Guest Opinion: The truth behind the NFPA standard and FRFD

Tommy Texeira

Posted Apr. 22, 2014

It’s 3 a.m. The lights are flashing but the sirens are off, it’s too early in the morning for sirens. The fire engine is screaming down the street as the smell of smoke begins to fill the nostrils of the approaching firefighters. They can feel the sudden rush of adrenaline, this isn’t a false alarm. We have a structure fire. The lieutenant tightens up the zipper on his turnout coat and checks his air as the engine approaches.

They arrive on scene and the three men race out of the truck. They can see the thick black smoke pulsing out of the second floor window as flames lick the side of the neighboring house. Somebody better hit that neighbor’s house with water or it’s gonna catch, too.

They have only just arrived but the second floor is now already fully involved; fire moves fast. They might lose the whole building if they don’t get some lines in there and fight that fire. The driver rushes to the fire truck’s pump panel to start running water. The hydrant is a block away and they only have a limited amount of water onboard. They need another crew to hook up to that hydrant before they run out. The two men mask up as the driver points upwards; they hear screams for help coming from a third floor window.

They arrived on scene within four minutes and met the NFPA standard response time. Now what? They’re alone and the next engine is 6 minutes away.

Mayor Will Flanagan has been pushing the fact that after layoffs, Fall River Fire Department will still meet NFPA standard response times. But that’s not the whole story. Sure, we’ll meet the response time for the first responding engine, but everyone’s in agreement (the mayor included) that the response time for the first arriving engine is the only part of the standard that will be met.

TO READ THE ENTIRE GUEST OPINION: CLICK HERE

Guest Opinion: The perfect storm brewing at Fall River Fire Department

Sean Flannery

Posted Apr. 18, 2014

On March 26, the Boston Fire Department responded to a basement fire that quickly engulfed the four-story structure. The wind-driven fire grew so fast and intensely that the fully staffed BFD became overwhelmed and struck nine alarms, their largest response. Tragically, the fire claimed the lives of Lt. Edward J. Walsh, father of three, and Firefighter Michael R. Kennedy, a combat Marine.

Whenever firefighters die in the line of duty, I dread listening to the radio transmissions from the incident, but I do so out of responsibility to my fellow firefighters, their families, and to my family and myself. These transmissions often include last words to loved ones in terrifying conditions: They’re lost, running out of air with zero visibility or being overcome by fire with no defense, and always in their last moments of life. It is the most heart-wrenching audio one can ever listen to. But I listen. And I make fellow firefighters listen as well. Although haunting, we learn from it and it makes us better firefighters.

In 11 years, as a Fall River firefighter, I’ve responded to some horrific incidents and part of me has grown accustomed to many of the tragic calls we respond to. Repetition will do that. One thing I can never fully detach from however, are those transmissions and the horror these brave, fallen firefighters experienced in their final moments, the Boston transmissions being no exception. The sight of the crying family members at the funerals, especially the children, never really leaves me either.

One hundred fifty firefighters responded to that deadly fire in Boston — an ominous number as 153 firefighters is what Mayor Will Flanagan is proposing to staff our entire fire department in Fall River. (For perspective, we operated with 232 in 2007.) This may result in just 25 firefighters providing daily all-hazards emergency response in Fall River and doing the work that 40 firefighters currently perform.

TO READ THE ENTIRE GUEST OPINION: CLICK HERE

Guest Opinion: Can the Fall River Fire Department operate with 153 firefighters?

Paul Ford

Posted Apr. 5, 2014

Can the Fall River Fire Department operate with 153 firefighters? Of course it can. However, the more important question would be, “At what cost?” If I may, allow me to offer my opinion, one gained by actually being the only fire chief forced to operate the department at that manning level to date.

In early 2009, the governor saw fit to drastically reduce the local aide to various communities nearly three quarters of the way through the fiscal year. With that news, then Mayor Robert Correira had to make a decision in five seconds (figuratively speaking). The city’s anticipated aide was cut by millions of dollars with just three months of the fiscal year left. Extreme cuts were necessary and the Fire Department went from 216 budgeted positions to 153 budgeted positions. Many other departments experienced the same fate.

Now it’s 2014, and the city administration has had literally five years to anticipate and prepare for this day, yet the solution is the same as when the city was taken by surprise: reduce the FRED to 153 firefighters. The real question is why are we here again, with absolutely no improvement in the city’s capacity to properly fund an adequate fire department?
TO READ THE ENTIRE GUEST OPINION: CLICK HERE

Guest Opinion: Don’t let Flanagan’s FRFD ‘solution’ endanger public safety more

Joshua Hetzler

Posted Apr. 2, 2014

I would like to clear up a few misconceptions that a number of people have in reference to Fall River Fire Department staffing levels and the proposed layoffs. If the layoffs occur, our city will not meet the National Fire Protection Associations standards for fire protection, and our citizens will be at a greater risk than they are today. The answer that the city’s administration and some citizens are proposing to solve this problem is irresponsible.

That would fund only 153 out of the current 213 firefighter positions that are filled. To make up for the reduction in manpower and attempt to meet those NFPA standards, they plan on training all the paramedics in our Fire Department’s Emergency Medical Services division as firefighters and taking some of the firefighters in Fall River’s Fire Prevention Bureau and putting them on a fire truck so they can respond to fires. Neither one of these options is possible.

First of all, making the paramedics become firefighters will not add one firefighter to the department. That newly trained paramedic/firefighter will almost never get a chance to practice their skills because the paramedics in Fall River are busy all day. It is very rare that they are not on a call.

The paramedics are so busy that the city asks for mutual aid from surrounding departments almost daily to help save the lives of those in Fall River. So taking these paramedics and making them firefighters solves nothing. It only adds to compromising our public safety and would increase our request for mutual aid from surrounding towns, leaving their citizens at risk.

 

TO READ THE ENTIRE GUEST OPINION: CLICK HERE

Guest Opinion: What will be left of Fall River Fire Department?

Tommy Texeira

Posted Mar. 25, 2014

The mayor and the Fall River Fire Department seem to have conflicting opinions in regards to how many firefighters are needed to safely protect a city the size Fall River. How many men are necessary? The mayor has given a statement in his “Statement regarding the Fall River Fire Department,” and Fire Chief Robert Viveiros made a statement at the City Council meeting on finances (March 11). Let’s start with an excerpt from the mayor’s statement:

“The SAFER grant will be expiring this year and the current compliment of firefighters is at a level of 213. Through its work, the SAFER Grant Task Force has determined that an adequate level of staffing should be a compliment of 200.”

The mayor states that the city will be cutting 60 positions and at 153 firefighters, national standard response times will be met (which is disputed by fire department union officials).

 

TO READ THE ENTIRE GUEST OPINION: CLICK HERE

Guest Opinion: Mayoral mismanagement created this FRFD crisis

James Mellen

Posted Mar. 12, 2014

I am a member of the Fall River Fire Department and I would like to respond to Mayor Will Flanagan’s Facebook statement regarding his plan which will decimate the FRFD. The mayor states that keeping 200 firefighters was the target of his administration, but the budget climate would not allow that.

Mayor, tell us, what suddenly changed in this climate? A landfill that has been closing for years? City employee contracts that your administration negotiated? Two years to prepare for this and at the 11th hour you propose a 34 percent cut?

The first part of your plan has already fallen through. Our federal delegation has informed you that an increase in the current SAFER application will not happen, confirming what we expressed our sources had told us. If it was “critical” to join you in this effort, we are now beyond critical. What is your new plan?

If level funded local aid was used to “calculate” the 153 number, will all increased aid be funneled directly to this problem? Will you publicly commit to that?

We have explained to you, and our local delegation has confirmed to you, that your home rule petition for early retirement will not pass the Legislature. Posting this as part of your solution after being told this merely detracts attention from serious solutions.

TO READ THE ENTIRE GUEST OPINION: CLICK HERE

Guest Opinion: Fall River Fire Department cuts are not the answer to fiscal woes

Joshua Hetzler

Posted Mar. 7, 2014

Fall River once again faces damaging changes, ones that promise to greatly compromise the safety of our citizens, as well as place at risk the firefighters sworn to protect them. Cutting Fall River Fire Department staffing to 153 will absolutely hurt this city. In no way should anyone fall under the false pretense that the department will be able to do its job properly with these numbers.

National standards will not be properly met. The SAFER grant is based on bringing the Fire Department up to the standard. The fact that we qualified for the SAFER grant means that we were not meeting the standard, and the city administration signed off on that application.

Mutual aid cannot make up for the valuable minutes needed to save the property and lives of our citizens. It is completely selfish to rely on these nearby towns to save our city at the potential risk of their own. Engines and stations will likely be shut down because of these cuts. Most citizens can only hope that their neighborhoods and families will not be victims as a result of this decision. An impact not considered by the administration is the huge cost of an injured firefighter.

This reality has been documented nationally as a consequence of the reduction of personnel. If a firefighter is injured, will we have to then lay off more personnel to cover the costs? I love my family, but as a Fall River firefighter, I now have to tell them that my life would be in more danger than ever when I go to work. It is mind-blowing that this is seen as an acceptable reality for my firefighter brothers and myself.

TO READ THE ENTIRE GUEST OPINION: CLICK HERE