTW I think there was a fatality at this job also.

[61MACKBR1 222]

Chief Flynn - What you and the Yonkers Fire Department did to save lives at the Caryl Avenue fire was nothing more than "THE BEST BEING THE BEST" From the first arriving Battalion Chief, to the Department Chiefs and Commissioner, every member of the Yonkers Fire Department who worked that job should be commended. "YOU SAVED LIVES THAT DAY." Like you said, during a job of this magnitude, it is very difficult for the First Arriving Battiion Chief to determine what outside Fire Department need to be assigned. All they are concerned about is the amount of additional Engine Companies and Ladder Companies needed for the job, not where they are coming from. As you also mentioned, this needs to be the PRIMARY JOB of the "60 Control County Dispatcher".

Could a Regionalized Fire District (ie: Southern Westchester County Fire District) with proper coverage plans in place, have helped in handling such an incident as the Caryl Avenue job, better? Is this the answer? (I believe it to be, but I will leave that up to the Professionals!!) OR is it that the current Mutual Aid Program in Westchester County Flawed? OR is it a combination?

Maybe Chief Flynn, Captain Bnechis, and others here on EMTBravo.net can answer this from their Professional Firefighting Management Experience, for us to all learn and grow from?

The entire building was involved in fire from 10 minutes after our arrival.

Yes, FDNY did not go to work at this fire and in hindsight a 3 and 2 response from FDNY would have been very helpful. The problem is as mentioned in the PACE study, mutual aid plans are drawn up by County...so our civilian dispachers who are supervised and controlled by Police (no uniformed Fire Supervisors at all) would not think to request an FDNY response until all county resources are used up, even if a fire of this magnitude, bordering the Bronx, would seem to be the ideal case for an FDNY response into Yonkers. The Battalion, and later Deputy Chiefs on scene had their hands full with numerous reports of people trapped and rescues being made, as well as at least one, maybe more MAYDAYS, so they would not have had the time to worry about who was coming early on, they were just requesting what they needed and hoping to get it from somewhere.

The FDNY BC who at one point approached the Yonkers first due Battalion Chief, I am told, did not offer the 3 and 2 from FDNY or even tell our Chief that they were staged, but he did offer some "suggestions" that the highly experienced Yonkers Battalion Chief did not feel were helpful. Apparently, when the first due Yonkers Battalion Chief, who was understandably quite busy, did not give the FDNY Chief his full attention, the FDNY Chief decided to leave.

We very much appreciate the times we have received mutual aid and many other types of invaluable assistance from our brothers in FDNY. It is understandably hard at times for members of FDNY, with basically unlimited resources, to understand the operations of a smaller, albeit, capable and experienced department such as Yonkers.

[Mac8146 61]

JFLYNN i am not sure that our BC got too involved in this incident, I was at the scene and tried to convince the BC to get us involved but as you say you have your system for mutual aid and if you asked the approval would have to come from an FDNY staff chief on duty, a timely process to say the least. It would be easier if there was a mutual aid system for a fire like this in southern yonkers where FDNY is closer than county resources. I know Yonkers had their hands full due to volume of fire and this location and that the response times must have been long it only seems right to have some sort of agreement in place. We did answer a few more smoke in the area calls in north riverdale that night. Your guys did a great job under extreme conditions that night.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

In the City of West Haven, CT, you have three separate fire districts that were created before West Haven was incorporated as a town and later a consolidated town and city. Under its current charter, the City of West Haven does not have language to provide a fire department. This is undergoing a change as the voters in the city have passed a resolution to place the language in during their charter revision. Now the three fire districts were established at separate times. One was created when West Haven center was a incorporated borough withing the Town of Orange and the Allingtown and West Shore districts (then also part of the Town or Orange) were created in the early 1900s under a special act of incorporation through the state legislature. Now when they combine, if and when it does happen many years down the road, the three districts have to be consolidated under the city's amended charter, thus a plan has to be made to consolidate all career personnel and the volunteer entities under a new fire department administration.

Izzy, you're a couple months behind. West Haven DID amend its charter, allowing for the city to provide a fire department. Now the districts themselves need to come together to consolidate, and the city needs to accept it. But the problem is, there is 70+ million in pension debt between the three districts. What Mayor is going to want to absorb that debt? Not a smart one. Thats one (of many) problems with the entire consolidation argument. It is years out, but its in the works, committees are together on the issue.

Don't get me wrong, West Haven SHOULD consolidate, but its going to take some work. The staffing issues would certainly be a concern. In Allingtown, the Tower runs with 2 people, in West Haven Center the Ladder runs with either 3 or 4, and in the Shore they run with 3. Engine Company Staffing is similarly strange, so how do we bring up the manpower to standard? Hire people. The thought of that alone will scare most taxpayers away. Sooner or later all this stuff needs to get put on the table and figured out.

[JFLYNN 681]

JFLYNN i am not sure that our BC got too involved in this incident, I was at the scene and tried to convince the BC to get us involved but as you say you have your system for mutual aid and if you asked the approval would have to come from an FDNY staff chief on duty, a timely process to say the least. It would be easier if there was a mutual aid system for a fire like this in southern yonkers where FDNY is closer than county resources. I know Yonkers had their hands full due to volume of fire and this location and that the response times must have been long it only seems right to have some sort of agreement in place. We did answer a few more smoke in the area calls in north riverdale that night. Your guys did a great job under extreme conditions that night.

No, I don't think your BC got too involved either. I wasn't there until much later that night, but I was told by our first due BC, a very sharp and experienced guy who is now retired, that pretty early on, an FDNY BC walked up and said something like, "you guys gotta get more water on this fire" (at least that's how he heard it, lol...in hindsight he thought it was pretty funny but he wasn't laughing at the time)...there wasn't a lot showing from the front of the building but there was fire venting from at least twenty windows in the rear, numerous rescues were in progress (not removals, rescues), including this Chief's Aide, who wound up on the top floor rear with a family hanging out a window and being rescued by Tower Ladder. Also, at least one Mayday and many other companies making rescues. Lots of calls for help on the radio, etc. so our BC said something like, "thanks, I'll take that under advisement"...that was about the extent of the interaction from what I was told and it's perfectly understandable from both sides.

As far as having a mutual aid system for a fire like this in Southern Yonkers where FDNY is closer than County resources, that would be the purview of our Commissioner and Chief of Ops., but I imagine the problems would be #1. it's not actually mutual aid unless it goes both ways and I'm not so sure FDNY would be comfortable having a formal plan to operate with any outside departments, even Yonkers #2. Legal issues as I believe there is some NYS law covering mutual aid which requires or at least recommends that it be within the county before going out of the county...I'm not sure on this though...Bnechis???

In any event, although we strive to be as self sufficient as possible, it's good to know that we have you guys as our neighbors for those times when we are out of options.

In regard to what another poster asked about whether a Southern Westchester Regional Career Department being available as a mutual aid partner would have made a response to this fire much more efficient, my answer would be a resounding yes.

[JFLYNN 681]

No, I don't think your BC got too involved either. I wasn't there until much later that night, but I was told by our first due BC, a very sharp and experienced guy who is now retired, that pretty early on, an FDNY BC walked up and said something like, "you guys gotta get more water on this fire" (at least that's how he heard it, lol...in hindsight he thought it was pretty funny but he wasn't laughing at the time)...there wasn't a lot showing from the front of the building but there was fire venting from at least twenty windows in the rear, numerous rescues were in progress (not removals, rescues), including this Chief's Aide, who wound up on the top floor rear with a family hanging out a window and being rescued by Tower Ladder. Also, at least one Mayday and many other companies making rescues. Lots of calls for help on the radio, etc. so our BC said something like, "thanks, I'll take that under advisement"...that was about the extent of the interaction from what I was told and it's perfectly understandable from both sides.

As far as having a mutual aid system for a fire like this in Southern Yonkers where FDNY is closer than County resources, that would be the purview of our Commissioner and Chief of Ops., but I imagine the problems would be #1. it's not actually mutual aid unless it goes both ways and I'm not so sure FDNY would be comfortable having a formal plan to operate with any outside departments, even Yonkers #2. Legal issues as I believe there is some NYS law covering mutual aid which requires or at least recommends that it be within the county before going out of the county...I'm not sure on this though...Bnechis???

In any event, although we strive to be as self sufficient as possible, it's good to know that we have you guys as our neighbors for those times when we are out of options.

In regard to what another poster asked about whether a Southern Westchester Regional Career Department being available as a mutual aid partner would have made a response to this fire much more efficient, my answer would be a resounding yes.

Oh, I should add that there actually are formal mutual aid plans now (post 911) for Yonkers and other Westchester career departments to provide mutual aid to NYC when requested. Training has taken place, but I believe this would be for another large scale terrorist incident. Also, in this scenario, Yonkers would quickly detail Firefighters over to companies going into NYC so that there would be 5 Firefighters and an Officer per company and then call back off duty members to backfill the depleted companies remaining in Yonkers.

[Bnechis 3,961]

#2. Legal issues as I believe there is some NYS law covering mutual aid which requires or at least recommends that it be within the county before going out of the county...I'm not sure on this though...Bnechis???

I have never heard of this. I do know there are some issues with cross state automatic aid, but thats it.

In regard to what another poster asked about whether a Southern Westchester Regional Career Department being available as a mutual aid partner would have made a response to this fire much more efficient, my answer would be a resounding yes.

Thanks Chief.

To get the 10 depts. in the study today you would need to call 6 different dispatchers.

[Mac8146 61]

Chief Flynn you are right about the amount of fire at this job, the whole rear looked like a fireball from broadway as we responded up. I wish politics would take a back seat to life threatening issues such as fire responses, but that is something no one can change. Both departments continue to work together, thanks for the input.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

As NRFD Engine 23 was arriving at the 133 Franklin Avenue Fire, Mt. Vernon received a call for

a reported house fire at 358 Union Avenue, with people trapped on an upper floor. Because all

remaining mutual aid resources had only moments before been committed to the second fire, when

this fire was reported additional mutual aid was requested to respond directly from their home

stations to the fire scene. This caused a very troubling dispatch: Fairview was requested to send a

ladder directly to the scene, with a report of people trapped on upper floors. Fairview’s Ladder is

more than 12 miles from the scene and would take about 20 minutes to arrive. If people were

trapped they had less than three minutes to live. Meanwhile, at least seven ladders that were closer

never responded. New Rochelle had two ladders in-service less than four miles away, Eastchester

had one ladder available 3.5 miles away, and Pelham had an available ladder two miles away. So,

why weren’t any of these ladders sent? A basic flaw in the mutual aid plan is that each department

will send only one or two apparatus because its primary responsibility is to protect the taxpayers of

its home district. New Rochelle had already sent an engine and a ladder to Mount Vernon. There

were still two ladder companies sitting in New Rochelle Fire Stations waiting to help people in

New Rochelle, while people were potentially trapped in a fire less than 4 miles away. In larger or

regional departments, the closest available resources are dispatched (i.e. the Pelham, New Rochelle

or Eastchester Ladders) as opposed to those resources that may be farthest from the incident (i.e.

Fairview) which, in a consolidated district, are sent instead to cover the empty fire stations.

Fortunately, this was a minor dryer fire and prior to Fairview’s arrival, Eastchester Engine 29 and

Ladder 16 were released from the South Fulton fire and were able to respond and handle this

incident.

Interesting discussion. I particularly enjoyed this narative of the course of events that occured in Mt. Vernon, although it's not entirely accurate. I happened to be tour commander in Eastchester that evening. We received the call from 60-Control and the dispatcher stated "I need an engine and a truck right away. We have multiple fires in Mt. Vernon and no units available. What can you give me?"

Well, thinking as quickly as possible, I told them they could have AN engine AND A truck from us, right away. This was contrary to the standing dysfunctional mutual-aid policy that stated at the time words to the effect of a mutual aid call for an engine or truck shall be delivered by consolidating two companies (of two firefighters in each company) onto ONE requested piece of apparatus. In this case, we would send an engine or truck, with the consolidated crew from Ladder 16 w/a Lt (two guys) and Engine 29 with two guys. the two companies would meet at one firehouse, transfer over to a somewhat properly staffed rig (funny and ironic that we would give Mt. Vernon a 4 man rig, yet in Eastchester we only provide two man apparatus for the taxpayers footing the bill) and respond. But what if they got on scene and needed an aerial and an engine? I only went by the dispatchers request.

The urgency in the dispatchers voice led me to do what I thought was the right thing, dysfunctional policy be damned, we'll sort it out later.

The rigs were sent to the 133 Frankin Ave. job, and rerouted to the Union Ave. job enroute. The 18 Battalion Coordinator was in communication with me via Nextel, and I had to direct the responding Eastchester apparatus to Union Ave over our radio frequency. I did this by pulling a Westchester County map out of the desk, and Nextel-ing the 18 Batt, and Ladder 16 officer.

Like the narrative says, it turns out it was a dryer fire, easily controlled by our units and I think Fairview.

But take a look at the cluster this was just to get two fire trucks into the city of MV for three fires!

Oh and by the way, I got called on the carpet by the chief at the time, next day, for sending two rigs. I got reamed. Total humiliation. NICE SYSTEM.

People wonder why I'm retired from that former nuthouse of a job.

I can only hope and pray things get better, have gotten better for mutal-aid requests. I know depts. are working better together, and training has improved, etc.

It wasn't but a few years ago, we were still in the dark ages, and to pull that system out of those dark ages took years off of people's careers. Eastchester lost quite a few officers, in the primes of their careers, because they were sick and tired of the ridiculousness of the entire system, the incomeptency of some of the leadership, and the downright jealousy of others who begrudge members who are able to accomplish improvements, in spite of the resistance from those "keep the bar low" type of leaders.

Keep rocking the boat fellas. It's the right thing to do if your goal is to improve delivery of service to the people you are sworn to protect.

[Bnechis 3,961]

One interesting thing I have learned from this thread is we need to consolidate documentation. The Yonkers incident I recieved the call narative from YFD (in looking at it, they sent 2 narratives with the incident location info cut off in the fax) so the 2 incidents may have been switched. The MV incident report was handed to me by the DC who was incharge that day (so if there are inacuracies in what was written, those issues never made it into the original incident reports).

All chiefs in the career chiefs were asked to review the study for acuracy prior to the final, and neither of these issues came up.

This shows how critical good documentation is after the fact.

I believe the examples are still valid, as the problems identified still remain.

[Guest USAFvet]

In reviewing the Pace press release it was described that the study:

"....evaluates the feasibility of consolidating 10 fire departments serving a population of 250,000 people in a 50 square mile area of Westchester County. The departments are those of Eastchester, Fairview, Greenville, Hartsdale, Larchmont, Mount Vernon, New Rochelle, Pelham, Pelham Manor, and Scarsdale."

The premise of using the very high population density concept in the stated geographic area of the county seems to have driven the decision making, but it left out The City of White Plains from the 10 department suggestion.

Anyone care to comment?

Edited February 16, 2010 by USAFvet

[JAD622 40]

In regard to what another poster asked about whether a Southern Westchester Regional Career Department being available as a mutual aid partner would have made a response to this fire much more efficient, my answer would be a resounding yes.

I for one truly believe that the time has come in today's fire service to seriously consider "Regionalization and/or Consolidation".There are many driving factors that cannot be ignored any longer, with first and foremost being the economy driven cutbacks we see rolling across the country. Many cities and small towns are already sorely understaffed and now are looking to cut even further. It seems it's only a matter of time until the system becomes so insufficient that something will have to be done.

My question is; do we sit idle and wait to see if it happens? Or, do we try to start the momentum and get people to understand that this is a matter of survival. Should we push our governments to start taking a serious look at this option instead of cutting vital services further and putting ourselves and the public at greater risk? The time has come to step up and promote the idea and get people thinking in a proactive direction instead of waiting for the Sky to Fall.

[Bnechis 3,961]

The premise of the very high population density in the stated geographic area of the county seems to have driven the decision making, but it entirely left out The City of White Plains. Anyone care to comment?

The career chiefs concept was the study was of the "willing". Each chief had to go back to the elected leadership (board of fire commissioners, Manager or Mayor) to be included.

White Plains (and Yonkers) assisted in the study but opted out of being a particapent. The door was never shut on any dept. as long as they were contiguos (shared a boarder).

As we consider the next phase, which is primarily a super detailed financial review, depts can be added. White Plains has had a major change in leadership and is facing a massive budget shortfall. Who knows, they would be welcomed if they are interested.

This issue was documented in the study.

Edited February 16, 2010 by Bnechis

[61MACKBR1 222]

The career chiefs concept was the study was of the "willing". Each chief had to go back to the elected leadership (board of fire commissioners, Manager or Mayor) to be included.

White Plains (and Yonkers) assisted in the study but opted out of being a particapent. The door was never shut on any dept. as long as they were contiguos (shared a boarder).

As we consider the next phase, which is primarily a super detailed financial review, depts can be added. White Plains has had a major change in leadership and is facing a massive budget shortfall. Who knows, they would be welcomed if they are interested.

This issue was documented in the study.

Here is a very important question for Captain Bnechis, Chief Flynn, Chief Fitzpatrick and NOW Commissioner Chong of White Plains. If a Consolidation/Regionalization of Fire Services in Westchester County, into, lets say a Northern Westchester County Fire District and a Southern Westchester County Fire District, the question I have to those above (and all others) is WOULD and/or SHOULD the City of White Plains AND the City of Yonkers be included in such a Regionalizaiton/Consolidation plan, PROVIDED that both cities would ONLY benefit by the increased service provided WITHOUT any reductions in Manpower and Equipment? (Yonkers FD is the CENTERPIECE for Special Operations in Westchester County and with such, in my opinion, no compromise should be made to existing services within YFD, especially given the fact that with BOTH the Ridge Hill Project currently underway and the Proposed Yonkers Downtown Development seriously being considered as a reality, YFD would be undermanned by say 2 to 3 engine companies and 2 ladder companies (ie: 301, 302, 305, Ladder 76, and Ladder 77).

Again, I defer to the Professionals (Bnechis, Fitzpatrick, Flynn and Chung) and any other Fire Management Professionals in Westchester County, could and better SHOULD White Plains and Yonkers be included in the end result of such a Regionalization Plan within Westchester County?

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Here is a very important question for Captain Bnechis, Chief Flynn, Chief Fitzpatrick and NOW Commissioner Chung of White Plains. If a Consolidation/Regionalization of Fire Services in Westchester County, into, lets say a Northern Westchester County Fire District and a Southern Westchester County Fire District, the question I have to those above (and all others) is WOULD and/or SHOULD the City of White Plains AND the City of Yonkers be included in such a Regionalizaiton/Consolidation plan, PROVIDED that both cities would ONLY benefit by the increased service provided WITHOUT any reductions in Manpower and Equipment? (Yonkers FD is the CENTERPIECE for Special Operations in Westchester County and with such, in my opinion, no compromise should be made to existing services within YFD, especially given the fact that with BOTH the Ridge Hill Project currently underway and the Proposed Yonkers Downtown Development seriously being considered as a reality, YFD would be undermanned by say 2 to 3 engine companies and 2 ladder companies (ie: 301, 302, 305, Ladder 76, and Ladder 77).

Again, I defer to the Professionals (Bnechis, Fitzpatrick, Flynn and Chung) and any other Fire Management Professionals in Westchester County, could and better SHOULD White Plains and Yonkers be included in the end result of such a Regionalization Plan within Westchester County?

You always ask good questions. You should have taken the test, got on the job and maybe made a difference yourself.

[IzzyEng4 427]

Izzy, you're a couple months behind. West Haven DID amend its charter, allowing for the city to provide a fire department......

I have not seen anything from the state legislature issued yet about West Haven's charter change and its approval. The residents only voted to have the charter changed and I know the city had sent a request to the state legislature for it. Just because the city residents voted for it and approved it, it still has to be approved by the state legislature to be place in the charter. It still has to go through the proper channels to make sure its legal and the wording is found correct before the legislature will accept the change to the city's charter. I have to search the Special and Public Acts for 2009 when its published to see if it was approved by the house and senate.

If it has not been approved by the state legislature yet, it would be more than likely passed soon. Rarely does something get kicked back and not approved. A city, town or borough in CT cannot just change their charter, as its issued by the state, thus they have to approve the change as well.

[whoisdan 7]

Just to add my two cents in here guys--I was one of the FF at this job (Caryl Ave) I was also the one which called in the MAYDAY, as well as the FF who located (and dragged down the hall) the single (one) fatality at this job (A 66 yr. old woman). Knowing the job first hand, and being there on a first due truck company, I can confirm all that has been written about the job. The bulk of the fire was in the Southwest rear of the building; it was caused by a broken gas main on the first floor which the super had "drilled" through while making ordinary repairs. Within minutes of arriving at the scene, there were literally 20 to 30 active rescues underway; many of which were extremely hazerdous and extremely difficult. While later on in the job, additional manpower may have helped relieve the exhausted crews; Yonkers FD responded (as usual) with the appropriate dispatching and backup dispatching as the job called for. I do think that many lives would have been lost that night if Yonkers was not staffed they way we are.

Having also been at the BRR job from start to finish, I can also attest to the fact that FDNY did show up and was extremly helpful and appreciated. This very large job had a tremendous amount of fireload and lifehazard. Once again, Yonkers FD dispatched to the best of their ability, recalling all off-duty manpower and manning additional units. But once all of our resources were depleted, it was nice to have helping hands from our brothers to the South.

I'm not here to tout Yonkers as the best, nor to chime in on the debate over departmental consolidation (although, I'm not a fan, and will reserve comments for another thread)I simply wanted to make sure the facts were known about these two referenced jobs, and to thank our neighbors (FDNY, New Rochelle, Eastchester, Mt. Vernon, etc) for the times we needed them and they answered the call). It's always nice to have an extra set of hands...now if we can just get past the politics........