Tennessee Firefighters Let Home Burn Over Subscription Issue

JASON HIBBS
WPSD
Reprinted with Permission

OBION COUNTY, Tenn. - Imagine your home catches fire but the local fire department won't respond, then watches it burn. That's exactly what happened to a local family tonight.

Related

FireEMSBlogs.com Updates

A local neighborhood is furious after firefighters watched as an Obion County, Tennessee, home burned to the ground.

The homeowner, Gene Cranick, said he offered to pay whatever it would take for firefighters to put out the flames, but was told it was too late. They wouldn't do anything to stop his house from burning.

Each year, Obion County residents must pay $75 if they want fire protection from the city of South Fulton. But the Cranicks did not pay.

The mayor said if homeowners don't pay, they're out of luck.

This fire went on for hours because garden hoses just wouldn't put it out. It wasn't until that fire spread to a neighbor's property, that anyone would respond.

Turns out, the neighbor had paid the fee.

"I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," said Gene Cranick.

Because of that, not much is left of Cranick's house.

They called 911 several times, and initially the South Fulton Fire Department would not come.

The Cranicks told 9-1-1 they would pay firefighters, whatever the cost, to stop the fire before it spread to their house.

"When I called I told them that. My grandson had already called there and he thought that when I got here I could get something done, I couldn't," Paulette Cranick.

It was only when a neighbor's field caught fire, a neighbor who had paid the county fire service fee, that the department responded. Gene Cranick asked the fire chief to make an exception and save his home, the chief wouldn't.

We asked him why.

He wouldn't talk to us and called police to have us escorted off the property. Police never came but firefighters quickly left the scene. Meanwhile, the Cranick home continued to burn.

We asked the mayor of South Fulton if the chief could have made an exception.

"Anybody that's not in the city of South Fulton, it's a service we offer, either they accept it or they don't," Mayor David Crocker said.

Friends and neighbors said it's a cruel and dangerous city policy but the Cranicks don't blame the firefighters themselves. They blame the people in charge.

"They're doing their job," Paulette Cranick said of the firefighters. "They're doing what they are told to do. It's not their fault."

To give you an idea of just how intense the feelings got in this situation, soon after the fire department returned to the station, the Obion County Sheriff's Department said someone went there and assaulted one of the firefighters.

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Billy Lilly on October 10, 2010 at 11:03pm

Actually only 3 firefighters are payed. I looked at there website. When it was up. It says 3 paid firefighters 14 volunteers.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Herb Genelly III on October 10, 2010 at 11:05pm

Ben,

#1) You didn't prove that the money for tourism was all from the US, like you asserted. Of the 9% of GDP, what is the figure? Can you prove that tourism $$ go directly to their FD's? (Assumptions on your part)

#2) I took a direct sentence from the quote. He would have put out the fire knowing it wan't policy, so out of morality/ethics, even if it resulted in adverse consequences. That goes to his character; his willingness to lose his job over the incident, and a direct contradiction to a chief who made a different decision.

#3)You didn't work for or with SFFD, so you can't claim to know anything about them. Saying you were closer is like saying I worked closer to San Francisco F.D. than you, so I know better. I don't.

#4)All orders do not have to be followed, if on the fire-ground, a situation exists where a decision maker makes an unlawful order. Violating a POLICY does not always constitute an UNLAWFUL order.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on October 10, 2010 at 11:07pm

I agree with Dr. Carter on one important point, when he said "there are no free lunches".
That is exactly the issue in the Obion County incident.

Otherwise, I think that this is the first time I have ever serously disagreed with him.
He bases his position on his personal experience in a densly-populated northeastern area with no coverage gaps. Obion County's situation is nothing like that.

The IAFF position has already been discussed as simple grandstanding by the IAFF President.
He is anti-volunteer. An example is his position on two-hatting. He statement applied to career professional firefighters. South Fulton's department is volunteer, per the statement by the Union City fire chief that the Union City department is the only career department in Obion County.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fireslayer960 on October 10, 2010 at 11:13pm

Yup, Emergency service district. Our district covers about 140 square miles. No, there is no separation for the city. It is all one district.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Herb Genelly III on October 10, 2010 at 11:14pm

See you tomorrow Ben.....................................LOL

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fireslayer960 on October 10, 2010 at 11:19pm

I posted that link so that you would see for yourself that he did indeed say what he did, and that I was not B.S.ing

And the "Bribing" issue? Well, as lame as I might think your comparison is (along with a few brothers and two city P.D. guys here with me) You just might be on to something! Why? because I just read, The police Chief of South Fulton is the mayors brother. : )

Almost makes me wanna sing the theme from Dukes Of Hazzard,,Just some good ole boys,,,LOL

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on October 10, 2010 at 11:55pm

Did you see the definition of "Bribery" that I posted for Herb earlier?

To paraphrase it includes ..."voluntarily giving something of value to a public official in return for influencing the official in how he carries out his duties. That sounds exactly like what the homeowner did when he offered "whatever it costs" in an attempt to get extinguishment that he knew he would not otherwise get.
Your geography is off, too. The incident occurrred in unincorporated Obion County. Neither the Mayor or the Police Chief of South Fulton have jurisdiction outside the city limits where the incident occured.

Thanks for the gratuitious, weak stereotype.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on October 11, 2010 at 12:00am

Thanks for the information.

Your department's history is different than either Obion County's or South Fulton's.

Their city and county fire services are provided differently, even if the same department runs the city and the surrounding unincorporated county as South Fulton does.

To put it another way, South Fulton's ESD stops at their city limits.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fireslayer960 on October 11, 2010 at 12:03am

You are welcome.

And from a reliable source sitting here with me (an off duty PD officer), not only is that issue a stretch by a long shot, you would never get a cop to enforce it. And even if you did, the D.A. would toss it out before even starting proceedings. There are issues of "Criminal Intent" that come into play, along with many other factors, that you would deem irrelevant anyway, so no point in my listing them.

And to bring the good ole boy analogy up one notch, do some research on why the county commissioners are against raising taxes. (Hint: They allegedly own large parcels of land)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on October 11, 2010 at 12:09am

Since the thread above has reached its limits, I'll put my reply here to try to keep it on the same page.

1) Since you don't/won't/can't back up a single thing you say, why should I show you additional evidence? I proved that tourism is important to the New Zealand economy according to one of their own web pages. In other words, their fire system benefits from non-resident tourist dollars so much that it's an essential sector of their economy. Obion County doesn't have that advantage. That's the point.

2) You cherry picked the one exception to everything else the Union City chief said. Deny it all you want, but we both know you did it.

3) I worked in the same state under the same kind of system, so I know how it works from experience. You haven't worked for that kind of system, and you've spent a lot of time here claiming that it was "not MORAL" without having a clue how it works - or that it has in fact worked, based on the Union City chief's comments that you didn't include when you cherry picked his comments.

4) The order was lawful, and it was obeyed. The policy was lawful, and it was followed. Your hypothetical isn't pertinent, because that's not what occurred.