Business group would shut fire stations, put city services out to bid

we reversed this century-long trend towards socialized firefighting. If big government had its way, you wouldn't even be allowed to set fires on your own property; it's already illegal in multi-story apartment buildings. Found THAT out.

I say we make all the BFD firefighters[1] independent contractors, and let them compete to the best of their disability.

[1] Jakes. (That's for Adam.)

I so do love it when private sector "business groups," who deal with numbers, statistics, and the almighty greenback, give their expert testimony and opinion on public sector issues, and make the public believe it is at their best interest to hop on the bandwagon.

To start, the firebox system was invented right here in Boston in 1852, and has stuck for one main reason: it works. Very simply. Without going into the logistics of exactly how it works, you simply pull the handle down, and wait. 3-5 minutes. BOOM! At least 2 fire companies show up to your location. Anytime I respond to a call that has been called in by cellular telephone, it is a tossup as to whether or not we will find it. Many times we do, but there are other we don't. Here is why:

Cell phone scenario: A person calls from one location on his or her cell phone, and it bounces off a cell phone tower in another location nearby. We may or may not find them depending on whether or not they gave their location correctly, which in an emergency situation is not always possible due to panic, worry, or simply not knowing where he or she is.

Fire Box Scenario: A person pulls a fire alarm box, which is in a fixed location. We show up, without fail, to that location, in an average response time of 3-5 minutes.

Cell phone in a disaster: May or may not work, depending on whether or not the cell phone towers are clogged with other calls or simply disabled due to lack of power or damage.

Fire Box in a disaster: Will ALWAYS work, since they run on a power supply that is uninterruptible.

I have a cell phone and use it very frequently. I have used it in emergencies, in addition to regular use, and advocate everybody having one (especially women and children) for safety and convenience. However, since cell phones became the popular technology and pretty much banished the pager to hospital use only, everyone has been on the bandwagon to get rid of the fireboxes, since their "not needed, cost too much, and aren't worth it." Well, are they not worth it? It does cost to maintain and repair them. Well, so do cell phones, which we all pay for through monthly fees and contracts. BUT....since the lovelys at the Boston Municipal Research Bureau nicely remind everybody that fireboxes are paid for on the "taxpayer's dime" (although I am a firefighter, I do pay taxes in the city also; so it's my dime too), and so we should get rid of them to save money. Well, if you ask me, if a firebox saves one life, it has paid for itself and then some. Those who don't believe this, like Sam Tyler, and anyone else who is doubtful, should talk to someone who has had a child, a spouse, or other loved one rescued from a fire.

You cannot put a price on a life, and a firebox will never have it's battery die, run out of bars because of bad reception, or fail when submerged in water.

When was the last time a firebox was used to report a fire, one might ask?
On February 21, 2009 Box 3358 (Columbia Road at Blue Hill Avenue) was pulled to report a fire at the former Franklin Park Theater. The fire ended up at five alarms, and was not reported by any other means except for the box. The box was pulled at 1:23am, and the first fire companies, Engine 24 and Ladder 23, arrived at 1:27am and asked for an additional response. 4 minutes.

When it comes to shuttering firehouses, I don't remotely see how this is in the best interest of the taxpayer. Closing firehouses will increase response times, put other firefighters and emergency workers at risk, and make it harder for us to do our job effectively. AND....before I hear the collective sigh of those who are ready to tell me that other cities have "successfully" closed firehouses without detriment, I ask you to look into this tragic situation:

April 2009: A police officer from Warren, Ohio is the first on scene to a fire in a group home a few blocks from a firehouse that had been shuttered a couple of months before. Since that station was closed and help was further away, he attempted to rescue the trapped people, who were all mentally-handicapped residents of this facility. One victim escaped, but the police officer and 3 others were cut off and had to be rescued by the firefighters from another station. The police officer ended up in a medically induced coma, and another victim later died.

Although this is only one situation, I would like to put out there to everybody that a fire can double in intensity in 30 seconds, and a room can completely ignite within 2-3 minutes, depending on the conditions. So, how long would you rather wait, 3 minutes, or 5? Or 6? Or 8?

Bean counters don't carry hoses or ladders for a reason, just like I shouldn't use a calculator or spreadsheets to put out fires. Although it is feasible that yes, the bureau does have an idea of how this will save the city money, it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Although Sam Tyler may not care what happened in Warren, Ohio, I'm sure that the police officer's family, and the family of the victim who died, both care. I'm also sure that anyone who has been a fire victim, had someone in their family die of a sudden heart attack, stroke or other medical emergency, or been in a car accident, can appreciate quick response from emergency officials much more than someone who has never needed their services.