The writers generally don’t disclose their specific background and experience in the field of firefighting. So here are some facts about the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District’s staff:
• Current staffing model: 48 personnel.
• Four stations staffed with three personnel.
• Two stations staffed with two personnel (Bethel Island and Knightsen).
• 16 captains.
• 15 engineers.
• 12 firefighters.
• 43 total and backfill five positions with overtime.
The team members of the each three-man engine companies in the ECCFPD are charged with one, big job: put a fire out as quickly and safely as possible. Be it from outside the building or inside with the flames, each person on that engine has specific responsibilities that require a unique level of training. Each three-man engine company in our district is composed of a fire captain, an engineer and a firefighter. Regardless of the title, all three will eventually play an important role at any emergency.
The fire captain is the senior officer at the station and is generally responsible for the station. On the scene of a fire, it’s the captain that evaluates the situation, locates the fire, then decides which door, hallway or stairway should be used to reach the fire with the proper amount of hose, establishes a command and draws up a plan of attack.
Once the battalion chief arrives on scene, the captain can then fulfill the fourth member position and become a backup firefighter, to institute the two-in and two-out safety rule. “The first five minutes determines the next five hours.”
The primary responsibility of the engineer at the station is the maintenance of the fire engine and all tools and equipment carried on that fire engine. Once the alarm is sounded, they are in charge of driving the fire engine and ensuring the safe delivery of the personnel and equipment to a reported fire or emergency and the delivery of water to the operating firefighting company.
The firefighter occupies one of the most challenging and dangerous positions during the fire. Their duties routinely take them in close proximity to the fire and require a determined and experienced member. The firefighter stretches the first length of hose with the nozzle attached to the location determined by the captain.
Meanwhile, the backup firefighter, the fourth on the scene (could be the captain, a battalion chief or a firefighter from the second company on the scene) moves toward the fire behind the initial firefighter, providing physical as well as moral support. The major function of the backup position is to flake out the hose line while waiting for water and to facilitate the hose line’s advance once it is charged.
Two stations in the district work with two-man engine companies. They consist of a fire captain and an engineer. Their roles in this situation are similar to a three-man company. The captain prepares the site, the engineer drives and prepares the hose lines. But they must wait for a second unit to arrive to begin applying water to the fire. Safety rules dictate a two-in and two-out policy.
It generally takes five engine companies to suppress a structural fire. As each unit arrives, they all basically become firefighters, assisting to put the fire out as safely and quickly as possible.
Based on training and experience, everyone arriving to a fire can be a firefighter, but not everyone can be a captain or an engineer. So when that three- or two-man engine company rolls up to your house in the middle of the night, who do you hope is on that engine?
A yes vote on Measure S will not only ensure that the current service model stays in place, but every engine that leaves a fire station will have a three-man engine company arriving on scene first, and one member of this of this three-man team will be a paramedic.
In addition to his role as mayor of Oakley, Kevin Romick serves as a director for the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District.
A system which introduces volunteers lowers the burden on the taxpayer. If it were mandatory to volunteer to become a payed fire employee, you keep stations open and the citizens (you are supposed to serve) safe.
It is high time to stop looking into taxpayers pockets to support broken systems. Restructure, STOP throwing good money (tax payer) on bad money (your broken systems).
Mr. Romick,
Do you remember when your board insisted on shutting down the Discovery Bay and Byron Stations last year? Not so much to save money but so that the community would take the budget problems seriously! Even your "claimed" savings from shutting down the stations was far less than the cost of the election consultants, and the board admitted it would not extend the financial viability of the district in any meaningful way.
This was your board's argument from the dais: “If we don't shut these stations people won't take us seriously.”
Well, here we are looking at a tax that:
a) Is more than double what your own survey indicated would be supported in this tough economy;
b) Shifts BLS from County to ECCFPD funding; and
c) You acknowledges won't even bring about a financially stable district.
Remember when people stood up and told you that if you shut down the stations just to prove a point you would lose the trust of the community? And all the while your board failed to take the necessary steps to become a legitimate independent district according to LAFCO. These are strategic decisions that your board made, that you supported and therefore you own.
Your decisions have proven two points, neither of which is that you should be taken seriously:
1) Don't trust the ECCFPD Board (city politicians from Brentwood and Oakley) to take action in the best interests of the entire district; and
2) Shutting the Byron and Discovery Bay station down did not cause the dire consequences we were concerned about.
Your city has even begun exploring a way to leave the district, which tells many of us all we need to know about your commitment to the unincorporated areas.
So here we are...I realize you must respond to Union pressure, which is one of the reasons the district should be legally independent and not manned by appointed politicians who rely on Union affection and support.
Our firefighters and our community deserve a solution that actually fixes the mess and doesn't just kick that can down the road. We have too many other tax increases (water, sewer, GovBrown's state sales tax, new taxes on things from cigarettes to soda, etc...) on the horizon and need to start solving problems rather than just putting them off.
No on $$$$$$$
I agree. It’s impossible to stand up to the federal bureaucratic behemoth. And it’s extremely difficult to stand up to the California bureaucratic behemoth.
But on June 5th it will be possible for Joe and Jane Taxpayer to stand up to the ECCFPD bureaucratic behemoth and tell them it’s not right, we’re tapped out, find another solution.
It's too bad that you frequently resort to abusive insults against those with whom you disagree. It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable - and it helps bolster whatever argument you want to make.
Sorry to be blunt but I think con fire is overpaid, and I don't care what they pay in San Jose or Castro Valley. Looking nation wide at metro areas you are paid way above average and this county cannot, and never really has been able to (even in good times) afford that kind of ultra high-end compensation. I wonder how many other people in this county wish they could earn compensation at even near the national average for metro areas.
This new entity would be much like all the other county wide agencies that provide service uniformly without an absolute direct return to source, but there would be some differences in service levels to various rural areas.
There has been a viable solution brought forward but you, the union and the politicos refuse to consider it. I believe voting NO is the only way to force the issue. It is a shame that it has to come to that kind of voter pressure to overcome the union influence long exerted in this county.
And by the way you know darn well that there are one person fire crews in this state. If you don't know it then I suggest you do some homework. When this tax fails, strategically using that staffing configuration will increase flexibility and put BLS closer to the population. I recently spoke to a firefighter who operates as a one person crew in CA (he volunteered for the assignment). He does not feel any more in jeopardy and he believes his proximity can have major benefit to the community her serves. Not even considering this configuration hurts your credibility given the dire economic circumstances we find ourselves in. If AMR can run a one person crew to handle medical calls why can't your people? Are AMR people better than your people? I don't think they are but you are making it seem that way. Nobody would expect a one person fire crew to take extra risks but the fact is most of your work is BLS in nature and back-up (as it is now) would be required for more complicated situations.
Sorry to say so but you do create the impression that the 'union' is part of the problem not part of the solution.
You, sir, do not appear to have a clue. A ride along would do you a world of good. Because what you are proposing with single person responses is completely out of touch.
Dissolve EMS? You do realize the County's EMS department has duties that expand far, far beyond your personal needs, right? Could you at least step back for just a second and self analyize how self centered what you suggested is?
You appear to suffer from the same delusion that your friends East County Reader and Mr. Gonzales do. You think the Board of Supervisors run this department when they do not. You are not sending a message to any one of them to "fix this" with a no vote. You are simply telling them that you are willing to live with the consequences of a 3 station fire district.
I am told that you are man of substantial means. Now I don't know if that's true or not. But putting this community at risk over 50 cents a day? What stroke of logic possesses anyone to think like that?
The only person calling this plan of yours "viable" is yourself. If it had any merit at all or was even possible, I'm sure somone would have considered it long ago. There are plenty of smart people in Martinez and this district who have a much better handle on the laws than you do. Seems to be to be a bit of ignorance on your part about what can and cannot be done.
Voting no is going to leave your neighborhood without an operating fire engine a portion of each day. That applies no matter where you live in the district. I don't know where or when you got the idea that one man can operate an engine, but you are dead wrong. Leave the deployment and operational aspects of this district to the professionals.
Voting NO does not send any message to the politicos except maybe that your common sense is a bit shy of a full glass. It's like holding a gun to your own head while saying, "don't make me shoot the hostage".
Saying "I talked to a guy" is a completely ridiculous way to approach a critical problem solving exercise and cannot be taken seriously.
Under what has been proposed (New fire/EMS entity) the county would still have an EMS function but it would be part of a joint fire entity. Did you know that many CA counties belong to regional EMS consortiums to save a lot of $$? They have done this for efficiency and to eliminate redundant bureaucratic overhead that is a waste. What has been proposed is called leveraging. It is called putting boots on the street rather than redundant butts in office chairs.
The BOS runs con fire, are you questioning that? And I have reason to believe the BOS has not done all that is ultimately necessary to permanently and completely put the ECCFPD in the hands of a separate board. I'm told there are at least two steps to occur before they are completely out of it. BUT……who cares, the BOS does run con fire and they could take the lead any time they what in putting together a NEW County fire/EMS entity. They do not have to totally control both to be true 'leaders' in this effort. I know leader might be a hard word to comprehend for some of them but maybe you could look it up and pass on what it means.
And you attack me for going out and talking to a real (full time) firefighter in CA who runs a one person engine…..I don't get it. You say I should immerse myself in what really goes on and when I go out and do so you chastise me. Please explain. Is it that I did not choose to engage with the crew you wanted me to? Is it because I went and found a real situation that is contrary to what this union is willing to consider?
I do not think the District is top heavy nor under or overpaid. I think the union has influenced our supervisors who have dropped the ball allowing this district to be insolvent by their lack of responsibility to the people of this county. The firefighters are caught in the middle of a sad political game of hot potato toss as someone commented. Real solutions have been offered on numerous occasions only for them to be ignored because of the Union/BOS relationship. This is sad because both the firefighters and the public have been duped. Now these two entities who are responsible, want us to bail them out.
Kevin, when in the public meeting I provided a document that was supplied by your fire district showing the ten year model of funds. It was suppose to explain where the existing and new tax money would go. I pointed to the forth year and showed you of the missing $4.8 million dollars. I asked where it went. You responded you had no idea. If you as a commissioner can't explain where $4.8 million dollars of our tax money goes, how do you expect anyone to vote for this? Shame on the BOS. They need to go back to the table and do their job without special interest influence. No on S.
I promised myself I wouldn't engage you anymore because you never provide any suggestions. You blame the union and the BOS all the time without any specifics. Can you for once state specifically what the "union" has done? For one,I am the union president and I am a fire fighter. There is nobody above me in this county. Gil is one of our Vice Presidents, he is a Fire Captain who works at Station 93 in Oakley, the next in line is Jim, who is a Fire Engineer who works in Brentwood. I am flattered that you give me all of this power but truthfully, the Fire fighters Union is the fire fighters. We all often wonder what you mean when you say you like the fire fighters but not the union. Gil and I and Jim are the spokes persons for the group. When we negotiate a contract, we bring it back to the rest of the fire fighters to vote. If it passes, we go back to the governing body and we have a contract. You like to seperate the two for your political purposes but we are the same.
So what has the fire fighters done to cause the budget deficit? Negotiate wages way below the average? We are the only agency in the county and surrounding counties that actually have "two person engine companies" You have been there when I have begged for three on all engines. All agencies within the county except Richmond have a paramedic on the engine. East County is the only agency that provides a single individual in a SUV to provide medical services. 1 person with a box of advanced life support equipment is not "cutting edge" service. You have been there when I have asked for a paramedic on every engine. East County had a volunteer service that showed to be out dated when they weren't responding to calls. There were times when they were dispatched and no volunteers came up. Or only one or two would show up. You were there when I spoke against having stations uncovered with full time fire fighters. So again, what has the union (me, in your mind) done to ruin things. Go back into the newspapers since 2006 and read my quotes. All of them were for equal pay, adequate staffing of a engine company, more stations, and paid professional fire fighters. So what has the "union" done to create a problem. I was too young to vote for Prop 13. We worked with the BOS and finally got a full time paid crew in Knightsen, and got three personel on four of the engines. That was what we fought for. If we were about salary and benefits only, why would we want more fire fighters to split the money with?
Please be more specific about what the BOS did or what fire fighters did. You have fought every plan that ever came up since 2006. The Master Plan work group established after the Citigate report in 2006 reviewed the report that stated we needed 10 three person stations all with paramedics. It also stated we needed a $250.00 tax due to the property tax allocutions set by prop 13 in 1978 being way below industry standard. The Master Plan work group, which was made up of leaders from the city of Brentwood, Oakley, Discovery Bay, Bethel Island, and I believe yourself, from Knightsen. The majority of the group said a tax would not pass if we were under the authority of the Board of Supervisors.The quest for "local Control" began. The majority agreed that once Local control was established, we would go for a tax. Well it took four years to get to the "local control". Unfortunately the economy fell a part around the same time. So here we are going for a tax that everyone new was necessary since the beginning of the district.. My involvement started in 2006, I was on the master plan work group.
If Measure S fails we will close half the fire station and lay off fire fighters. Response times will go up and so will insurance rates. What do you suggest happen July 1? It took four years to get Local control! Are you suggesting that we run with half of the fire stations while we work on another solution? How long will it take to create this new fire service agency that you never actually describe. The money is gone July 1? If you have a suggestion you should descibe it. You blog enough that you could have written out your entire plan by now. If Measure S passes, it doesn't mean other options cannot be looked into if there is a more efficient way that still provides adequate service.
As far as to safenotsorry's comment. Why don't you ask Kevin Romick where I showed him on the document provided by the department of the 4.8 million missing compared to the previous model even though the annual increase was reduced 2%. It was done at one of the public meetings.
You and Mr. Barber like to toss incomplete and just plane bad ideas out there and then say that people won't listen. You say a plan to fix this by consolidating EMS and fire county wide has been brought forward and ignored. That's BS. The IDEA has been floated. An idea is not a plan.
I can say every day for a month that theres gold at the rainbow end. If they decide not to chase after the rainbow you would say 'you didn't explore all your options even though they were suggested to you over and over." You would also accuse them of ignoring another "solution" but that would be just as bogus as most of your others.
You say a one man engine makes sense because you talked to a guy who does that and he said he's providing help to the public. Same would be true of a boy scout with a pocket knife but it's not the way to run a fire department with 6000 calls per year..
Send it back to the BoS to fix? No matter how many times you say it, the local board not the county has control here. The supervisors have no spare money to solve the problem and won't be moved to do what you want just because we let half our protection go away instead of coming to our own rescue.
The only thing you guys offer is "They should have fixed it before so give it back." That's a nonsensical approach because you say they screwed it up so lets give it to them again. At least you don't have to actually come up with any answers with the nonsensical approach.
I'll even settle for part of a plan. Tell me how we are going to force 32 fire districts, a dozen cities, several unions, the county and who knows how many EMS providers to drop whatever contracts they have so this can be done. Tell me what law or legal precedent makes that possible. Thinking that could be done in the two years this local board has had the eccfpd is naive, and thinking it could be done in the future in a short time shows your not being realistic -- it took 10 years since consolidating eccfpd and we still struggle with moving forward. Do you think it will be easier with 10 times the people and departments involved? How does me doing without half the firestations in my area put any pressure on anyone else? If that kind of thing works maybe we can all just hold our breath, that will surely make them take us seriously and come to the table to give up some of their money so eccfpd can be fixed and save you form having to pay another $3.50 a week
I urge you to come speak at the next fireboard meeting. I'd love to hear your thoughts on record rather than read them on the brentwood press site.