The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
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
- WPSD: Firefighters Watch as Home Burns to the Ground
- WPSD: More Fallout Following House Fire
- USAToday: Firefighters watch house burn because owner hadn't paid $...
- MSNBC: No pay, no spray: Firefighters let home burn
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.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Actually, it is the county citizens that are resposible. They DO properly fund fire protection according to their wishes, as expressed through the county council members they elected.
They just do it by individual contract with the neighboring cities rather than through county taxes.
-
-
Robert,
The condescending tone here is yours and yours alone.
I offered you the chance to look up something that is well-known by anyone who has to design, fund, budget, and operate any government service and you essentially said "No, my mind is already made up." That's not just condescending, it's arrogant.
Your lack of understanding about how fire departments are funding speaks volumes, too.
-
Permalink Reply by Daniel Gormley on
-
All of this is so insane. The VFDs here go out and get donations from people and regardless if you donated or not, they will still go assist in your time of need. I can understand the argument over someone not paying and not getting fire service, but in my opinion, Fire/EMS service falls under the Good Samaritan Act. How does this not apply here? Is there no such thing there in Tennessee? Here in Texas, almost anyone that seen something bad happening, would stop and render aid. I cant see how someone would just stand by and do nothing. Forget orders. It's time counties like this are held liable. Ya so the county officials are elected by the people but the people are only told what they want to hear. Another good reason to never move to that area. Long life Texas.
-
-
I totally agree to this.... If the fire at the non subscriber home posed a threat to subscribers, then why not use preventative measures and just put out the damn fire... there is a great way to justify a FF's actions... they didn't put out the fire at the non subscriber, they prevented the subscriber's home from being engulfed. Wow... But then anyone willing to blindly follow such obscene "orders" .... wow... i dare to think the extent of the orders they would follow would be. I would NEVER stand by and do nothing. I would risk losing my job and tell the little chief good riddance. Go find a better job somewhere else. Some times, a job is just not worth being a part of.
-
Permalink Reply by Herb Genelly III on
-
So exactly how many times did the former fire chief get arrested? Talk about a Straw Man argument....LOL
-
-
Politicians do things and say things in order to get elected. The whole truth is rarely supplied. It is very possible that the people that voted on this were told half truths.
I wonder what people that live in apartments are forced to do for fire protection. Everyone seems to forget that localities can receive compensation from state and federal levels for many things.... hmmmm there is something to think about... Why are they not using their money wisely? They do have money to allocate to emergency services and as part of the whole 9/11 incident, even more resources have been put aside. Is the local government keeping more than they should for themselves instead of protecting their voters? Just something to keep everyone thinking.....
-
-
Ben,
First you say they can't put out the fire because of policy, but then you say if it's a Tactical situation, it's OK. That's my point: The policy CAN'T be uniformly applied, so it is then biased. The only reason this guys home burned, is because it wasn't TACTICALLY prudent to put it out, and no Life Hazard existed, regardless if he was a subscriber or not.
So..........people can FREELOAD, if their home is in the right place (close to a paid subscribers home)
Goodnight Benny Boy!
And now you're playing LAWYER, and talking about apples......LMAO!
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
MJ, again try looking at actual facts, not opinion.
They did not do the right thing the county of Obion, the homeowner and the city of South Fulton are all at fault.
Legally they DID do the right thing. There was No duty to act, orders were given and followed, there was no life threat trumping either, exposures were controlled, and the policy was followed. There is no gray area there.
if we get called to help its not our job to determine if they can afford the house or not. Or if they have paid their taxes or anything else our job is to go fight fires.
Our job also entails following orders by those above us. We do not enact the policy, but can enforce it, as in this case.
If he doesnt pay charge him with theft of services or fraud if he receives a check from the insurance company and doesnt pay.
Seriously? C'mon, how do expect a person who lost their possesions to adequately pay up after the fact. Besides, why should they thus get an "out" for paying after the fact than taking responsibilty to pay up front?
This is a past practice issue because it can show that they are selective in who they will or won't help. It shows that they will help some people outside of the city that havent paid but not others so it shows that they are being selective in their services which is discrimination.
MJ, do you even have a clue about how past practice would operate? It is a non-issue here because the policy is in place, just because the policy was ignored or unenforced in the past doesn't make it any less pertinent.
For example if your dept has an SOG in place that a plymovent will be in place for all rigs and attached while the rig is pulling in, etc that is the policy. Along the same lines if the dept has a policy that there will be a spotter any time a rig is backing up...that is the policy. If such policies were repeatedly ignored in the past and then suddenly a chief etc decides to enforce such SOG, there is NO past practice to fall on because the policy is in place.
Another analogy would be trying to sue for discrimination because you received a speeding ticket. You can argue all you want that others did not receive a ticket, or you never received a ticket in the past, but it doesn't matter, the law is there, the policy is there....if it is determined to be enforced, there is no past practice to fall on.
-
-
No, Daniel, it is not. There IS no VFD in Obion County. They have NO fire department, and it is by the taxpayers' CHOICE.
Fire and EMS specifically DO NOT fall under the Good Samaritan Act. That act is intended to protect people who act in good faith as BYSTANDERS. It specifically does not cover members of an organized emergency service - Fire, EMS, Rescue Squad, or Law Enforcement.
They firefighters in question did NOT "just stand by and do nothing". They protected the exposure - their subscriber's property.
"Forget Orders". You might. Once. Then you'd be unemployed.
"It's time counties like this are held liable." For what? Doing EXACTLY what their taxpayers told them to do, which is to keep taxes low by not having a fire department?
It's not the people who are being told what they want to hear, it's the elected officials hearing what the taxpayers are saying, then doing it.
"Another good reason tonever move to that area." 30,000 plus residents of Obion County disagree with you.
-
-
I wonder what people that live in apartments are forced to do for fire protection
Daniel, that has no bearing whatsoever here. People living in apartments are responsible for their own property, much like as in this subscription issue. Meaning there is renter's insurance available at a fraction of cost of homeowners. So if a renter decides against renter's insurance and the apartment complex burns, along with their possessions, they are SOL....there is no obligation by the building owner to compensate for their loss.
Everyone seems to forget that localities can receive compensation from state and federal levels for many things
Hmmm...like what? No, it is still the responsibility of the local community to provide public safety, not worry about begging from the state or fed because they chose to provide substandard services.
Why are they not using their money wisely? They do have money to allocate to emergency services and as part of the whole 9/11 incident, even more resources have been put aside. Is the local government keeping more than they should for themselves instead of protecting their voters?
Well sure seems the lack of a tax based system for fire protection and instead the use of subscription services has shown a poor use in using money wisely. Bottom line is the county here is afraid of implementing a tax, which would resolve this issue, and the county residents are either too greedy or too stubborn to accept such a tax.
-
-
"It is very possible that the people that voted on this were told half truths."
Speculative and not congruent with what has been published regarding the issue. The taxpayers don't want a county fire department. They've shown it by electing and re-electing county council members who will not vote for a county fire department and the tax increase that would go with it.
Apartment dwellers - the building owner is responsible for paying the fire subscription - if there are even any apartments in the county. It's possible that there are none. If any exist, it's up to the residents to obtain renter's insurance to cover their possessions.
"They do have money to allocate to emergency services..."
What evidence do you have for that? This is a small, rural county and the categorically DO NOT have enough money to fund the kind of system you advocate.
"...and as part of the whole 9/11 incident, even more resources have been put aside." WMD and law enforcement grants, maybe. We're not discussing a terrorist attack here, we're discussing a house fire.
There haven't been "enough resources put aside" to fully fund every fire department in the country. Since they don't have an organized fire department, Obion County isn't eligible for the FIRE grant process anyway.
"Is the local government keeping more than they should for themselves instead of protecting their voters?" Unless you can show some evidence that this is the case, that is a slanderous allegation.
"Why are they not using their money wisely?" According to their local taxpayers, they are using their money VERY wisely. They have very low tax rates, and that's what they want.
Not only that, but Obion County does not charge or collect a PENNY of fire tax from anyone. Please explain how they are going to "protect their voters" from fire without collecting ANY fire taxes???
-
-
The VFDs here go out and get donations from people and regardless if you donated or not, they will still go assist in your time of need
Whoa Daniel, hold on there. Despite the fact that volunteer depts still do fund raisers, make no mistake, fundraisers are not the sole means for providing services. There are still capital expenditures like rigs, etc that a fundraiser don't cover, there is still gear, maintainence, training, repairs....basicallycost of daily operations to consider and so forth. What it boils down to is in the vast majority of places....even volunteer...there are still tax dollars going to the cost of operation......not the case here in a subscription area.
but in my opinion, Fire/EMS service falls under the Good Samaritan Act. How does this not apply here?
Nope. Good Samaritan act does not cover for people who are acting in an official capacity. Meaning the person who is trained as a FF and responds as a FF for the responding dept does have an obligation to follow the rules and ORDERS of the dept they represent. Good Samaritan is really for the bystander, not the trained professional.
Forget orders
So freelancing at all cost then? Freelancing by any means? The hell with an IC on scene, do what you want?....yeah right...please!
It's time counties like this are held liable.
And what the heck do you think the SFFD just did? They stuck to the policy and the county is responsible...is it not.
Ya so the county officials are elected by the people but the people are only told what they want to hear.
It is also the people voicing their opinion at such council meetings against a tax and the fact that such elected officials have no spine to incorporate such a tax that this takes place.....hey the people asked for such a policy....don't whine because the policy was enforced.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
