HARRY R. CARTER, Ph.D., MIFireE

It seems like a number of events have come together this week that lead me back to a real simple premise. In last week’s commentary we discussed capital funding problems. During a telephone conversation with a good buddy of mine in Florida, I was informed that the Houston Fire Department is going to drop its per-unit staffing from four firefighters per engine and truck to a figure of three.

And then there was the e-mail message from District Chief Dave Mager in the Boston Fire Department that quite simply said the following:

"Send us to an incident with a given amount of training and equipment and we'll somehow get the job done. We always do. And some of us die trying. The public and the politicians know this, too. Put 10 firefighters on 5 fire trucks and they'll get the job done. Put those same 10 firefighters on 2 fire trucks and they'll still get the job done, and probably more efficiently and safely. But it is the public, and those who represent us in government, that count fire trucks not firefighters. Why did you send all these fire trucks, is the question we've heard so many times. They think that if you surround a building with fire apparatus, the fire will go out. The reality is that FIREFIGHTERS PUT OUT FIRES, NOT FIRE TRUCKS."

Apparently the city fathers in Houston don’t get it either, because they are willing to consider sending only three people per vehicle. We need a large number of people to get the job done safely, regardless of where your fire department is located.

Chief Mager further stated, "Proper training, apparatus, equipment and staffing are what is required. The public and the politicians need to be reminded of this daily. Not by the widows (widowers) and families of firefighters who have seemingly died in vain, but by fire service leaders who can remember for longer than six months. Thank God we don’t forget that where I work."

And then there is the continuing saga of the budgetary bean counters in Worcester, Massachusetts. As you might imagine, these three converging ideas set me to thinking. All of this led me to an episode of serious front porch thinking, a pastime that I truly enjoy. It occurs whenever I get to go out to the front porch with a cup of good strong firehouse coffee, and one of my favorite cigars. I will sit there, watching the traffic go by, and gathering my thoughts. I stew, I brood, I mumble under my breath, and then I get angry. I then sip some coffee, take a puff on my stogie and proceed to calm down and start really thinking. I strongly recommend most of this to you. The cigars are, of course, optional.

Anyway, last week I wrote about the City of Worcester, Massachusetts and their dangerously frugal budgeting. In the days since that commentary was published, I received word via a number of my Massachusetts buddies, as supplemented by the Worcester Telegram website, that a compromise had been struck between the Business Administrator and the Fire Chief.

This is very interesting, particularly in the way that the dollars for the safety issue items were raised. Remember the comment contained in last week’s commentary by Mr. Thomas Hoover, the City Business Administrator. The one that said"… We should not try to rob Peter to pay Paul." Well, somebody had better call 911 and report a robbery. It seems that in a fast shuffle of the town’s financial books, a number of staff vehicle acquisitions were deferred to next year. And some emergency state funds earmarked for the Worcester tragedy were also shuffled into the mix with the vehicle cuts to make up the difference. Or at least these are the facts that I gleaned from the Worcester Telegram.

According to that article, "… Mr. Hoover said he and Fire Chief Dennis L. Budd reviewed the Fire Department's capital equipment budget and both agreed to forgo purchasing three vehicles at a total cost of $80,000. Those vehicles that will not be purchased next year are one for the Fire Prevention Division, $20,000; one pickup truck for the Maintenance Division, $35,000; and one van for the Maintenance Division, $25,000. The additional $100,000 will come from federal and state emergency funds the city has received from the Dec. 3 warehouse fire.

So, as I said, you can see that the Peter’s of the staff section of the Worcester Fire Department were robbed to pay the Paul of fire suppression. When will these folks ever get it right.

These city government people know that if you send out one firefighter with a bicycle and a water extinguisher, that firefighter will attempt to cut their way through a wall of fire to get the job done. That’s the way we fire people are. And they play upon our good nature to save a buck. But you can only depend on the can-do spirit of dedicated suppression troops for just so long. When the spirit is exceeded by the circumstances, live are lost.

Much to his credit, Chief Dennis Budd stated in the Worcester Telegram story that, "… the Fire Department would need a capital budget of about $900,000 to meet all its equipment needs. Mr. Hoover said the city could not provide that level of funding for the department because the city has a limited amount of money to meet all the capital equipment needs of its municipal departments." Doesn’t this guy ever change his tune?

But is it about fire trucks, radios and SCBA, or is it about people? We always seem to focus on the equipment and forget the people. It isn’t really about the various elements of the world of apparatus and technology. It is about the mindset of most politicians and municipal administrators. It is this seemingly inhuman thinking process that considers firefighters and fire trucks equally disposable.

Until we are able to change the mindset of people, nothing will really change. If the citizens, politicians, and administrators could come to see the value of each firefighter’s life, the tools and trinkets would follow as easily as night follows day. But as things currently stand, firefighters are equal to fire trucks; and both are then equal to dollar signs in the eyes of those who control the purse strings. And since we have allowed the public to always think that fire happens to the other person, they are not there to support you. When are the politicians going to realize that it is not the apparatus that counts, it is the brave people who ride on that equipment?

If the members of the fire service were sales people who worked on commission, many would starve. If getting the word of our successes out to the public led to a continuing salary, maybe we would then see a greater effort to create a community fire safety consensus. Until then, many amongst us will remain slaves to the remote control on the color TV’s in their fire stations.

Back to the issue at hand. Think back to last week’s commentary. What did I say about town government in Worcester last week? "The city is once again crying poor-mouth. Oh, poor, poor Worcester; we are big and we are broke." They are real good at this.

Let me offer a way to help this situation. I suggest that we station Mr. Hoover directly in front of Worcester City hall with a tin cup. His job is to stay there until he has enough money to fulfill Chief Budd’s budget needs. Whether it rains or not he has to report to his duty station. Neither the heat of the day nor the coldness of the night are allowed to be an issue Mr. Hoover. Out you go to the curb line. There is a hole in your tin cup. Sorry Mr. Hoover, there are no tin-cup maintenance funds in the budget. Perhaps a few weeks of this torture will sensitize Mr. Hoover to the manner in which Worcester, and fire departments all across America are forced to operate every day.

I can remember times in the Newark Fire Department where a front-line pumper would have to go out of service because the city did not have the money for a fan belt. I can remember the time that city hall had the Engineering Department conduct a study of whether our fire apparatus fleet was adequate for the task. To no one’s surprise, the people from Engineering said that we had plenty of apparatus and proceeded to take us off of the ten-year replacement plan for new apparatus.

When I asked for permission to review the Engineering Department’s fleet, I was told, don’t be a wise guy. What does a fire chief know about the needs of Engineering? What in deed could anyone possibly know in such an environment? The battles in Newark were sad to watch. I can remember the city business administrator telling everyone how much we were loved, just before cutting ten Fire Captain positions out of the budget. And on it goes.

As I was crafting this commentary, another e-mail came in to me from a fire person in Rutland, Vermont, who shall, since he values continued employment as a member of their fire department, remain nameless. His message mirrors many I have read. He mentioned that their city is losing six firefighters due to early retirements. His comment shows the true frustration in his heart when he says, "…and you guessed it: the bean counters say we can do without. This is a 20% reduction in our staffing. It looks like we are going to have to "kill" our ladder/tower on first alarms, Makes sense $500,000 truck and nobody to run it." Big or small, fire departments across our nation are being made the patsy for municipal frugality.

I say all of this, because Worcester, Massachusetts is the lightening rod at this time. They are high profile because of the large loss of life they experienced. But there are literally hundreds of mid to large sized cities across this great land of ours, that could easily duplicate the Worcester disaster. Think about it. Have you heard anything about Keokuk, Iowa lately? They lost three brothers and then fell off of the map of fire service concern.

Folks, I am only a commentator. I can tell a story fairly well. But I cannot create action on your part. I have spent a great deal of time studying about writing. I particularly cherish the knowledge I have gained from a study of those writers who labored in the background during the glory days of live television. Think of the talent it took to write a riveting drama for Playhouse 90. Or what about the clever thoughts that went into making Jackie Gleason’s, The Honeymooners such a classic? But as great as the writers were, without the talents of the person who delivered the written lines, nothing would have happened.

Let me make it simple. People are the issue. If you fail to provide them with the proper equipment to get their job done safely, it is your fault when they get hurt or die. Let every death of a firefighter be laid directly onto the doorstep of the politicians and their lackeys who shortchanged us when we asked for their help. And don’t try to hide behind the shabby laws that politicians everywhere have crafted to protect their legal responsibility. While your penny-pinching assault on the fire service may be legal, it sure as heck isn’t moral. And I am sure that none of the offenders can hide from the moral law to do what is right by your people.

If we want the public and the politicians to know that it is truly the people who are the issue, and not the fire trucks, you have to tell that story. I can only write the lines. It is up to you to take those lines that I am feeding you and run with them. Please do something positive with my words. "Let Your Voice Be Heard", was the theme of this year’s Congressional Fire Service Institute Dinner. Well folks, let them hear it now. Make it loud and make it clear!

The commentary in this column does not necessarily reflect those of Firehouse.Com, Firehouse Magazine, their employees or parent company Cygnus Business Media. Harry R. Carter, Ph.D., MIFireE, is an internationally known municipal fire protection consultant and contributing editor to Firehouse Magazine. He recently retired as a Battalion Commander with the Newark, New Jersey Fire Department. His commentary appears regularly on Firehouse.Com. For more commentary and information, visit Carter's web site at www.harrycarter.com Harry has published several books available for online ordering, including Firefighting Strategy and Tactics and Management in the Fire Service