The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
And they watched it burn, again...
Before you comment read my whole post...
Well the story has broke again. I made this prediction in the many threads from the last fire in 2010 that got the FFN boards lit up. History repeats itself in the fire service. The homeowner this time admits they knew the past story of "Pay for Spray" in 2010 and about the $75.00 fee. They said quote, "never thought it would happen to them."
Here is the news video: http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Home-burns-while-firefighters-...
In my opinion, the FD who refuses to put out the fire is doing the right thing. As hard as that may seem, if the FD provides the service for free, then nobody in the county will pay. This story has been going on for many years. For those who don't know, the county has NO fire department, the residents know this. Many move there because it is cheaper to live there. Past studies have been done to reccommend providing fire protection services but it will cost the homewowner more in their county taxes. The county administrators have decided to keep it "Pay for Spray" meaning a neighboring fire department who does NOT have any jurisdictional requirement to respond to your county residence, is allowed to offer their services to each individual homeowner for $75.00 per year. If you pay the $75.00 subscription service, you will get a response and mitigation from the neighboring FD. This is not mutual aid, this is not automatic aid. This is paying for fire protection from a contractor. If you don't pay the fee, the FD has told everyone numerous times, no pay = no service.
In my opinion the lack of FD action keeps the integrity of the lousy system in place. The people who pay are getting services when needed and they are NOT subsidizing their neighbors lack of payment. The fire department unfortunately gets caught up in the media and the "passion police" when the story of "they just watched it burn" After the last story unfolded, many neighboring chiefs came out and tried to explain how small of a budget this fire department has, one chief even mentioned the fire chief sometimes, empty's the soda machine to buy fuel for his trucks with change.
So instead of continuously being the bad guy, I suggest the Mayor and the Fire Chief tell the county administrators that they are done offering subscriptions next year. Therefore no more subscription service to the county and the COUNTY will now have to fund their own protection services. The administrators will then have to assess a fire tax to their residents to fund either a volunteer fire department(s) or pay for services from another FD for every county residence.
Time to end the subsciption mess...... it is a black eye to the one's who have to enforce the rules and the integrity.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
Again, what am I missing?
That such a concept would have to instilled in the decision makers and residents of the said county. The residents want this system and the elected officials seem to have no stones to look at implementing a fee/tax on all, to fund fire protection to the unincorporated areas of the county.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
a) There is NO contract with the County and SFFD, it is individually 'contracted' between homeowner and SFFD.
b) SFFD is funded by the residents of South Fulton, TN. They have extended the opportunity to subscribe to fire protection for $75. Bear in mind that their FIRST responsibility is to the RESIDENTS of South Fulton. What you are suggesting is SFFD take on ALL fire protection service within the appropriate unincorporated area of Obion County. This is going to reduce the level of fire service to South Fulton.
c) As has been mentioned times too numerous to count, the County does NOT want to require its residents to pay for any fire protection. It means raising taxes, something the residents of Obion County do not want.
d) Requiring ALL residents of the unincorporated area of Obion County to pay an additional $75 per year IS raising taxes. How can you not see that?
e) There IS a need for a county fire department, clearly they don't have one and some (who agree with this) are subscribing to SFFD services.
f) Very clearly, the residents of Obion County would rather go without their own fire department and bet (mostly, with NO money down) that their house won't burn down.
g) At some point, SFFD will no longer be able to provide fire protection to two different due areas: those that fund them through their tax rates and; those that subscribe because their own leadership won't raise taxes to fund their own department.
h) What you are ignoring is the fact that one group of residents have consistently refused to fund for their own fire protection, some of whom opt into the SFFD subscription service. You are failing to understand that SFFD is NOT responsible for County fire protection, ONLY to those that subscribe. And while you seem not to get that requiring residents to pay an additional $75 for fire protection IS raising taxes, you also don't get that you are suggesting that residents OUTSIDE of South Fulton are entitled to fire protection services from SFFD.They are not.
i) To eliminate the "bad PR" (which is little more than uniformed media reporting) South Fulton Fire Department needs to END the subscription service and let the County residents fend for themselves. And so long as the county does NOT have to pay for fire protection and subscription remains available they will never fund their own fire department. Think of it this way, If someone handed you a paycheck every month for NOT working, would you give that up and find a job instead? The County is being given 'free' fire protection, why on earth would they ever raise taxes on themselves to pay for something they are now getting for (essentially) free?
Or am I missing something?
-
Permalink Reply by Bradley Webb on
-
While I did not read the majority of replies on here. All of them either say one thing. They should have put it out or they were justified.
Well in my honest opinion, I believe in both. I understand that the residents are basically "rolling the dice" if they don't pay the subscription service, and that if the dept. responds and acts to extinguish the fire then everyone else thinks they are entitled to fire protection without paying. However this subscription system needs to be abolished before someone gets hurt. I also understand the residents voted down cancelling the subscription system however it should still be overruled in my opinion and done away with. Also if this department is supposedly so relying on these $75 subscriptions, how much is the residents of South Fulton paying for protection? If the department relies more on the $75 subscriptions wouldn't that make the department have more of an obligation to those residents than even to South Fulton? I don't know, nor does it bother me, I'm just getting tired of seeing black eyes from sucker punch news headlines like these.
This whole situation is not only making South Fulton look bad, but every other Fire Department. If an average civilian reads a headline like this, they are automatically going to think that the fire department is the bad guy. Even knowing the full story, I'm sure a good many people will still believe the department is the bad guy. Some will think like most on here, oh well they didn't pay too bad, their fault. While that may be right, I don't think it is.
Now moves on to my point. To me it is all about ethics. To let someone's prized possessions burn is not something I think I can do. It's just not in me to let that happen. So ridicule me, type nasty things, you won't change my mind. I think that from a moral and ethical point of view they could have made an attempt at putting the fire out. I work this job not for money, not to be some super hero, not to be in the news, definitely not for the politics. I work this job because I like helping people. I would work this job for free, if I didn't have bills to pay. Money is not an object that factors in my decisions. Letting someone's prized possessions including their house which they paid however much for burn down all for a lousy $75? It makes me lower my head in disgust and makes me think of how far we have come as a service. In the early days it was all done either volunteer or paid for by insurance companies. Now we have a BS subscription service that is going to get someone killed if it doesn't stop.
Again these are all just my opinions, I am entitled to my opinions, just like everyone else. I just wanted to voice how I personally feel about the situation.
-
-
Bradley,
Let me quote you;
Letting someone's prized possessions including their house which they paid however much for burn down all for a lousy $75?
Exactly! All the homeowner had to do was pay the $75. Why do people think it's a shame the FD let a house burn down all for lack of $75 BUT, none of you seem to give a crap that the homeowner did NOT value their OWN property to the extent of $75.
You should lower your head in disgust, that you would lay the blame at the feet of a put-upon fire department that is TRYING to be the nice guy here and provide fire service for people that want it but whose own local government won't provide it.
And right, every time some knuckleheaded, chromosomally damaged dipshit that didn't think their own crap was worth $75's house burns down, SFFD should go and extinguish it for free. Why don't you put the blame where it belongs: On the mofo homeowners that won't fund their own department and won't pay $75 for a subscription.
I hang my head in disgust every time I read someone here who thinks the FD is to blame.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Exactly. Well said.
-
-
I did not place blame on anybody. If anything is to blame it is the stupid subscription service itself, even though the residents voted for it. I just hate to read headlines like "Fire department lets home burn...." It doesn't help anybody especially not the department. However you will never see a headline: "Homeowner didn't pay, house burns down." You won't see that in the media. Why is every firefighter on here so quick to blame the homeowner for not paying $75? It goes both ways, you can't say one without looking at the other. To me there is no blame this person or that, cause it is a lose/lose situation anyway you put it. Fire dept lets a house burn down, black eye to the department. Homeowner doesn't pay $75, stupid homeowner. County won't help implement a plan that's reasonable to help the citizens of Obion county with fire service WITHOUT being subscription based, shame on them. Lose/lose all around fellas in my opinion. This argument has no end. You are either on one side of the fence or not. Help with no pay, or not help. I chose help from my own viewpoint. Not blaming anybody just saying how I think about it. If I lived in Obion county and whether the tax was paid or not, I would try and find some way to raise money for my own department to help Obion county. Even if I worked for South Fulton I would still try and help. I don't know how many people we are talking but if they all took their $75 and put it towards a used pumper truck and some used equipment. I'm sure they could have a decent volunteer department. Sure if they don't, then their problem. However I want to stop seeing bad headlines, so I'm saying Subscription service out. However here is food for thought, what if South Fulton helped then everyone cancelled their $75 and the county made it mandatory for them to pay a $75 tax? Would that solve all problems? Probably not, but it would be a start.
-
-
There are two huge holes in your "solution".
1) The members of the SFFD are busy just trying to keep their department afloat for the city jurisdiction where their legal obligation lies. They have no obligation - and probably don't have the time to fund fire protection for the county residents that have already indicated that they don't WANT any fire protection.
2) If the SFFD cancels their county subscription service, then they are punishing their subscribers who comply with the system in place in order to help the few non-subscribers that are the ones causing the problem in the first place. Why on earth would any sane fire department remove fire protection from people who are contractually entitled to it in order to provide free fire protection to people that have already indicated that they don't want it?
Frankly, your idea would reward the guilty, punish the innocent, and make the firefighters support that mistake with their time, effort, and money. That just doesn't make sense on any level.
-
-
I still say that if this department relies more on funds from outside it's jurisdiction then it needs to take a look at it's own area and figure out why it isn't making ends meet. Is the department growing past what the city can give it? Or is the city not giving it enough as it is? Or is the department stretching it's resources past the point of what the budget will allow? The department should at least break even with it's own area. If not, then the whole situation is more messed up than just letting a house burn down. I know we get a very small budget compared to other department's in the county. They run half as many calls as we do and spend all of their money every year and we always have money left over. Sometimes more than we know what to do with. We have always gotten by with the bare minimum and are always the leading dept in the county. Maybe it is just good management, I don't know.
I work in a department paid by the city, however we run outside the city limits on calls all the time. A miniscule amount of money comes from that. Surely not $75 per house worth (although I may be wrong). I'm never going to ask a person if they paid their taxes. I know a many a fires I've been to where people probably have never paid taxes nor never will. Is that any different? They found some way not to pay or can't pay and therefore legally don't have fire service, but we still go and do what we can. And sure cancelling the whole thing like your saying would be stupid. I would like to see the $75 fire tax mandatory for everyone. That would help the department, delete the subscription, help the county keep the media away, doesn't change the people who do pay, and the only ones punished are the ones who don't pay now, who are already getting punished by letting their houses burn down. That is how I see that it could work. I'm not a politician, just a lowly level fireman, so I don't know if that is even possible in back-asswards Tennessee. If they don't vote that in then the homeowners who are paying the $75 don't know what's good for them. Cause if it is mandatory it means more money for the dept and better service for those who have been paying their $75.
Like I said earlier. I don't care if they do it again or not. Happened twice now, can't get much worse. Not my department don't care. I just don't want to see headlines like this because it doesn't help any department, so the best bet is to fix the problem. It's not the fire department, however much I don't like their actions, justified or not. It's the subscription that is the problem, not South Fulton. So I guess that is my closing remarks. System is messed up. I think everyone can agree that the system is not very smart, and the department is justified in their actions, however much as firefighters we don't like not fighting a fire. Can everyone agree on that or am I wrong?
-
-
Bradley,
You obviously have not been paying attention to all the facts here.
The City of South Fulton has an all-volunteer fire department that serves a city of approximately 1,500 people. The unincorporated area of Obion County has approximately 35,000 residents.
Do you REALLY think that it is the responsibility of a small city to give away free fire protection to the much larger county population when the subscription system has worked just fine for everyone except for two homeowners who INTENTIONALLY chose to have no fire protection?
It has been pointed out over and over that the $75 is NOT a tax - it is a business contract fee.
There is NO fire tax in the unincorporated areas of Obion County. The county taxpayers have voted down ANY fire tax on multiple occasions. They elect county council members who run on a "no fire tax" platform.
The local taxpayers have the right to NOT have a fire tax. I'm pretty sure that they don't care that you believe that the $75 should be mandatory.
Do you REALLY believe that the fact that your fire department gives away free out-of-jurisdiction fire protection has any bearing on what South Fulton can afford to do? Obviously, it doesn't. South Fulton doesn't operate based on your comfort zone, or your department's policies. Obviously, their situation is different than yours, so you have no reason to claim that they should operate in a way that doesn't fit their situation.
"Keep the media away." That is not just a really bad idea, it is illegal. The news media has a Constitutional right to be on scene and report the news. Retired Chief Curt Varone has several stories of public safety officials getting themselves in trouble for trying to prevent the news media from videoing emergency scenes at his Fire Law blog. The link is one of many posts Chief Varone has published on the subject. He is one of the foremost U.S. authorities on Fire Law.
"back-asswards Tennessee" That comment is an offensive generalization, to say the least.
"System is messed up." In what way? Just because it's not the system that you are comfortable with doesn't mean that it is messed up. The locals have exactly the system they want. It is their Constitutional right to have things that way.
The bottom line - your discomfort with how things are done in Obion County in no way makes the locals' preferences bad,"bass-ackwards", "not smart" or anything other than their exercise of their legal rights. They, and only they have a say in the matter.
-
-
My niece is a special needs teacher; I know have a greater appreciation for how her days go.
-
-
I hear you, brother. Convey my appreciation for what she does to her for me.
-
-
First of all, Jack/dt, is not only what you said rude it is disrespectful. You go through life talking to all strangers like that? Maybe you should go join your niece's class and learn some manners. You don't give respect you don't deserve any. I have been nothing but respectful, (except maybe to TN) just slightly disagreeing in the debate which I can do without being harrassed by you. And just because I disagree, it doesn't make me a special needs student. Just means I can think for myself and don't have to take crap from rude individuals such as yourself. Now onto the points Mr. Waller brings up, RESPECTFULLY.
I did not know what the population was til this last message. And I also never said anything about South Fulton being responsible either. I said it is inethical, to let someone's home burn down, whether paid or not, whether obligated too help or not. You witness a car accident on the side of the road, do you go help? If you say no, then I rest my case. Fine by me, you are not obligated to help, keep on keeping on. Just like in the South Fulton case. They are not obligated so they didn't. Simple, end of story not arguing that. It's just not something I am comfortable with. ME. I could not do that. That's my choice. I would rather do the right thing and help whether it was bad politically or it cost me my job. That's my nature. Sorry can't change that. That is the point I was trying to make with my first message. I just happened to run a little askew of my point.
I'm just going to keep this simple. I don't really want to argue anymore. I argued the first time this happened and I really don't want to do it again. YOU ARE RIGHT IN EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID, however I still think the fire subscription is a bad idea. South Fulton can do whatever they want as far as I'm concerned, I may not like it, may not agree with it, however not my dept couldn't care less. Just felt like voicing my concerns again, which I should have thought about beforehand.
Also on the "keep the media away" thing, I meant more of a bad media, bad press situation. Not all press. I should have said bad publicity. You read into it too far, and I didn't clarify enough. My apologies. Even then you can't prevent the media from reporting, all you can do is do your best and hope they don't turn it around into something bad. Much like South Fulton. They were doing what they were told to do. However the media only sees it as a bad move. The press is responsible for all the bad publicity South Fulton has received. It wasn't their fault, they were following orders.
As for the Tennessee remark, I apologize, I was frustrated (not with this) and let my emotions out. Sorry about that.
So I hope we can end this fair. I don't like what they did. I don't like the system. I don't see how all this could end in any positive way for Obion Co. or South Fulton. That is my opinion. I am allowed to it. No amount of persuasion or facts can change that. Just how I feel about it. You are entitled to your opinion on the matter and I respect that. Thanks for trying to change mine, sorry it didn't work.
I'll finish with a quote and you can take it or leave it, doesn't bother me: "Rules are great, but sometimes you just need to do the right thing, just because you know it is the right thing to do."
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
