Judge rules Stamford breached agreement with volunteer fire department

OK, fine. So what does this do for me when my house is buring and I dont get any volunteers to come out to help?

The simple fct remains TOR doesnt have a reliable resonse record. We deserve full time protection like the OH SO Special downtown residents get. Fair is fair.

Well, TOR did have a "reliable response record" when they had their 17 career firefighters. Now it seems that in some way or another they may get them back, and possibly an additional 16, due to that federal grant.

But this whole mess has unearthed the proverbial elephant in the room, which is the volunteers in TOR (and some other departments) respond to a minority of the total calls. This brings into question the cost effectiveness of the volunteers in those stations. While volunteer firefighters generally save a community money, they can not save any money if they are not responding to calls.

rv, that's some pipe dream, there will be no federal grant and no additional 17 FF's. TOR is going to have to sit down and work out a deal with the city. More than likely keeping E-8 and E-9 in the district. I'm sure the parties want to wait for a new mayor, so this will drag out and nothing will start to happen until spring at best.

I'll bet that this mess keeps going indefinately. For as long as I can remember the "free" volunteers have been at the city tit, always crying for more money, manpower, and equipment. Take a look at it all in detail, and you'll find that the districts in question can be run cheaper with a career staff than the independant unaccountable volunteers are. There is no spending oversight, no response accountability, and no command function in actuality.

A bunch of amateur people playing with the immediate need issue at their convienience. Abolish this mess before another citizen dies.(yes, I'm referring to the multiple deaths in Springdale over the years) Have we not learned anything from the past?

Leave E8, and E9 in place, create E10,E11,E12, and redistict all the current failures to respond to their own street address only. Halt All funding and funnel the money to pay for a reliable coverage system.

The voluneet system just doesnt work anymore and throwing money and effort at it is worthless. Grow up, and move on people.

Literal guy right before me, wonder if he/shes paid or volunteer!

Look folks, we need 100% coverage up here. Is that too hard to handle? If the volunteers can do it fine. Since they dont have a good record, let somebody else do the job.

It seems like forever and a day that the same issue has gone unresolved. The volunteer companies cant get the job done.

Close them, Get the millions of dollars worth of firetrucks and stuff and put all of it to use with a true fire service.

Enough already, how long can this liabiality issue persist for the residents to tolerate?

I personally wouldn't let this go, but look how well Stamford handled Scofieldtown Dump with 20+ years of notice..........

Seenitall before wrote:

I'll bet that this mess keeps going indefinately. For as long as I can remember the "free" volunteers have been at the city tit, always crying for more money, manpower, and equipment. Take a look at it all in detail, and you'll find that the districts in question can be run cheaper with a career staff than the independant unaccountable volunteers are. There is no spending oversight, no response accountability, and no command function in actuality.
A bunch of amateur people playing with the immediate need issue at their convienience. Abolish this mess before another citizen dies.(yes, I'm referring to the multiple deaths in Springdale over the years) Have we not learned anything from the past?
Leave E8, and E9 in place, create E10,E11,E12, and redistict all the current failures to respond to their own street address only. Halt All funding and funnel the money to pay for a reliable coverage system.
The voluneet system just doesnt work anymore and throwing money and effort at it is worthless. Grow up, and move on people.

Well Mr. so smart 1st you will have to change the charter - good luck

Wawaweeewa

If you can wrote:

<quoted text>
Well Mr. so smart 1st you will have to change the charter - good luck

Both of the Mayoral hopefuls have been researching the mechanics of just such a charter change. Seems they both want to say "I fixed it and fixed it quick, no like my predecessor"

Inside scoop wrote:

<quoted text>Both of the Mayoral hopefuls have been researching the mechanics of just such a charter change. Seems they both want to say "I fixed it and fixed it quick, no like my predecessor"

It's doubtful it will happen in the near future, maybe in 5 or 10 years.

Inside scoop wrote:

<quoted text>Both of the Mayoral hopefuls have been researching the mechanics of just such a charter change. Seems they both want to say "I fixed it and fixed it quick, no like my predecessor"

"Inside scoop"? Or just a wild guess?

I don't believe you are right.

1. The mechanics of a charter change are not that complicated. There is no need for research. Everyone knows how to do it. The question is how to get it passed without more controversy than exists now. A mayor who elects to "fix it" by changing the charter will end up in more trouble than the current administration.

2. The charter does not have to be changed. The necessary changes can be approved under the existing charter.

3. I haven't heard either candidate speak of changing the charter.

Just Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
It's doubtful it will happen in the near future, maybe in 5 or 10 years.

It will never happen, too many hard heads with politcal ties on both ends of the table. I'd wager that at the end of the next mayors first term (no matter who gets elected) nothing will have substantially changed.

To be truly happy, one must give up all hope and accept things as they are.

Publius wrote:

<quoted text>
"Inside scoop"? Or just a wild guess?
I don't believe you are right.
1. The mechanics of a charter change are not that complicated. There is no need for research. Everyone knows how to do it. The question is how to get it passed without more controversy than exists now. A mayor who elects to "fix it" by changing the charter will end up in more trouble than the current administration.
2. The charter does not have to be changed. The necessary changes can be approved under the existing charter.
3. I haven't heard either candidate speak of changing the charter.

A Charter Revision would be too much of a coin toss for this issue.
Changes must be negotiated, not imposed.
Once done, the revision becomes moot.

No Chater revision necessary, they just need the rest of the VFD's to agree to let SFRD to provide and control the paid staff. Glenbrook did and the VFD was rewarded with a new truck.

David wrote:

No Chater revision necessary, they just need the rest of the VFD's to agree to let SFRD to provide and control the paid staff. Glenbrook did and the VFD was rewarded with a new truck.

Glenbrook? whats a Glenbrook? Is that the fire company that went out of business when SFRD engine 6 went in business?

get real wrote:

Glenbrook? whats a Glenbrook? Is that the fire company that went out of business when SFRD engine 6 went in business?

Close, it is the fire company that went out of business years ago, when the Chief started allowing one of the career drivers to chase away any actual volunteers, to the point that taking in E6 was the only viable option.

As sad as it is to admit it, in Glenbrook's case, E6 was the solution and not the problem. The same can be said for E7 in Springdale by the way.

The end is near for the vollies, bye bye.

David wrote:

No Chater revision necessary, they just need the rest of the VFD's to agree to let SFRD to provide and control the paid staff. Glenbrook did and the VFD was rewarded with a new truck.

Never Happen !
Also the Charter clearly says that SF&R is NOT ALLOWED to operate in the Volunteer districts.(unless the Mayor declares an emergency)

In the Know wrote:

<quoted text>
Also the Charter clearly says that SF&R is NOT ALLOWED to operate in the Volunteer districts.(unless the Mayor declares an emergency)

SFRD is already operating in every VFD district except Belltown

In the Know wrote:

<quoted text>
Never Happen !
Also the Charter clearly says that SF&R is NOT ALLOWED to operate in the Volunteer districts.(unless the Mayor declares an emergency)

Better check you facts there little boy, SFRD is running the show for Glenbrook, Springdale, an Turn of River. All without an emergency declaration.

Vox Pop wrote:

<quoted text>
A Charter Revision would be too much of a coin toss for this issue.
Changes must be negotiated, not imposed.
Once done, the revision becomes moot.

We agree 100%