On July 1st of this year the city eliminated 29 positions from the Fire dept. This caused the reduction of 1 Engine Company and 3 Brush Pumpers. Shortly after this happened the Fire administration ordered one of the Brush pumpers be manned with personnel from elsewhere. This was a trail balloon floated to see if it would be noticed. It was, and a grievance was filed and the project was stopped. In discussions with the Fire Chief, it was brought up that these formally manned rigs were now "tools" at the Fire station and could be used as the officer saw fit.

In 2008, the city funded 951 positions. 202 through the Public Safety sales tax and 749 through the general fund. This year the Fire dept. is funded this way, 200 through the PSST, 45 through a one year, temporary Maps3 Use tax and 677 through the general fund.

If you do the math you will see that there are 15 Brush Pumpers in service, multiply that by 3 shifts that equals 45 positions. When asked in a meeting if the 45 Temporary Maps 3 use tax
positions were in danger of being eliminated at the fiscal years end and those rigs being deemed as "tools", the Fire Chief would not deny that possibility.

If you support further reduction in your Fire services, do nothing. If you are concerned about the dangers of further reductions in Fire services, please contact your council member

Isn't the MAPS 3 Use Tax "committed" for 2 years?

I know Cornett's plan was using it for 2 years which would hopefully get us past the low sales tax receipts (and for the past 5 months, sales tax revenues have been up, sometimes significantly). However, they were at a such low point to begin with, don't think we are close to being at the point where they were before the year long double digit declines. In Tuesday's Council meeting some still are urging caution (wisely so), noting that they still think the bump is due to the storms we had and replacement roofs etc.

Patrick Ryan made It perfectly clear, even specifically asking the Mayor twice whether or not this was a one year deal. Ryan also reiterated that it was a one year only funding of those positions.

Sales tax revenues for this fiscal year are 4 million dollars higher than the similar time in 2008. You do have to take into account that the general fund is paying for 80 less positions in addition to the revenues being up.

... You do have to take into account that the general fund is paying for 80 less positions in addition to the revenues being up.

Raises a good discussion question, at least to me. As the GF is paying for 80 fewer positions, one might wonder if the gross amount of GF dollars for the FD has declined in your comparison periods, with those funds going to some other part of the city now. Or, one might wonder if, notwithstanding GF now covers 80 fewer positions in the FD, the expenses associated with the FD had risen at a level that there is still more GF going into the FD now than there was before.

Anyone know which scenario is closer to the mark?

Adequate FD staffing and equipment are iimperative to the safety and well being of this city.

Is the staffing currently inadequate? What specifically has been the negative impact?

Sales tax revenues for this fiscal year are 4 million dollars higher than the similar time in 2008. You do have to take into account that the general fund is paying for 80 less positions in addition to the revenues being up.

Mike - Weren't sales tax revenues DOWN in 2009, and aren't we digging ourselves out of that hole, especially in light of tenuous current/future revenue situations?

If there are not personnel to operate the brush pumpers, for example, the city is in a precarious situation when it comes to fighting grass fires. I don't believe that the regular engine and ladder trucks can access as easily places like fields, areas between trees, etc. because of their weight, for one thing.

We are going through similar discussion here in Jax where the City Council is trying to push through a 9% increase in property taxes, which as you can imagine, is going over like a lead ballon. This has prompted people to start taking a hard look at what the City spends money, and eliminating it. A few of things found so far is the city paying for an official city band, several hundred season tickets to the Jags, a multi-million contract to ensure the city is selecting enough minority owned business to contract with, paying for a community picnic for inner city kids and their families, funds the Jackonville Human Rights Commission to the tune of $1 million, $21 million to the Children's Commision, $10 million to a group called Jackosnville Journey, and the list goes on and on.

Meanwhile, 15 firefighter were laid off and 23 were demoted. It is in times like this where we see the real priorities of elected officials.

If there are not personnel to operate the brush pumpers, for example, the city is in a precarious situation when it comes to fighting grass fires. I don't believe that the regular engine and ladder trucks can access as easily places like fields, areas between trees, etc. because of their weight, for one thing.

Why can't the same staff man both? What do the 45 firefighters that staff this equipment do the 6+ months plus a year where there are no grass fires? Is cross training for efficiency not possible?

Meanwhile, 15 firefighter were laid off and 23 were demoted. It is in times like this where we see the real priorities of elected officials.

I wonder when folks will realize...Police and Fire come BEFORE parks, libraries, you name it-- and all the other things. Period, drop dead.

How will reducing fire staff by 45 personnel effect readiness?

And what is the city staffing to be ready for? What kind/size of event? How often does an event that size happen historically.

And what is the city staffing to be ready for? What kind/size of event? How often does an event that size happen historically.

The fire department doesn't do much in the way of actually fighting fires. We spend an awful lot of money on them so that they can go to calls which our A++++ rated EMSA already goes to. If it were up to me, I'd probably get rid of a lot more fire fighters so that we could more adequately staff the police department.

Meanwhile, 15 firefighter were laid off and 23 were demoted. It is in times like this where we see the real priorities of elected officials.

I wonder when folks will realize...Police and Fire come BEFORE parks, libraries, you name it-- and all the other things. Period, drop dead.

You know this, I know this, Firefighters/Police know this... but for some reason politicans don't know this. I guess there are more votes to be had with parks, libraries, picnics, etc... Don't get me wrong though, hiring more firefighters for the sake of hiring more firefighters isn't a good idea either. Anyone know the Key Performance Indicators that are used to determine 'adequate resources'? The logic that says we have to have enough to staff all the trucks doesn't sound like a solid justification to me because the solutioon to that easy - just get rid of the extra fire trucks.

Mike - Weren't sales tax revenues DOWN in 2009, and aren't we digging ourselves out of that hole, especially in light of tenuous current/future revenue situations?

True. But his point was collections are above 2008 levels (not 2009), presumably before the decline (at least the worst part).

As far as the 2 year thing I mentioned in a previous post...the 2 year guarantee/commitment of the MAPS 3 Use Tax (M3UT)/no cuts to fire/police, was for the then current fiscal year (before the vote and budget approval) and now. So the "only" for 1 year is technically correct. My problem isn't with that, but that they said no positions would be cut and in fact, positions were cut. Now they plan on cutting even more? There is nothing stopping them from using additional M3UT at a later date (but no commitment to do so).

You know this, I know this, Firefighters/Police know this... but for some reason politicans don't know this. I guess there are more votes to be had with parks, libraries, picnics, etc... Don't get me wrong though, hiring more firefighters for the sake of hiring more firefighters isn't a good idea either. Anyone know the Key Performance Indicators that are used to determine 'adequate resources'? The logic that says we have to have enough to staff all the trucks doesn't sound like a solid justification to me because the solutioon to that easy - just get rid of the extra fire trucks.

They did that too. According to the info on the flyer, they cut 29 Fire positions and 4 fire trucks from the budget. Don't know if those 4 include the truck that had already been MAPS for Kids Use Tax money ($4M, mol) had been earmarked and was instead diverted to pay for improvements to the Cox for the Barons hockey.

Midtowner it makes alot of sense to have the Fire service take control of the mentioned ambulance service. Since the ambulance service is a for profit company and they do well on the profit part.

Midtowner it makes alot of sense to have the Fire service take control of the mentioned ambulance service. Since the ambulance service is a for profit company and they do well on the profit part.

Maybe/maybe not. I'm guessing that when you figure in pensions and benefits, the city might come out better with EMSA rather than increasing the number of firefighters and city owned ambulances. It'd be worth a study at the very least.

There are smarter, better-read and -informed people here than me, certainly about sources of public funds going into public services. Some of the sources are discretionary (general fund, I believe), while others are dedicated (M3UT). BUT - Since those sources of funds are based primarily on sales tax revenues, and sales tax collections are down in this recession, wouldn't it make sense that money simply isn't coming in to the extent that it once was, and that the pain is going to be shared across the board? So isn't this topic really about "my ox is getting gored more than your ox?" If so, then shouldn't we all just HTFU until better times come around?

EMSA paramedics don't get paid overtime for when they are on vacation. FACT: Oklahoma City firefighters, by their contract, do.

Steve, why do you have to pick a fight every time? It seems through your post that you are putting "blame" on firefighters for agreeing to something the city proposed. Let's cover this again. The city in their infinite wisdom decided to cure manpower issues about ten years ago. They thought if they offered us the option of vacation and holiday pay to be considered hours worked. They did this thinking the firefighters would take off less. In theory it worked for a time. But when you don't replace those who retire it makes it hard to stretch the manpower. So why don't you present it next time that the city is a bunch of idiots for wanting to pay people overtime for being on vacation. Hey, remember Steve there are 29 less firefighters getting that overtime this year. That ought to count for some savings, hub?

How about the city paying a company to run it's business. Don't you think the city could use that million or so dollars instead of it going to a Texas hospital?

Not picking fights, just pointing out an example of how EMSA paramedics cost less than firefighters.

Steve, why don't you tell everyone about the paramedics that get paid a 200 dollar bonus plus mileage of about 115 dollars, to drive to Tulsa. To work 1 shift to cover the shortages in manpower up there.

Maybe/maybe not. I'm guessing that when you figure in pensions and benefits, the city might come out better with EMSA rather than increasing the number of firefighters and city owned ambulances. It'd be worth a study at the very least.

A study would definitely be in order. From what I understand, not sure if any additional fire personnel would be needed since they are responding to calls anyway and read somewhere that the City owns the ambulances anyway (so not sure why the number would necessarily increase).

In today's Oklahoman, it mentioned that our ambulance service got high marks. Do we really want to change it?

Am all for deleting duplication of effort (fire and EMSA both responding to the same calls), City/County duplication of services etc. Point is make sure you are getting rid of the right ones.

I don't pay my employees overtime when they're on vacation. I can't afford it as a business owner. But it's OK for me to do it as a taxpayer? I can't afford that either.

A study would definitely be in order. From what I understand, not sure if any additional fire personnel would be needed since they are responding to calls anyway and read somewhere that the City owns the ambulances anyway (so not sure why the number would necessarily increase).

In today's Oklahoman, it mentioned that our ambulance service got high marks. Do we really want to change it?

Am all for deleting duplication of effort (fire and EMSA both responding to the same calls), City/County duplication of services etc. Point is make sure you are getting rid of the right ones.

Exactly. I don't think anyone knows the answer here. Trouble is--with all of the heavily entrenched interests and politics involved, can a study be done which is divorced completely from the politics?

Too many powerful interests are lined up against that sort of thing Midtowner. And the folks who benefit from such waste count on a fickle public not keeping the pressure up to make real changes. They know that at the end of the day the average person is too lazy to remember how their legislator voted on a particular bill. For example: how many of you know how your representative voted on a bill that REQUIRES raises be given to county officials?
I'm betting you don't. So here's a copy of a story done when this whollybooger was signed into law. Someone who delves into other legislation will find all sorts of items like this.


A one-word change to state law has sparked confusion about whether elected county officials in Oklahoma are now guaranteed the highest salaries allowed by law.

The revised law doesn't go into effect until November, but one county commissioner eager for his first raise in four years already raised his salary and those of the county's other elected officials to the highest allowed under state law.

The decision by Comanche County Commissioner Ron Kirby outraged several county officials there, including a judge who criticized it as unwise at a time when many public agencies are facing serious budget problems.

"Your common sense has been vaporized by your never-ending crusade to raise your salary," District Judge Allen McCall wrote in a scathing June 30 letter to Kirby. "Like most people in the courthouse, you have a great job with a very generous salary. Are you so greedy that you can't understand that?"

The officials' salaries were raised from about $58,000 to about $61,000, but Kirby, 70, quickly retracted the raises after realizing the law wasn't in effect yet. He and the other elected officials paid back the extra money they had received — a couple hundred dollars each.

Kirby, a former state representative, admitted to the mistake and said much of the controversy there stems from his ongoing feuds with the county excise board, which must approve county budgets but has not approved his request for raises for elected officials for the past four years.

"It's kind of ironic they put me in charge of an $8 million budget, yet they want to send out for a cheap guy to do it," Kirby said.

Implications are far-ranging

The larger issue, however, is whether the new law forces counties to pay elected officials the highest salaries possible even if they don't want to do so.

Their salaries include a base salary plus an amount determined by a formula that factors in county property valuations and population.

State law used to say counties "may" pay elected officials up to the maximum amount determined under that formula; House Bill 2573 changed the law to say counties "shall" pay them that amount.

Gov. Brad Henry signed the bill last month. Most of the bill deals with medical costs at county jails.

However, the one-word change regarding salaries could have statewide implications.

"It infuriates me," said Oklahoma County Commissioner Brian Maughan, who successfully fought against raises for Oklahoma County elected officials last year. "This is just worthless. Absolutely worthless."

Oklahoma County and several other counties do not pay elected officials the maximum amount allowed under the formula. Maughan said the new law appears to give counties no way to opt out of doing so in the future.

"I've already visited with legislators and gotten commitments to run legislation next year to strike this provision in the law," Maughan said. "There's some legislators who are awfully hot because they had this snuck in on them."

The bill was authored by Rep. John Trebilcock, R-Broken Arrow, and Senate Pro Tempore Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City. Neither returned calls seeking comment.

Lobbyist requested change

Lobbyist Dave Herbert, who represents the County Officers and Deputies Association, said he recommended the change to Trebilcock.

Herbert said an attorney general's opinion released in April dealing with elected county officials' salaries was found to contradict a similar opinion released about a decade ago. The opinion was then retracted so the issue could be studied further.

At issue in the opinion were unequal salaries for county elected officials. Herbert said an assistant attorney general told him the best way to avoid unequal salaries for county officials in the interim would be to change the "may" to "shall" in the pertinent portion of the law.

"We were just trying to make the law consistent. We were not trying to give anyone a raise or not give them a raise," Herbert said. "For some reason, Kirby felt it gave him a reason to do whatever he wanted to do."

Herbert said counties that don't have the money or don't want to pay elected officials the most possible under the property and population formula can reduce the officials' base salary to make up the difference.

Herbert and Kirby denied ever speaking to one another about the bill.

Kirby said he didn't know anything about the bill until it passed the Legislature.

"I did not talk to anybody," Kirby said. "I'm sitting here on the sidelines getting beat up, and I'm thinking, 'What in the hell did I do?'"

Okctalker. Please refer to post 22 as to the why.

Steve, you kinda glossed right over the post about para
Medics getting big bonuses. That must not be near as sexy as bashing the fire dept.

"I've already visited with legislators and gotten commitments to run legislation next year to strike this provision in the law," Maughan said. "There's some legislators who are awfully hot because they had this snuck in on them."

Don't see how that could have happened since language changes (additions, deletions or change) to existing legislation MUST be noted in every version of the bill as it makes it's way through the process. Granted it was a single word and that most likely means the legislator(s) never read the bill before they voted on it.

Seems like every session there is at least one bill where something was "snuck in", and usually the author of the bill denies all knowledge of changing it and no one knows who made the change (while every change must be noted, there isn't any requirement to point to the offender).

This one word change reminds me of the 5% cap that was placed on property taxes increases. The obvious, plain language of the bill showed the intent was that increases couldn't be more than 5% yearly. But the Oklahoma County Assessor at the time asked for an attorney general's opinion. That opinion said that they were required to raise it by 5% each year (not up to). Attorney General's opinions have the full force and effect of law unless specifically overturned by the Court.

Go ahead and let go of these 45 firefighter positions. See if there are some cop positions we can't let go as well.

I'd hate for anyone to lose their job, but if you need to fire cops, start with a corruption probe. As for the firefighters, a lot of them are about to retire. Just let those positions expire as men who served this city valiantly retire. Time to be more efficient.

The fire department doesn't do much in the way of actually fighting fires. We spend an awful lot of money on them so that they can go to calls which our A++++ rated EMSA already goes to. If it were up to me, I'd probably get rid of a lot more fire fighters so that we could more adequately staff the police department.

I dont know what fire dept that you are referring too Mid, but its sure not OKC fire. In my area of the city we have at least one structure fire per shift and many times we will have multiple structure fires per shift. Many of these fires are extinguished so fast that the news cameras dont have time to make the drive to see any fire. These fires are in addition to the 20+calls too car wrecks, automatic alarms, and medical calls (ob calls, shootings, stabbings, domestics, heart attacks, trouble breathing, etc.) that we make each and every shift.

Last shift for example, we had 27 calls, on the avg it takes about an hour to run a call, get to the call, perform the duties at the call, load patient, get back to the station from a call, restock equipment if needed, do the incident report on the computer at the station. 1 call avg is about 1 hour from time of receipt until incident report is completed, sometimes less sometimes longer depending on the severity of the call.

So last shift we have 27 calls, 2 on which were fire alarms which we are on scene longer for. So at the very minimum we had about 27 hours worth of work to do in 24 hours (a shift). The 2 fire alarms we were on scene at those for a total of 3 hours combined, doing things that we do saving life and property. So it should be apparent that there is not a whole lot of downtime. If there is downtime, it all changes when that bell goes off, we go from a ready mode to working hard mode.

OKC has a very well trained and aggressive fire firefighting department. Any other slant or depiction just aint true.

Now about this EMSA stuff. An A++++rating, lol, how can you have that kind of rating when many of your employees cant even lift the patient, much less their equipment to take into the scene. Im curious as to who is behind this rating and what their motive is. I can assure that is not in the best interest of the citizens of OKC. If it werent for the OKC fire dept, EMSA couldnt do their job very well, if at all. The only thing that EMSA does that OKC fire cannot is transport, but they couldnt be very effective in the transport business if it werent for OKC FIRE. By the way, EMSA has a turn over rate that is astronomical.

You guys on this forum wonder why the fire dept wont just let the city run over us and systematically eliminate us one by one.
The men and women on the OKC fire dept have pride and ownership in their jobs and in this city which we serve. We took an oath when we hired on this job to serve OKC and its citizens to the best of our abilities, even in face of adversity, even if the city leaders
are trying to ax positions, even if midtowner wants to get rid of firefighters, even if it cost us our lives, even if.......
Its obvious that city leaders or mid have never needed our help or been in a time of need where OKC fire dept members coupled with their speed and decisive action mean the difference between life or death. I think what you guys need to do is ask some of the recipients of the 80,000 plus calls we make each year and see what they have to say. I know it would be a much different picture getting painted on this forum.......

If that's the case, then we don't need EMSA and fire could assume those duties. You have to admit though--the cost to the city for a firefighter is astronomically higher than the cost to the city to pay EMSA for one of their employees. But if EMSA can't do its job and is using a rigged study to tout their greatness, what we need is an independent study. We only need one entity to appear at medical calls, not ladder trucks with full crews, etc.

If EMSA was eliminated, maybe we wouldn't even have to increase fire dept. staff. Maybe they could still handle those medical calls using different equipment? I'm definitely no expert, but I know enough to say that the city would be smart to research this and spend its money more wisely.

Public relations.

Midtowner it makes alot of sense to have the Fire service take control of the mentioned ambulance service. Since the ambulance service is a for profit company and they do well on the profit part.

Hold on a second. The ambulance service is private, provides quality service, isn't laying anyone off, AND earns a profit while the fire department is public, provides quality service, IS laying people off, and is not making a profit; and your proposed solution is to get rid of private ambulance service and turn it over to the fire department. That does not compute. If anything, maybe the City should like at privatizing the fire department.

Huh - what do you know, some places are going to private fire service. OKC should really look into this.

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/08/26/how-private-fire-departments-success-undermines-obamacare/


Our first-year contract was $300,000, and we were providing the same level of service the consultant said would cost $1 million,” Jensen said. “We continue to provide service as good as that of our municipal neighbors, but because we are private, we can operate more efficiently. We save 30 to 40 percent over what a similar municipal department would cost to operate.”
The savings come mainly in personnel. The fire district has 14 full-time firefighters and 28 paid-on-call firefighters, all of whom are privately employed. None is a union member.
“We don’t pay the insane salaries that our municipal neighbors pay,” Jensen said. “Our benefits are more in line with traditional industry. We are non-union, which gives us a lot more flexibility in dealing with our employees. Salaries and benefits are the big savings, but we [also] have a shop where we can rebuild and refurbish fire apparatus for our own use.
“We save money in purchasing almost anything a fire department would use, just by shopping around. We’re very cost-conscious. We watch every penny we spend,” Jensen added.

Public relations.

Steve,
No amount of public relations is going to change the minds of some of these people.
Mike, do me a favor and quit posting stuff on here. These people have been given factual information time and time again, and chose to twist that information for their own chosing. Some of you have absolutely no idea what it takes to provide public safety for a city of our size. So why dont we leave the public safety to the professionals and you guys go back to doing whatever it is that you do. I dont claim to know about your profession so dont think for a minute that you know anything about mine.
Like I said earlier, ask the people who have needed us whether we are worth it or not.

I dont claim to know about your profession so dont think for a minute that you know anything about mine.

Got it - we aren't firemen so we have no idea what we are talking about and should just shut up and pay the taxes. Thanks for putting us in our place.

The assumption that any organization is at peak efficiency, whether it be fire, police, EMSA, a private company, city hall or any other, is ludicrous. These are times where actions and efficiencies have to be challenged. The public does not stand by and assume thy have to keep paying more and more. If you are in private business you know what I mean.

As a casual observer there are many (in)efficiencies I guess I don't understand. I have been at a number of occasions where emsa was called and a huge expensive firetruck arrived to transport a couple of firemen to assist emsa. The truck was never used and was never going to be used...it was not a FIRE, but a medical emergency. If the reason the fire dept is necessary is on the scene is merely for the brute force of moving and lifting the victims/patients, then why use a $500,000 "taxi" to get them to site. Use more efficient and more appropriate transport, OR require EMSA staff to qualify. Wiring around problems NEVER makes them more efficient or solves them. Maybe we don't need as many trucks as much as we need innexpensive vans. Let's be smart and save taxpayers money.

The answer isn't always more. Smart use of assets can achieve better results than bad planning, bad organization, and inefficient operations. Not saying the fire department is bad, but the idea that it can't be better is just not acceptable.

Okctalker. Please refer to post 22 as to the why.

Steve, you kinda glossed right over the post about para
Medics getting big bonuses. That must not be near as sexy as bashing the fire dept.

I didn't answer that one because it just came off as so surreal, probably because one scenario is something people in the real private sector deal with and it's not that unusual to see people stretched thin and being paid extra for carrying that workload, but I doubt any of us in the non-unionized private sector get paid overtime while we're on vacation! (and this will shock you: many people in the private sector currently are having to work an extra 10-20 hours a week WITHOUT ANY COMPENSATION in exchange for keeping their jobs). So, do you guys think it's perfectly normal to get paid overtime while on vacation? Do you guys have any clue how bad it is for so many people in non-government jobs?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/06/13/INSD1DRDIC.DTL

Rover, what you are not aware of is the "the Fire Dept" is not just for fires. This dept is the cities catchall for a large number of services. They include EMS, fire, rescue which includes any type of accident or natural disaster and God forbid, terrorist act. All types of public services that defy a category. Where do they keep all of these tools? On the truck!
Did you want them to take their own car to these calls? What happens when you are at a fire and are sent to a sick call? You take the truck because all of the tools you will need are on the truck. I'm sorry that doesn't compute to you. Are you going to complain about the big truck showing up with a paramedic when someone you know needs immediate cardiac intervention? Are you going to tell them to move along because you will accept nothing less than an ambulance? The fire dept is the back bone of the EMS service here. We have 65 vehicles that make EMS responses, while you will most likely only find 8-10 ambulances in town.

I think the point Rover was trying to make is that maybe a fire department lite is needed. Leave fire fighters for fighting fires but maybe let a private company respond to medical calls, auto accidents, domestic violence, etc. You could easliy get everything you need for such situations on an F-250 pickup that seats 4 or 5 people. Of course, since they don't do as much they would be paid less. The US military doesn't send an aircraft carrier to every situation just in case it is needed, OKC shouldn't be doing it either.

Public relations.

Actually, Marshall is a PR genius. He's managed to turn his own brotherhood against him. Not a lot of PR people can do that.

From the San Francisco Gate story:
Public unions' traditional strength - the ability to finance their members' rising pay and benefits through tax increases - has become a liability. Although private-sector unions always have had to worry that consumers will resist rising prices for their goods, public sector unions have benefited from the fact that taxpayers can't choose - they are, in effect, "captive consumers."

At some point, however, voters turn resentful as they sense that:

-- They are underwriting, through their taxes, a level of salary and benefits for government employment that is better than what they and their families have.

-- Government services, from schools to the Department of Motor Vehicles, are not good enough - not for the citizen individually nor the public generally - to justify the high and escalating cost.

We are at that point.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/06/13/INSD1DRDIC.DTL#ixzz12StPbAAk

Rover, what you are not aware of is the "the Fire Dept" is not just for fires. This dept is the cities catchall for a large number of services. They include EMS, fire, rescue which includes any type of accident or natural disaster and God forbid, terrorist act. All types of public services that defy a category. Where do they keep all of these tools? On the truck!
Did you want them to take their own car to these calls? What happens when you are at a fire and are sent to a sick call? You take the truck because all of the tools you will need are on the truck. I'm sorry that doesn't compute to you. Are you going to complain about the big truck showing up with a paramedic when someone you know needs immediate cardiac intervention? Are you going to tell them to move along because you will accept nothing less than an ambulance? The fire dept is the back bone of the EMS service here. We have 65 vehicles that make EMS responses, while you will most likely only find 8-10 ambulances in town.

This is the kind of response that creates the PR backlash you guys create. You are not willing to serioulsy consider improvements and are arrogant enough to assume you already are perfect. I never suggested that you use your own cars and yes I know that the Fire Dept has become a catch-all of services. Well guess what...maybe they SHOULDN'T be an oleo of services. Maybe you guys should consider some efficiency measures and the appropriateness of transportation might just be an area to consider instead of feeding us back condescending dismissal. Any discussion of improved efficiency of resources seems to get met with some sort of veiled threat to health and safety. So, instead of defending why don't you seem to join in with the public that is paying for the services to identify the absolute most efficient way of using OUR money in the BEST way. Quit being defensive and protective of turf and work with the public.

public relations

Rover, perfect? Who said anything about perfect? I would like to see your top ideas for solving the problem of A) a 9% Increase in call volume yearly. You can shuffle the call all you want but someone will have to respond to the 911 call. B) expanded growth, have you seen the construction going on? All those houses have people in them. Remember its not only OKC. You guys want to gut our department, yet Moore and Norman are hiring personnel and building new fire stations. Can they all be falling into the same trap that you say we are? Please take it that I am saying this very nicely.

Kerri and Lordgerald, please know your on my ignore list.

Steve, it is amazing to me that you have laid the blame for the OT squarely at the feet of us firefighters. Not a single time have you addressed that it was an idea the city proposed. Why haven't you been critical of our city leaders for being reckless with out tax dollars?

Those leaders who went for the overtime on vacation aren't around anymore. But it would be a mistake if you think I'm gushing with love for city leaders in what I cover.

Steve, I don't know how many members of the cities negotiating team are the same. The point is you keep bringing up the firefighters get this. Andy157 was trying to convince me of what a great guy you are the other day.

Remember its not only OKC. You guys want to gut our department, yet Moore and Norman are hiring personnel and building new fire stations. Can they all be falling into the same trap that you say we are? Please take it that I am saying this very nicely.

You should take one for the team and go try to work in Norman or Moore, that way one of your fellow firefighters doesn't have to be laid-off.



Kerry and Lordgerald, please know your on my ignore list.

There is a shocker.

Fighters must be making decent pay, I live 2 blocks from a station and work across street from another, most firemen I see roll around in brand new $45-60K trucks, and yes it's their personal vehicle not city property

Metro, shame on you! Most? Get your camera out and let's see! I bet you won't show anything but the new stuff!

My question is whether there are actually fewer firefighters, or if they just eliminated vacant positions?

I've waited until the usual silliness and half truths to finish before chiming in and trying to correct a few things since that seems to the mobs mentality here on this forum when anything is said about the fire department. As usual it's been spun off the topic of STAFFING (45 less ff) and into a union bashing, efficiency wasting bitch session.

Steve you were picking a fight or you would have presented all the FACTS. Yes, we are paid 12 hours of OT every 212 hours worked. This is called a cycle and there are 13 of them in a year for us. EMSA medics make OT hour for hour for what they work, but pick and choose whether they would like to work a 3 shift week or a 4 shift (their shifts are 12hrs).
The city opted to pay us firefighters for vacation and holidays several years ago and yes the people in charge of that decision are still around: mainly the City Manager. Sounds like we're slaying a FAT hog doesn't it? But as you are so fond of touting, lets look at the whole picture and tell me if we are getting rich off the cities pocket book.

Firefighters work 212 hours a cycle x 13 year= 2756 hours a year. We are paid 156 hrs of OT a year. We do not get the option of automatically being able to take the day off for ANY holidays, anniversaries, Birthdays, kids events, ETC. But if we have a death in the family they graciously grant us 4 calendar days off. Plenty to bury your dead, unless they are out of town. So far this is looking like a sweet deal, right?

John Q Taxpaying public- works an average of 40hrs a week x 1 years = 2080 hours a year. They are paid hour for hour for any OT worked. Most are mandated to take holidays off, and if they have built up leave time can take off for other family events. They have options to take off as their time allows and if times dictate they can pick up extra hours for a little extra cash. Not a bad life but I really want to slay that FAT city hog and make me money.

What they don't tell the general public and won't print in the media because of the BIG BAD Union which is made up of John Q. Taxpayer. As a firefighter you will work an additional 700 hours a year over what JQP does but the city will only pay you 16 hours out of every 24 hours. The other 8 hrs are considered "sleep" time. They were called on this tactic years ago when the politicians were screaming about those Rich firefighters making $25/hr all over the media until it was pointed out that our paychecks are adjusted. Now if they want to pay me exactly hr/hr by what their own numbers show I'm supposed to making, then I would gladly give them guaranteed OT back.

So how this really matches up- A firefighter that is hired on with the city at $20/hr will make less than JQP that is hired at $20/hr. You will spend 1/3 of your life at the fire station, protecting and helping people that really are pompous and ungracious. You will spend part of your life working a second job next to JQP to make up for the shortfall of funds that you aren't making at your primary job. You will die on average 10 years post retirement from heart disease, cancer or some other malady having spent a lifetime of being puked on, pee'd and shat upon, bled upon, cussed out, etc. all in the name of protecting those that can't protect themselves. Take away the guaranteed OT, we don't care! The city is the one who offered it up in the first place. But pay me true hour for hour wage and not one on paper and another in the media.

Ok Rant #2 since I've got time today-

Its the FIRE department that also goes to EMS rides. Not the EMS department that goes to fires. History lesson- the fire department began responding on EMS related calls in the 1970's for some of the same reasons they still respond today. Currently there are 35 fire stations located around OKC that are staffed with a min. of Basic level EMT's and more than 20 that are staffed with ALS Paramedics. FACT- the fire department gets to the scene faster than the ambulance because there are more of us strategically positioned around the city (on average 4:20). The ambulance is mandated to get there within 8:59 I believe but I will have to confirm this time if anyone cares to know. I have a stake in this whole process because not only have I been a ff for the past 24 years but I'm also a paramedic that's been doing the ALS side for the past 13 years and I still train both sides of the fence.

Can the current system of EMS response be improved? YES....Both the fire department and paramedics have been saying this for years. The city politicians are the ones that don't want to make a change IMO because of politics. That specific topic is one for an entirely different thread.

Let's look at the topic of this thread though, a reduction in the staffing of 45 fire personnel. Is this a reduction in services? YES. Now the city politicians will tell you that the fire stations and apparatus are still responding but that's only a half truth. The truth is there will be a Big Red Fire truck (BRT) rolling down the road, but their capabilities have been reduced. It may not be the proper type of BRT such as a Brush Pumper instead of an Engine or ladder truck. It may only have 1 ff on board instead of two. This is where the general public needs to get educated on the capabilities of a firefighter and the initial response. A rapid and overwhelming response is what is needed to combat initial fires to keep them from becoming a conflagration. Case in point, MWC brush fires last year with over 100 homes lost. 1989 Eastern Ok county brush fires over 60 homes lost. Don't like the example of brush fires? Ok- how about a little thing like the Murrah Building. Maybe an F5 tornado in south OKC or even a little F3 tornado that blows through NW Okc into Frontier City. There are way too many examples to list and for the family that has there home or apt. burned out this is their own personal disaster. If you don't think so, come on down and volunteer for the ARC helping these families after they've lost it all.

The fires and disasters WILL still occur. I've spent my career responding to them not creating them. Fires are NOT down. Total incidents are NOT down. Business for the FD is at an all time high and it's not a good thing for us or the general public. Your local FD's do an incredible job of responding to and taking care of your emergencies. The message that is not getting through to those on this msg. board seems to be that the FD's are all taxed to the limit and cannot suffer anymore losses or there will be consequences to pay. It may be in the form of your house lost in a fire, your loved one not getting early EMS or a firefighter dying because there were not enough bodies on the BRT or in the firehouse. From what I'm hearing from a few is that these are acceptable losses. If that's the case please call your council person and let them know you really don't need the firehouse closest to your home or business. We could use the personnel in other parts of the city.

PS- October is Fire Prevention month. Do you even know why? History is bound to repeat itself if we do not change our ways.

I think our firefighters do an outstanding job. It's my understanding their response times are excellent, and I rest better knowing they are there.

I do think there's value in determining whether OKCFD has the appropriate equipment to respond to EMS calls in the most cost-effective manner. I'm guessing there are policies and procedures in place to determine what type of vehicle and equipment is needed based on the information that's known at the time of the call.

Fighters must be making decent pay, I live 2 blocks from a station and work across street from another, most firemen I see roll around in brand new $45-60K trucks, and yes it's their personal vehicle not city property

Has it ever occurred to you that some our spouses are doctors, dentists, attorneys, PA's, nurses, hygienist, etc. That would explain some of what you are seeing.

My question is whether there are actually fewer firefighters, or if they just eliminated vacant positions?

In 1999, we had 999 firefighters, last year we had 948, now we have 922, that number continues to drop when we have a retirement and the city does not hire anyone to replace the retiree.
The city would have you believe that those positions are vacant, which is nothing more than a play on words.
Those positions are eliminated when a person retires and is not replaced, that is actually what is happening and no amount of word play is going to change that fact.

The city point of view is they didn't lay anybody off last year; no they didn't. But what they fail to make public is at the end of the day, OKC fire is down 26 positions from last year due to those positions being eliminated out of the budget due to retirements.

^^Thanks