Easy Target

Dear Nozzlehead: I just read that President Bush’s budget request for the Department of Homeland Security includes only $293 million for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program (FIRE Act), which is a big decrease from the $545 million appropriated by Congress last year. In addition, there is no money earmarked for the SAFER Act or even Fire Prevention & Safety grants. On the other hand, the President’s request for Citizen Corps is $35 million; last year it was funded at $20 million.

Has the President totally forgotten that we are America’s first responders? I am fed up with the President for not supporting firefighters! We should get what is needed to ensure we are able to provide the services we are expected to provide, each and every day. If our own president won’t support us, who will?

-Upset in Iowa

 

Dear Upset,

I know-isn’t this just horrible? How dare Mr. Bush cut those funds we have so bravely earned?
As “America’s first responders,” we should absolutely demand he restore funding immediately! I can just hear the boys from South Park: “They killed the FIRE Act and SAFER grant program!” “You bastards!” Yeah, the government better restore those funds-our funds-or else ?

Or else what? I am glad someone asked this question, because this issue has been on my mind for a long, long time. First, I am sure most of the funding will get restored. This is another example of the same old game played between the administration, the politicians and the OMB (Office of Management and Budget, aka “Office of Mind your own Business”) which would do anything to eliminate all our funding.

I have a few thoughts on this, and I will try not to ramble, so bear with me.

While many fire departments used FIRE Act grants to obtain needed funding, in my old and generally close-minded opinion, a whole lot of money was pissed away by fire departments that did not need the funds they were awarded through this program. Which fire departments? I won’t list them here, but we can probably all cite examples-I know of one fire department, which protects about two square miles, that received a grant for communications equipment exceeding $300,000. Let me repeat: three hundred thousand dollars for communications equipment.

Years ago, we purchased low- and high-band portable radios; they cost about $400 each, and they worked OK. But then we all had to move to 800-MHz digital trucked systems that, quite honestly, do not work OK in many, many documented cases. The cost of these new portables? Around $3,000 or more, depending on the options you select and the “systems” you have to speak to. How did this happen? Well, for one, many areas claimed to be “running out of frequencies.” Maybe that’s true-in some areas. And then the newest big word-which by now, we all have learned on our vocabulary study cards-came along: interoperability. It’s supposed to mean that during the “big one,” fire, police, EMS, public works, sanitation, animal control, the politicians, the city hall staff, utilities and numerous other agencies will be able to communicate with each other.

Let’s just pause for a moment and ask this question: Without radios, on a day-to-day working basis, how well does your fire department communicate with the police, EMS, public works, sanitation, animal control, the politicians, the city hall staff and the utility folks? That’s what I thought. But numerous communities all over the United States just had to get these new systems. If your 800-MHz digital trucked radio system works great, well, that’s good. If it doesn’t, how much have you spent? How much more will you have to spend to get it working the way it should?

I could give a damn about talking to the cops-I want to talk to Engine 6’s crew in the basement or to the incident commander (IC) around the other side of the building. Talk to the cops? What for? To ask them to move their police car because it’s blocking our hydrant again? I don’t need to talk to the cops to solve that problem (imagine the sound of broken glass, followed by a 5″ supply line running gently across the police car console).

Millions of dollars have been awarded to communities for “critical” equipment that, quite honestly, may not be so critical. Somehow, the formula of two square miles = $300,000 for radio equipment doesn’t equate, at least not to me. What’s critical as far as radios are concerned: that firefighters possess the simple ability to communicate with each other and the IC on every run. And don’t give me this “95 percent effective, 95 percent of the time” crap. If I can talk to my friend in Florida on the fourth story of an apartment building when I am in the basement of a home in California using my “direct” $150 cell phone, you tell me why firefighters can’t communicate when they’re a few hundred yards away from each other.

What else are communities getting with their free money? Well, those $500,000 command vans are popping up all over the place. Do I think they are a waste? In most cases, probably not, but they should only be awarded when the department agrees that any time, any place they are called, they must send the vehicle and qualified folks to respond. Immediately. That way, if Clueless, Ohio, gets one of these half-million-dollar “communications/command/interoperability/mobile home-disguised-as-a-command-unit” trucks, they must make it available when Very Clueless, La., has a major emergency.

An even better option: Instead of each community asking for vans, ladder trucks, rescue units and the like, maybe such apparatus should be purchased regionally, so many more citizens can benefit from them. Instead of the five-square-mile city of Pissawayfunds, Calif., getting a unit it may use once a year, maybe, just maybe, Welovetoshare County, Calif., gets that unit, and everyone in the county can benefit. The same process could be applied to portable training towers, apparatus, radios and anything else paid for by FIRE Act grants.

Some of you might say, “Well, we did get that equipment, and if someone wants to use it, they can call us for it.” Sometimes that works, until the fire chief in one town starts flirting with the wife of a fire chief in another town; then, mutual-aid plans change overnight! It might not be a problem in your town, but mutual aid based on personal relationships can be difficult.

The FIRE Act grant program is a decent program, but can we show where the money has made a difference? In some places, yes; in others, absolutely not. So, when the policymakers ask us in the coming days to show the value of the program and why it matters, what will we say as one united fire-service voice?

One more thing to remember about FIRE Act grant money, in addition to SAFER grants: The money is simply your federal tax dollars coming back to specific communities. It’s not really free. But sure, many fire departments that didn’t have decent bunker gear now have excellent bunker gear, and some fire departments that had old and ineffective SCBA now have SCBA they can count on. That’s how it should work.

What about the SAFER program? Again, this is another well-intentioned program that needs some serious work. The purpose of SAFER grants is to provide money directly to volunteer, combination and career fire departments to help them increase their cadre of firefighters. Ultimately, the goal is for SAFER grantees to enhance their ability to attain 24-hour staffing, thus ensuring their communities have adequate protection from fire and fire-related hazards. SAFER grants can be applied in two areas: 1) hiring of career firefighters and 2) recruitment and retention of volunteer firefighters.

I have always said the best way to increase turnout and morale at a volunteer fire department (VFD) is to look inside the VFD and identify the internal BS. Internal BS is the No. 1 reason why folks leave-or don’t join-VFDs. Simply put, VFDs must ask the question: Why would someone want to join our department? Why have people joined? Why have people left? Why don’t our members show up? Simple questions, simple answers-if we want them to be.

But let’s look at another example. A one-square-mile village in the mid-Atlantic was awarded a SAFER grant to hire a firefighter. Good stuff. But nowhere in the grant does it indicate the firefighter must respond to calls coming to the five or six other communities within five miles of the village. It’s up to the local fire departments to arrange that. So here is a fire department with a federally funded firefighter answering a couple hundred runs a year, in about a one-square-mile area. You know what? If the taxpayers in that community really want to fund a firefighter, they can pay for it. Raise taxes, hold a bake sale. Whatever it takes. But using federal funds doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense to me.

So, as pissed off at “W” as you may be, the FIRE Act and SAFER programs really need some work, starting with some ground rules for what departments can do with “it” once they receive “it.” Until the programs require the receiving community to share, play nice and provide regional backup with our tax-funded equipment and personnel, we will provide great targets for the budget cutters. And until radio systems are regional, and tools, equipment and gear are bought cooperatively among multiple fire departments, we will give the budget folks plenty to screw with.

Still mad at the Feds? Maybe we need to make the changes so they can’t find any reason to cut our programs. A hunter can’t hunt when there is nothing to kill. Screwing with the Feds so they can’t screw with us, without them knowing it? Now that’s pretty sweet!

Steve Weikle

VA Firefighter, 70, Dies in Line of Duty After 49 Years of Service

Boiling Springs Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department firefighter Steve A. Weikle, 70, died following a medical emergency.
Virden (IL) House Fire

2 Die, 1 Injured in Virden (IL) House Fire; Investigation Underway

Two people died and another was seriously injured in a house fire Saturday, according to authorities.