Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Automatic aid agreements-Perpetuating the Bureaucracy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
    You want to see a failing fire department, look for one that relies on an auto aid agreement with other communities to provide first response. Fail.
    So your telling me that PGFD, or any of the numerous stations/departments in the DC metro area (that operate under the county FD flag) are failing? just because they have units responding from another station or another department on dispatch, which gets manpower to the scene faster..... are you sure you're a real firefighter? just getting the T shirt doesn't count....
    Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
    I have never seen folks so afraid to discuss the pitfalls of auto aid compared to lawful mergers, annexations, creating new fire districts or even regional fire authorities. All requiring voter approval.
    I've never seen someone so afraid of getting more help to the scene of an incident faster..... no need to merge or annex, or create new fire districts. When it sounds really bad, its better to have more people there faster than not enough 10 minutes from now.
    Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
    Auto aid deals do not require a vote of the people.and have all the different taxpayer groups paying different amounts of tax dollars for the same all for one fire service. Doesn't sound fair to me. How about you?
    actually, that's the definition of any mutual aid, automatic or not. Your tax dollars are paying for your fire department to fight a fire elsewhere. consequently, when you have a big fire, someone else's tax dollars pay those fire trucks to come to your fire. it all balances out, and if it isn't a close to equal balance, then have those discussions.
    Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
    Auto aid deals also only merge the fire response, but not the fire admins. The voter approved ways of joining fire rescue services also merges fire administrations. And many fire admins are costly. Why have redundant Fire Admins?
    agreed, you have too many administrators, too much admin staff, and are top heavy.... why don't you go complain to your city manager and recommend they trim some fat?
    Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
    I'm just a retired firefighter that gives a crap. Obviously the naysayers here are the bureaucracy I speak of and they want all the Fire Bureaucracy they can get. Have fun with that. I give a crap about fairness to Taxpayers. And if merging firefighters in different fire agencies is done, then merging their fire admins should be done too...
    Why merge fire departments? should your fire department, that protects a coverage area of 10,000 people be able to assemble 4 engines, 2 ladders, and a chief, when the vast majority of your calls aren't structure fires? assuming 20 FT FFs, doing 3 shifts, that's 6 per shift, 3 on the engine and 3 on the ladder/rescue. Those numbers can handle most AFAs, more MVCs, most medical assists, and most service calls, which make up 90% of your calls. That's what your tax dollars pay for. When you have a house fire and you need more, you call for assistance from your neighbors. the same goes for your neighbor; they handle most calls themselves, but when it sounds big, they start heading over immediately. Chief's don't get auto aided, their job is to watch their own department; but I'll take an auto aid engine or ladder any time.

    I have been on 100% career departments, 100% volunteer, and combination. My current department is combination, with two stations, one that staffs 3 FFs 24/7, and one that staffs 2 FFs 24/7, and 1 6a to 6pm. if we get a dispatch of a house fire, we guarantee two engines can respond (and maybe our tanker, but that puts 2 on the engine). our auto aid will send additional engines and tankers. And we will provide aid to them if we need. we handle the majority of our calls using our our resources, but when we have a major calls, or the potential for a major call, we start assistance early on; that's just how rural departments work.
    Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
    This auto aid discussion has nothing to do with the top heavy FD protecting me in my retirement. I live on an island in Puget sound, any aid is a slow ferry ride from the main land. Mutual aid works, just barely. No need even trying auto aid. But I wouldn't mind seeing our Island FD merge with a mainland FD to provide fire protection on our island and the mainland.
    sounds like you have your next topic of discussion at the city council meeting. maybe the mainland FD doesn't want to protect your island? have you ever thought of that? after all, the slow ferry ride to get units from the mainland to the island sounds sounds like a good idea when it's your house on fire....
    If my basic HazMat training has taught me nothing else, it's that if you see a glowing green monkey running away from something, follow that monkey!

    FF/EMT/DBP

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post

      You are long winded, if nothing else.
      Oh zing!! Quite humorous from the guy who has 35 posts in a 72 post thread belaboring a local tax issue.

      Go start your own thread on taxation vs utility fees. F&%K utility fees for FD if you ask me. .

      If you want my thoughts on FD utility fees go see my post under ambulances.
      Yeah, and you are all over the place over there too.

      And now you are on a rant about unfair property taxes and merged voter approved FD's costing three times as much. Get out of the weeds or start your own thread. Nobody likes taxes but they gotta be paid. Whiner.
      I am not the one whining about my fire tax. I would even have to look up how much I pay, its a rounding error compared with the school board. You are the one bent out of shape over the different choices communities make when it comes to financing their fire protection.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
        Have fun Chief. I thought I was a consultant according to you? You confused much? They don't have a Fire Chiefs' forum?

        I don't like having firefighter EMT's that are trained to the same level doing the same work side by side, one for half the hourly wage of the other. Rubs me wrong. And they can't be called back for major emergencies because of part time hours restrictions.

        I think it is even easier saving money by joining forces lawfully and merging fire administrations, not just merging the firefighters through auto aid.

        I totally respect volunteer firefighters doing the job for next to nothing, helping out their community.

        I bet you are OK with getting by on the cheap Chief, whatever it takes. You don't get paid in your Chief Jobs?

        I know you are OK with perpetuating the bureaucracy, you are the bureaucracy.
        My experience has me pretty firm on that. That and the facts of what is best for taxpayers and firefighters. If you need to have an auto aid agreement to fight fires you have a failure of a fire department, by definition.


        Around here, auto aid is the only way to get enough bodies on scene, especially during the day. All of our aid departments are either volunteer only, or staffed with 3 guys, 8-5. Oh, and our volunteer depts are absolute volunteer, from probie to chief. We ran an aid call for a neighbor dept a couple weeks ago where all they could muster was one FF in a truck, because its all hes checked off to drive. Luckily,we were able to send two more trucks. The opposite has also happened, all we could muster was a man or two and a truck, and had to have aid send all they could. Its just the nature of the beast out here in the sticks. We do the best we can with what we have. We work closely with other depts, and we all lean on each other.

        We have about a dozen active members, and cover ~150 sqmi. Its just a fact of life round here. Merging would not do anything good here, as the bottom line is we still need more hands on deck.

        Comment


        • #79
          All I'm saying is that in Washington State every way for FD's to come together lawfully (merger, annexation, create new or regional fire authority) requires a detailed plan approved by the voters affected. In Washington State auto aid agreements are only done under interlocal agreement law. requiring no detailed plan or vote of the people. Why a vote of the people when F'ing around with fire rescue response? Because it's F'ing Fire Rescue!! These auto aid deals end run the State Law requirement for detailed plans and votes.

          Also every lawful way to join FD's in Washington also results in a single fire admin for the new single fire response. Auto Aid deals leave multiple fire admins in place. And Fire Admins can cost a lot of money, in most places.

          Also every lawful way in Washington State to join fire forces would also result in all the taxpayers involved paying the same money per $1000 assessed value for the newly formed all for one fire service. Auto aid agreements I have seen ignore this completely. How fair would it be if three FD's got together with auto aid and one taxpayer group paid $1 per $1000 assessed value for fire rescue, another taxpayer group pays $1.25 per $1000 assessed value and a third taxpayer group pays $1.50 per $1000 assessed value. That just doesn't seem fair to me. Three communities' Taxpayers all paying different taxes for the same all for one auto aid fire rescue service.

          If you're community can't muster a fire response efficiently and relies on neighboring FD's for first response (auto aid); Your communities fire rescue efforts are sub-par and a failure. You might as join lawfully together with other area departments, with a detailed plan, a vote of the people and all taxpayers paying the same in property taxes for the new all for one service. Might as well, if you need auto aid to muster an adequate response; Fail.
          Last edited by Bigjohn24; 09-07-2018, 04:35 PM.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post

            No you haven't but please do explain.

            How did these communities consolidate? Was there a vote of the people creating one new fire agency? If there was a new all for one fire department created, all the taxpayers should pay the same taxes for their new consolidated fire district or department.. In Washington State all taxpayers of a lawfully consolidated fire rescue service, that was voter approved, would all pay the same money per $1000 assessed value to support the newly consolidated fire department.

            You are the idiot and argumentative azz Chief. Obviously.

            Trying to talk to you with actual facts is like talking to a 2 year old with their hands over their ears yelling NO over and over.

            Enjoy your ridiculous illusions.
            Last edited by FyredUp; 09-07-2018, 04:49 PM.
            Crazy, but that's how it goes
            Millions of people living as foes
            Maybe it's not too late
            To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
              All I'm saying is that in Washington State every way for FD's to come together lawfully (merger, annexation, create new or regional fire authority) requires a detailed plan approved by the voters affected. In Washington State auto aid agreements are only done under interlocal agreement law. requiring no detailed plan or vote of the people. Why a vote of the people when F'ing around with fire rescue response? Because it's F'ing Fire Rescue!! These auto aid deals end run the State Law requirement for detailed plans and votes.

              Also every lawful way to join FD's in Washington also results in a single fire admin for the new single fire response. Auto Aid deals leave multiple fire admins in place. And Fire Admins can cost a lot of money, in most places.

              Also every lawful way in Washington State to join fire forces would also result in all the taxpayers involved paying the same money per $1000 assessed value for the newly formed all for one fire service. Auto aid agreements I have seen ignore this completely. How fair would it be if three FD's got together with auto aid and one taxpayer group paid $1 per $1000 assessed value for fire rescue, another taxpayer group pays $1.25 per $1000 assessed value and a third taxpayer group pays $1.50 per $1000 assessed value. That just doesn't seem fair to me. Three communities' Taxpayers all paying different taxes for the same all for one auto aid fire rescue service.

              If you're community can't muster a fire response efficiently and relies on neighboring FD's for first response (auto aid); Your communities fire rescue efforts are sub-par and a failure. You might as join lawfully together with other area departments, with a detailed plan, a vote of the people and all taxpayers paying the same in property taxes for the new all for one service. Might as well, if you need auto aid to muster an adequate response; Fail.

              As long as the dept keeps people safe, and responds effectively, Id hardly say that its a failure. Now, I havent been in this long, but its pretty clear what the bottom line is. Keep the community safe. If that gets done with an "all for one" dept or a group of automatic aide volly dept, I really dont think the community cares. Just as long as the job gets done.

              This thread reminds me of the "Long driveway" thread. Both ways CAN work. If automatic aide works well and gets the job done, why mess with it. If you have several towns that all agree they would benefit from a collective dept under one admin, go for it. Each community has different needs and will go about things differently.

              You are just upset that not everyone likes your way of doing it!

              Comment


              • #82
                If you can't muster an effective first response, you are half or two thirds of a fire rescue force.

                By my definition a successful FD can muster a first response themselves and only rely on neighbors for back up for large emergencies and multiple emergencies that would overwhelm a well staffed FD. And the failure is on the community, not the firefighters bustin' *** trying their best.

                And if your community's fire rescue is a failure you might as well fully join forces with your neighbors. At least the new FD can now muster twice the response for twice the area/population.

                Auto aid deals I have seen are not fair to Taxpayers or Firefighters, the only one's cutting a fat hog with auto aid are the taxpayers getting by on the cheap and the fire admins left intact. Perpetuating the bureaucracy.
                Last edited by Bigjohn24; 09-07-2018, 05:02 PM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
                  If you're community can't muster a fire response efficiently and relies on neighboring FD's for first response (auto aid); Your communities fire rescue efforts are sub-par and a failure. You might as join lawfully together with other area departments, with a detailed plan, a vote of the people and all taxpayers paying the same in property taxes for the new all for one service. Might as well, if you need auto aid to muster an adequate response; Fail.
                  As has been pointed out, the problem on the volunteer side is the declining number of volunteers. There are a number of reasons for that, most relating to changes in lifestyles making less time available for the fire department.

                  There are two stations in our fire district. They were separate entities before the town-wide fire district was formed, and still operate as separate entities. All that changed was the funding stream.

                  Sometimes we can't get the equipment we need out the door in a timely manner, and sometimes they can't do it. I've had cases where I drove the first arriving pumper to a scene (some seven miles) that was less than a mile from their station.

                  Making the two departments one really wouldn't save anything.

                  Opinions my own. Standard disclaimers apply.

                  Everyone goes home. Safety begins with you.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by JSJJ388 View Post


                    As long as the dept keeps people safe, and responds effectively, Id hardly say that its a failure. Now, I havent been in this long, but its pretty clear what the bottom line is. Keep the community safe. If that gets done with an "all for one" dept or a group of automatic aide volly dept, I really dont think the community cares. Just as long as the job gets done.

                    This thread reminds me of the "Long driveway" thread. Both ways CAN work. If automatic aide works well and gets the job done, why mess with it. If you have several towns that all agree they would benefit from a collective dept under one admin, go for it. Each community has different needs and will go about things differently.

                    You are just upset that not everyone likes your way of doing it!
                    My way of doing it is fair to firefighters, taxpayers, saves fire admin costs and follows State law requiring a detailed plan with voter approval and all taxpayers paying the same tax dollars for the same all for one fire service. Sue Me.

                    And if you're community can't muster an effective first response for fire rescue without having multiple FD's all responding; Your community's fire rescue service is a failure. God bless the firefighters responding for a failed FD. Be careful. Your community doesn't deserve you.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post

                      My way of doing it is fair to firefighters, taxpayers, saves fire admin costs and follows State law requiring a detailed plan with voter approval and all taxpayers paying the same tax dollars for the same all for one fire service. Sue Me.

                      And if you're community can't muster an effective first response for fire rescue without having multiple FD's all responding; Your community's fire rescue service is a failure. God bless the firefighters responding for a failed FD. Be careful. Your community doesn't deserve you.
                      Life isn't fair. Also, your way is not always fair to communities. Having independent departments allows communities a stronger voice in how things are run. This is not true with your system.

                      Seeing as how the job still gets done, the departments are not a failure. Just because it is accomplished differently than you think it should be, does not mean it's a failure. The job still gets done.

                      Another thing you neglect to realize is that mutual side is not only for manpower. Out here in the sticks, we cant simply connect to a city hydrant and get water. Every drop of water we use comes in via tankers. We do not have a single set hydrant in our district, and only one neighboring district has hydrants. Our mutual side procedures call for first due side to bring a tanker for a structure fire. Without mutual aide, wed likely be out of water quick.

                      So again, your system MIGHT work sometimes, but it is far from perfect and far from a universal solution. I still cant grasp why someone has a problem with a system that has a long track record of getting the job done. Just because it's not the way you want it , doesn't mean it's a failure.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Life isn't fair; but taxes paid by taxpayers for the same all for one fire service damn well should be fair.

                        My system is following state law for joining fire rescue forces including a detailed plan, a vote of the people, combining fire admins (not just firefighters and with all taxpayers paying the same tax formula for supporting the newly formed fire agency.

                        Auto aid only joins firefighter response. Auto aid does not thin out redundant fire admins or assure all taxpayers pay the same for the same all for one auto aid fire response. Auto aid also does not require a detailed plan for combining fire rescue presented for voter approval.

                        And you want to argue in favor of auto-aid? Different strokes for different folks I guess.

                        And the response of firefighters with my system is no different than firefighter response with ill-conceived auto-aid.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post
                          Life isn't fair; but taxes paid by taxpayers for the same all for one fire service damn well should be fair.

                          My system is following state law for joining fire rescue forces including a detailed plan, a vote of the people, combining fire admins (not just firefighters and with all taxpayers paying the same tax formula for supporting the newly formed fire agency.

                          Auto aid only joins firefighter response. Auto aid does not thin out redundant fire admins or assure all taxpayers pay the same for the same all for one auto aid fire response. Auto aid also does not require a detailed plan for combining fire rescue presented for voter approval.

                          And you want to argue in favor of auto-aid? Different strokes for different folks I guess.

                          And the response of firefighters with my system is no different than firefighter response with ill-conceived auto-aid.
                          With auto aide, people do pay a pretty fair rate. It's notallthe same, because the areas risks are not all the same. With local departments, the people control the dept. Not so with a regional system.

                          your system still does not help a lick with there not being enough people responding. Not one bit.

                          if auto aide is so "I'll conceived" why does it work so well?

                          Again, your system MIGHT work in some cases, but it WILL NOT work every time.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by JSJJ388 View Post

                            With auto aide, people do pay a pretty fair rate. It's notallthe same, because the areas risks are not all the same. With local departments, the people control the dept. Not so with a regional system.

                            your system still does not help a lick with there not being enough people responding. Not one bit.

                            if auto aide is so "I'll conceived" why does it work so well?

                            Again, your system MIGHT work in some cases, but it WILL NOT work every time.
                            My system is State Law for joining fire forces and improves fire fighter response every bit as well as your ill-conceived auto aid that does not combine fire admins and has different taxpayer groups paying different taxes for the same all for one auto aid deal. Your system sucks.

                            An all for one firefighter response is the same regardless of your system of unfairness or my system of fairness based on following State Law, that has all taxpayers paying the same, after all affected Taxpayers have voted for a detailed merger plan and merges fire admins as well as firefighters.

                            If you don't get that there is not much I can do.

                            Just stick with your life isn't fair answer.

                            I tried.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Bigjohn24 View Post

                              My system is State Law for joining fire forces and improves fire fighter response every bit as well as your ill-conceived auto aid that does not combine fire admins and has different taxpayer groups paying different taxes for the same all for one auto aid deal. Your system sucks.

                              An all for one firefighter response is the same regardless of your system of unfairness or my system of fairness based on following State Law, that has all taxpayers paying the same, after all affected Taxpayers have voted for a detailed merger plan and merges fire admins as well as firefighters.

                              If you don't get that there is not much I can do.

                              Just stick with your life isn't fair answer.

                              I tried.
                              Your system does not improve the response. It's the same response, minus the sense of pride that small communities have in their departments. Yes, different areas pay different rates, based on the local risks. Should the town next to us pay the same rate as we do, even though they have a more dense population and higher for risk? No, of course not. Your system says they should...


                              Auto mutual aide follows all state laws here.

                              I cant help that your system is so illogical no sane person says that it will work 100% of the time. Your fault, not mine.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by JSJJ388 View Post

                                Your system does not improve the response. It's the same response, minus the sense of pride that small communities have in their departments. Yes, different areas pay different rates, based on the local risks. Should the town next to us pay the same rate as we do, even though they have a more dense population and higher for risk? No, of course not. Your system says they should...


                                Auto mutual aide follows all state laws here.

                                I cant help that your system is so illogical no sane person says that it will work 100% of the time. Your fault, not mine.
                                BRILLIANT POST and 100% correct.
                                Crazy, but that's how it goes
                                Millions of people living as foes
                                Maybe it's not too late
                                To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

                                Comment

                                300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                                Collapse

                                Upper 300x250

                                Collapse

                                Taboola

                                Collapse

                                Leader

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X