Automatic aid agreements-Perpetuating the Bureaucracy

[captnjak]

He hasn't been back .... He must be fighting another windmill.

Thanks for the laugh!

[LaFireEducator]

He hasn't been back .... He must be fighting another windmill.

[tree68]

An old saw comes to mind regarding Bigjohn's mindset - "When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

[johnsb]

SC?

Have I stepped into a little peyton place of Chiefs?

ROFLMAO

This is what happens when you start questioning Fire Management, you get trolled.

Have fun girls.

You know BigJohn, the common thread in this thread is that NOBODY agrees with you.
NOBODY.
To an astute person that would clue them in that something is wrong with their stance on an issue....
You base your assessment of the entire US Fire Service on YOUR LIMITED experience. See anything wrong with that???
You should.

[johnsb]

And there are two reasons your department is involved in Auto-Aid Chief.

Perpetuating the bureaucracy and your failure to provide fire protection in your community without outside help. Big fail if you ask me Chief.

Now go troll someone else.

BigJohn, you're just plain WRONG. There is only so much money that you can wring out of taxpayers. The county I live in goes from VERY high dollar real estate to rural ag. You're just NOT going to get the same money for fire protection. While my POC dept. has very nice equipment, we don't have a ladder or aerial platform, and likely never will. But fulltime FD's on either side of us do and don't hesitate to send them if we have them on our run card or ask form them.
By your logic, every dept should have the exact same resources and a bunch of equipment, with paid firefighters.

NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

The BEST situation is for departments to work together well, and to have an understanding of what another departments limitations are. The fire service is not a socialist organization, everything is not going to be divided equally. Having a FAIR mutual or automatic aid pact means departments get what they need and deserve, and giving what they can without over taxing them. It has NOTHING to do with absolute equal exchange of resources and equal pay.

[FyredUp]

The public doesn't care when they call 911. But they do care when this stuff comes up for a vote. They should not be allowed to vote until their house is on fire. Then we would all get the resources we need.

BOOM! The winner of the internet today!!

[captnjak]

In practice, it IS an automatic aid box alarm system.

It was modelled after the Chicago Fire Department (which makes it like most big city dispatch systems).

For an incident at a given location, appropriate units from departments X, Y, and Z will all be dispatched, based on preplanned "cards" on file at dispatch.

It's been running that way since the 1960's.

Dispatching in many areas follows the same format - PG County in MD being a case in point.

When it comes right down to it - the public doesn't care who shows up at their door when they dial 9-1-1. They don't care if the tax rates aren't the same, whether the chief has one secretary or three, whether the white hats are from one department or four. They just want someone to show up and fix their problem.

The public doesn't care when they call 911. But they do care when this stuff comes up for a vote. They should not be allowed to vote until their house is on fire. Then we would all get the resources we need.

[FyredUp]

Sure it does troll.

Yawn...When you can't debate or discuss with logic and facts this is your tract.

[FIRE117]

Before saying that one jurisdiction pays more for fire protection than another, you have to look at many factors of the tax base and the level of service of neighboring fire departments/jurisdictions.

1. One jurisdiction may have a larger taxable valuation and the next may not.
2. Some jurisdictions may have special hazards or situations. A major medical care facility may be in one jurisdiction and the next adjoining jurisdiction may have a chemical facility located there. The FD protecting the major medical facility may need a truck company, while the FD with the chemical facility in its jurisdiction may need a hazmat team. One FD may offer its aerial ladder on auto aid, while the adjoining FD may offer its haz mat unit on auto aid.
3. One jurisdiction may receive funding to protect a tax exempt property (military complex, university, etc.) and the neighboring jurisdiction may not. Also, some FD's have fundraisers (donation appeal, carnival, bingo, etc.), to defray the costs of fire protection, while the neighboring one may not.
4. One FD may receive special funding (Homeland Security funding, etc.), that the adjoining may not receive.

Therefore, stating that one jurisdiction is subsidizing the next jurisdiction may not be true. You could actually be comparing apples to oranges. Each fire protection jurisdiction is unique in property values, hazards and revenue it receives.

[Too_Old]

When it comes right down to it - the public doesn't care who shows up at their door when they dial 9-1-1. They don't care if the tax rates aren't the same, whether the chief has one secretary or three, whether the white hats are from one department or four. They just want someone to show up and fix their problem.

And that's the bottom line.

[tree68]

Well, there is a difference when it comes to the ISO process. Resources in a automatic aid plan which arrive from an immediately adjacent territory can be counted towards your capabilities. E.g a tanker on an auto-aid run-card counts towards your water supply. A mutual aid company that has to be ordered does not provide the same level of credit.

Very true.

[tree68]

MABAS stands for MUTUAL Aid Box Alarm System, not auto aid box alarm system. Then it would be called AABAS

In practice, it IS an automatic aid box alarm system.

It was modelled after the Chicago Fire Department (which makes it like most big city dispatch systems).

For an incident at a given location, appropriate units from departments X, Y, and Z will all be dispatched, based on preplanned "cards" on file at dispatch.

It's been running that way since the 1960's.

Dispatching in many areas follows the same format - PG County in MD being a case in point.

When it comes right down to it - the public doesn't care who shows up at their door when they dial 9-1-1. They don't care if the tax rates aren't the same, whether the chief has one secretary or three, whether the white hats are from one department or four. They just want someone to show up and fix their problem.

[Too_Old]

I did a little research for NY. Automatic mutual aid hasn't showed up, but mutual aid definitely does. One county's mutual aid plan includes the following:


Automatic mutual aid is just a subset of regular mutual aid.

Well, there is a difference when it comes to the ISO process. Resources in a automatic aid plan which arrive from an immediately adjacent territory can be counted towards your capabilities. E.g a tanker on an auto-aid run-card counts towards your water supply. A mutual aid company that has to be ordered does not provide the same level of credit.

[tree68]

So merging instead of auto aid turns your dept into FDNY huh? ROFLMAO

You're so focused on this redundant thing that you missed the point entirely.

The references to FDNY serve to point out that your statement that no one needs more than one chief at an incident show that you are completely out of touch with the reality of firefighting.

Chief was directing traffic for something to do no doubt. So with autoi-aid you have plenty of Chiefs for traffic control. Quita a system you got.

Wasn't my call - and maybe that MA chief (coulda been an assistant) was part of one of your mega departments responding mutual aid to another of your mega departments for a major incident near their shared border. I really don't recall. At what point do the mergers end? When the whole country is one big fire department?

And somebody was going to show me automatic aid in their state law, but they couldn't. Go Figure. Why don't you show us auto aid in your State Law for FD's. Everybody is doing it, it must be covered in State Law like the other ways FD's can lawfully and really join forces, including turning multiple Fire Admins into one fire admin.

I did a little research for NY. Automatic mutual aid hasn't showed up, but mutual aid definitely does. One county's mutual aid plan includes the following:

Each participating fire department or fire company may request assistance from another fire company or fire department pursuant to the provisions of this Plan. Requests shall take the following forms: 

The request of a fire chief or officer in charge of any fire or other emergency. 

The pre-planned and/or automatic pre-planned response to any building, area, or district agreed upon by all agencies involved and filed in writing at the County?s Emergency Communications Center

Automatic mutual aid is just a subset of regular mutual aid.

Many departments in my county have extra alarms defined (it's not universal - not all departments want to do the planning necessary to set up the extra alarms, or prefer to wait and see what they've got). Should my department's second alarm be merged in as well? The third alarm?

There are departments that should merge - I can't deny that. There are departments whose raison d'etre expired long ago that should be merged in with someone.

But, as I asked earlier in this post - when does it end?

[Bigjohn24]

In Wisconsin, and actually multiple states in the midwest, we have MABAS. It is the Mutual Aid Box Alarm System a multi-state mutual aid system that includes preordained box alarm assignments in your local region as well as the potential for mutual aid companies from outside your region and even from outside your state if the size of the incident calls for it. It has been in place in Illinois since the late 1960's and has spread from there. It works and works very well.

MABAS stands for MUTUAL Aid Box Alarm System, not auto aid box alarm system. Then it would be called AABAS

And even that unified mutual aid system has minimum staffing requirements that is part of the system