It seems that newspapers, magazines and Web sites are announcing budget cuts by local governments practically every day. Public-safety and fire departments in particular are seeing their share of the budget crunch with layoffs, brownouts, station closings and training cutbacks. Other agencies are seeing the postponement of apparatus or equipment replacement and there is a nearly universal curtailment of travel and outside training.

At the same time, our residents — who also are feeling the pinch of the current economy — are adamantly opposed to new taxes. Their frustration is felt mostly at the local level because that is the only place they feel any semblance of control.

At least one of my neighboring fire departments is facing brownouts now and possible layoffs in the future. Most of its non-operational budget already had been decimated, and now it appears that fire and EMS operations won’t be spared. How did we get here? Obviously this stems primarily from the economic downturn, but why does it seem the first thing cut to balance any budget are safety services? Are politicians using the fear factor to scare voters into accepting more taxes? Sound cynical? Here’s an idea that may be worth considering in the near future.

In the greater Cincinnati area, the Hamilton County auditor W. Emerson “Dusty” Rhodes has proposed that legislatively all property taxes should expire on the same date. He believes that would provide voters an opportunity to clearly support whatever they believe is important and oppose what they believe to be superfluous. That may sound crazy, but it would allow voters collectively to prioritize where they’d want to spend their tax dollars and eliminate services they no longer wish to support.

If a person believes fire, EMS, police, schools or libraries take priority, then those taxes pass and those services are funded — there would be no general operating funds. I have the feeling that most citizens would want to adequately fund essential safety services such as fire and EMS, while looking to cut those service they may deem more frivolous.

While we live in a republic where our representatives are elected to speak on our behalf, would any of us in the fire service dread the outcome of an election where fire and EMS operations were put head to head with other money issues? If we have any reservation on the results, then what do we need to do now to provide better, more efficient service with the resources we already have today to ensure we will have adequate funding tomorrow.

My wife, Diana, and I love chocolate. It is perhaps our greatest weakness, especially as both of us try to stay physically fit with a very active lifestyle. One of our favorite dark chocolates comes individually wrapped in foil with a message printed inside each wrapper. Usually these are pretty blasé, so I was surprised when I found one message that read, “Failure is only the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.”

It started me thinking about how many great minds failed before they got it right. It is said that Thomas Edison conducted hundreds of experiments with various substances to be used as filaments before perfecting the incandescent light bulb. Initially he also used direct current from storage batteries for his experiments, then realized if electricity were to be practical, it needed the capability of being transmitted over long distances — hence the introduction of the alternating current that we still use today.

Over 20 years ago, two U.S. Navy scientists, Martin Fleischman and Stanley Pons, announced they had discovered cold fusion — a form of nuclear energy that simply put could provide a limitless power source without the nuclear waste or fear of nuclear meltdown. The problem was their discovery was not reproducible and hence their claim was rendered unfounded by the scientific community. Working from the original data and experiments, chemist Pamela Mosier-Boss, announced last month that she had once again found cold fusion, but after countless attempts she was also able to repeatedly reproduce the process in her laboratory.

Think of the possibilities? Is this the source of power for interplanetary space travel that provides power both for travel to and from a distant planet? Is this the source of unlimited “green” power that could be used to power homes, vehicles, airplanes and even the fire apparatus of the future? What implications does this have for helping us find a way to remain a highly productive society in an environmentally friendly world? But what would have happened if Mosier-Boss had not picked up the trail of Fleischman and Pons without the freedom to fail?

You may wonder what this has to do with the fire service. During difficult times with limited resources, thinking outside the box, developing a paradigm shift or just plain thinking creatively are hard to do, yet it is the very time we need to do so the most. While we are struggling with issues of firefighter safety, there isn’t a week that goes by without a story of a fire department facing personnel cuts, station closures, service eliminations and more. I am convinced that these are the very times we need to be most creative to help us evolve into the fire service of the future.

These solutions must come from within the fire service or surely they will come from outside sources that will not account for the dedication and service we provide to the citizens of our community. Which is worse: the indiscriminate losses of personnel and equipment by a bean counter or bureaucrat who doesn’t have a clue about firefighting, or a new paradigm shift from the leadership within the fire service that can adapt to our changing economic times without compromising our mission?

By way of example, in the past 30 years, both Russia and the United States have been at war within Afghanistan. The Russians lost hundreds of fixed-wing and rotary aircraft to the tribes and warlords in Afghanistan’s mountainous terrain. While many U.S. soldiers have been killed or injured during these eight years of war, our losses from aircraft have been far less than those suffered by the Russians. Why? In part this occurred because we refused to fight the same kind of war. Today over Afghanistan, unmanned aerial vehicles such as the Predator or the more advanced Reaper carrying Hellfire missiles are flying many missions. The pilots are hundreds or even thousands of miles away flying the unit by remote control. These UAVs also can loiter over an area relatively undetected for extended periods of time, but react much quicker to the needs of ground troops for support than having to sortie manned aircraft or helicopters for assistance.

Now to bring this discussion back to the needs of the fire service in these changing times, consider this a call for each of us to study and then apply the evolving science and technologies under research and development in the fire service and related fields; to study parallel organizations such as the U.S. military and the international fire service community for best practices; to study the mission we have today and visualize the mission we will most likely have tomorrow; and then to borrow the best from each of these areas to explore the possibilities of how we should evolve into the fire service of tomorrow.

Remember Edison? He didn’t get the light bulb right on his first time, but with each new attempt he continued his research “more intelligently” until he had it perfected. We would be wise to consider the same.

Recently, I attended the 21st Annual Executive Fire Officer Program Graduate Symposium at the National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg, Md. Previous graduates of the EFOP — I’m from the EFO class of 1989 — can mingle with recent grads to discuss topics that both find pertinent. It is also a time when the best and the brightest present their outstanding applied research papers, which this year centered on topics such as the physiological effects of inadequate firefighter hydration and the development of timed standards for 10 operational evolutions on a fire scene.

The symposium is one of the best-kept secrets in the fire service and it is designed to put daily problems on hold, recharge our batteries and refocus our interests.

One of the highlights of the symposium was a day-long trip to the nearby Gettysburg battlefield, where we compared and contrasted the leadership qualities of four major military players: generals George Gordon Meade, Daniel Sickles, Robert E. Lee and James Longstreet. Led by five battlefield guides, the group learned that while both Sickles and Longstreet disagreed with the battle strategies of their superiors, Meade and Lee respectively, Longstreet carried out Lee’s orders and plan, while Sickles either ignored or continually misunderstood Meade’s orders and initiated a plan of his own — what today we might call “freelancing.” There was considerable discussion as to whether Sickles’ actions left the Little Round Top unprotected and subsequently led to the decisive battle on the second day of the action. The group also used this opportunity to compare each general’s leadership styles and how their decisions impacted the outcome of the three-day battle, as well as which style might be most appropriate for major decisions on the fireground.

Away from the study and lectures of the symposium, the National Fire Academy lends itself for reflection and exploration. There is ample time to explore the campus and discover the enhancements that have been made to make this one the foremost facilities for advanced study of the fire service. It was while wandering the campus one afternoon that I rediscovered the other best-kept secret in the fire service: the Learning Resource Center. The LRC serves both the National Fire Academy and other programs such as the Emergency Management Institute of the National Emergency Training Center. When it was founded in the 1980s, the LRC was envisioned to be the repository of knowledge for research that affected the development of the U.S. fire service. The LRC has more than lived up to that goal.

In talking with Edward Metz, the librarian of the LRC, I learned that there are now more than 160,000 documents on file, but more importantly, that the majority of these documents are accessible for downloading via www.lrc.fema.gov. This includes more than 100,000 journal articles and 30,000 reports or dissertations, nearly 18,000 books, and 10,000 EFO research papers. Most are available through a simple online word search.

The LRC also has an advisory service, the Really Simple Syndication or RSS that anyone can subscribe to that will automatically inform you of new documents or updates on a subject available online. The bottom line is that you can use the LRC for a variety of practical needs, not just educational uses such as the EFO Program. If you need the latest stats on response time studies, or issues such as the 48/96 staffing model, station design, disaster mitigation or the use of compressed-air foam systems, then the LRC is your one stop source for the latest information.

Such a repository is only possible with a dedicated staff that for the past two decades had the vision, drive and resources to make it happen. These folks feel successful when more of us use the system they’ve developed to better enhance our capability and our resources. In today’s tough economic times when money may not be available to hire a consultant, the knowledge, ideas and documents housed at the LRC may make a huge difference for you, your department, and the fire service as a profession. And that should not be kept a secret.

Last April, one of my neighboring departments lost two firefighters when the kitchen floor collapsed as they were operating in a residential structure. Several separate items crossed my desk recently that emphasized how frequent such events happen and how without intervention they will continue to happen, especially in residential structure fires.

In 2008, we in the fire service believed we were successful in our quest for residential fire sprinklers when an amendment was passed to the proposed ICC Residential Building Code. The change would universally require sprinklers in all newly built dwellings. Soon after the vote, it became apparent that opposition, primarily homebuilders, were going to mount another effort to obtain a second vote on the amendment, claiming that residential sprinklers were an undue expense in the current economic climate that would drive up the cost of homes.

Several issues demonstrate the importance for us to bolster our efforts and once and for all demonstrate the need for universal sprinklers.

The Georgia Pacific Co. recently unveiled a new twist to the wooden I-beam construction approved for residential housing. My son, Todd, a career firefighter and volunteer fire officer in Indiana, brought this product to my attention. I-beams — which when I started in the fire service were made only of steel — span the length of the house to provide the primary support for floor joists. Current wooden I-beams are little more than lengths of pressed board sandwiched between 2×4s or 4×6s to provide that support. Floor joists that used to be solid 2×8s have been reduced to wooden trusses that result in quicker failures of residential flooring.

The new twist to wooden I-beams is a product that now is also made of truss construction. The Georgia Pacific Web site shows a photo of the new I-beam and its construction material. The beam itself has become a truss or series of triangles with the tagline, “Find your ductwork’s happy space.” The Web page also indicates “Customers can take pride in reduced timber consumption, usage and the ecologically friendly nature of engineered wood.”

Obviously with less solid wood, we can expect not only quicker floor failures but also more frequent and major I beam failures in these newly constructed houses. Both mean that we need to take some new steps to enhance firefighter safety.

There are sobering statistics in the new NIOSH alert, “Preventing Deaths and Injuries of Fire Fighters When Fighting Fires in Unoccupied Structures.” This 12-page bulletin is geared to make us pause during size-up at residential structure fires and conduct a risk-versus-benefit analysis. It reminds us as incident commanders that it is OK to use defensive tactics that do not place firefighters at risk to save just the building. A similar theme is echoed in an article in latest NFPA Journal, “Truss Issues,” written by longtime friends Ben Klaene and Russ Sanders.

So what else can we do? Right now, homebuilders are going green, using alternate energy-saving devices such as solar panels and geothermal heat pumps that won’t recoup their initial costs for many years to come. They are also using cheaper construction methods under the guise that they are more ecofriendly. Residential fire sprinklers are not only beneficial to saving the lives of residents and firefighters, they are also green. They save one of our most precious natural resources, water.

Instead of having to use thousands of gallons at 250 to 1,000 gpm to overcome a well involved structure, a single sprinkler head at 25 gpm in a fire’s incipient stage may extinguish or hold the fire in check for firefighters to extinguish no matter what the construction of the residence. How could our ecologically friendly homebuilders disagree?

In going “green” with sprinklers, one of our logical partners should be the federal government. We should take the opportunity to stress this point with our Congressional Representatives at the upcoming Congressional Fire Service Institute’s visitation and dinner in Washington DC. For example, using the stimulus package to financial institutions, Congress should dictate that no homes will be built with federally guaranteed funds that aren’t both energy efficient and “green”. The residential sprinkler system should be at the forefront of these “green” initiatives. There should be no other choice to save all of our resources, water, citizens and firefighters…because enough is enough.

In these uncertain economic times, it is easy to forget the things that often are the most important to remember. I was reminded of this during a recent trip to New York. My wife, Diana, and I visited the Ground Zero Museum Workshop, a non-profit museum. The museum features photographs by Gary Marlon Suson, who was the official photographer for the Uniformed Firefighters Association from September 2001 until recovery efforts ended in March 2002.

Along with more than 100 of Suson’s photos, the museum showcases several rare artifacts in its approximately 1,000-square-foot space. Tours are limited to approximately 25 visitors at a time and last two-and-a-half hours. After a brief audio/video presentation and orientation, attendees are free to use the self-guided audio tour to hear commentary on the stories behind each display.

As the state fire marshal for Ohio, I traveled twice to New York during the recovery efforts. The first time was on Sept. 14 to visit Ohio Task Force 1 while members cleared several buildings at the World Trade and World Finance Centers. The second trip in November 2001 was as part of a FEMA team assembled to evaluate FDNY’s future needs. During that time, I became all too familiar with the sights and smells associated with Ground Zero.

And the tour brought it all back — from behind an enclosed case the chalky dust engrained into portions window glass from the upper floors, the skeletons of the building facades captured once again in a photograph but etched forever in my mind and the iron cross forged from the debris that remained on site for more than six months.

More importantly, however, are the stories of the people in Suson’s photos. Probably the most striking to me were the photo series entitled the “Fathers.” Photos showed active and retired firefighter fathers who lost firefighter sons in the collapse and their quest to find them among all the debris. There were photos of firefighter Lee Ielpi cradling the helmet of his son, Jonathan; retired Capt. Bill Butler searching for his son, Thomas; retired firefighter John Tipping helping to carry the Stokes basket containing his son, John Jr.; the entire Geidel family of Rescue 1 searching for their son and brother, Gary. The list goes on.

Today, New York City and the New York Port Authority have reclaimed Ground Zero for future use. Just across the street is a striking memorial cast in bronze on the side of Engine and Ladder 10’s house. But just uptown by subway and a bit off the normal tourist route is the Ground Zero Museum Workshop. It’s worth the time, the effort and the emotion to once more remember the sacrifice so that we never forget.

A friend and a true mentor during my career was the late Don Manno, who I first met when I was a student in the Executive Fire Officer Program almost two decades ago. Don was a storyteller and his passion was fire prevention.

Don began a class during the first week at the academy by role playing as the fire chief of the Tokyo Fire Service. He explained how the Japanese instilled taking responsibility for fire’s use, from the time a child was old enough to walk to the time they became grandparents. He stressed the importance of fire prevention, as the majority of Tokyo is frame construction. A small kitchen fire in one residence could mean a conflagration affecting many families before firefighters could arrive through the narrow, congested streets and closely built housing. Today, Japan has the world’s second-largest economy, yet has far fewer fires and fire fatalities than the United States.

Don had started his career in the Baltimore County (Md.) Fire Department. At his first assignment, he was asked by one of the department’s public educators to assist with a fire-prevention program. After the visit, his station captain strolled over and warned him, “Watch it, son. Them’s not real firefighters. Them’s the bureau.”

This winter, U.S Fire Administrator Greg Cade and the fire chiefs from the District of Columbia, Baltimore and Philadelphia held a press conference to discuss the more than 200 fire deaths in the United States that have occurred since the holidays. They stressed just one thing — the importance of working smoke alarms to save lives. This national call needs to be echoed in every fire station and fire hall throughout the country. At a time when the economic downturn may mean slashing essential services, prevention and public education may be the first to go from fire department budgets.

A colleague suggested just the opposite. What would happen if we in the fire service really focused on prevention and education during these hard economic times? The preliminary work of the Vision 2020 Committee in part calls for a renewed emphasis on fire prevention as a way to reduce firefighter fatalities. Look at groups such as the Institution of Fire Engineers–U.S. Branch and the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation that have taken up this challenge as part of their mission to reduce firefighter deaths. Consider the possibilities if “we” became “them, the bureau.”

Have you ever played “What If?” as a fire officer? It’s not hard to do. You come across an unusual building or construction site or a difficult intersection and you say: “What if I had a fire (or trench rescue or extrication) here? What would I need and how would I use it?”

This game has driven my wife crazy. A few years ago, she and I went shopping at a department store under renovation. As I came off the escalator, I scanned the congested construction area separated by a temporary wall from the sales floor. Although the building was sprinklered, I asked myself how would I advance a line from the outside (as the high-rise connection was behind the construction area), vent the smoke and remove the water in the event of a fire.

Less than a week later, my department fought the fire I had envisioned. A worked started the fire after store hours by using a torch next to an open can of flammable adhesive. We laid a standard fire line up the escalator, wyed it off so we had two hand lines, then vented the smoke through a skylight and removed water through the restroom. We scored points with both the mall and store management for containing the damage, which allowed them to open the next morning.

I recently saw the “What If?” game pay dividends at a fire in a nearby community. The department’s new chief came to my office to discuss his concerns about the water supply in his historic business district. He asked if he could special call two of our engines to help lay out 4,000 feet of supply line from a 12-inch water main should he have a major fire in that district. Such a fire occurred 10 days later when a candle in a window display fell over and ignited holiday decorations that spanned the length of the store. While that building was severely damaged, the fire did not spread to an adjacent store which was less than three feet from the involved structure nor to any of the other shops in that historic block. The reason in large part was due to the chief’s preplan for an adequate water supply.

Sometimes what separates a good officer from an exceptional officer is just playing “What If?” I say that knowing that it has been a while since I played it myself, but having the concerns of my fellow chief come true in such a short period of time reminded me that I had to do it more often in my community. Have you played the “What If” Game recently? If not, expand your mind and sharpen your strategy by taking the time to play it. It may pay dividends for you and your department in a very short time.

Recently I was asked to attend a three-day course entitled “School Shootings: Prevention, Response and Mitigation,” as a member of the fire service advisory committee at the local career development institute. Taught by both a retired police chief and several retired federal agents, the course gave the history, motivation and analysis of multiple-victim shootings at schools throughout North America, with special emphasis on the Columbine High School and Virginia Tech attacks.

Of the 35 attendees, only four were from the fire service. At first we had to overcome the learning curve regarding current police tactics in dealing with these shootings. Equally difficult to comprehend was the Internet subculture that instructs, openly discusses and borderline promotes school shootings as a way for a student to get “even” while forever making his or her name “infamous.”

As the course continued, it became obvious that the sooner responders started medical triage and treatment, the greater chance there was for victims to survive. The class discussion at times centered on how we first responders could better prepare and work comfortably in an ongoing environment that may be “contained” but not yet fully “secured.” For example, three volunteer EMTs at Virginia Tech (college students, not SWAT members) agreed to go into the stairwells with the SWAT team to triage and treat victims who were brought to them in a controlled setting while SWAT teams continued to sweep the area. No other victims died after EMTs entered the building.

After the course, we started a dialogue in our area on how to best respond and mitigate such carnage. This blog is as much an attempt to obtain input from those of you who have had similar discussions with your law enforcement counterparts as it is to raise your awareness that most of us are ill-prepared both procedurally and emotionally to handle this type of emergency.

I am not looking for every EMT or medic to be an armed SWAT member, but do some of you issue tactical vests and allow medics discretion to enter just after SWAT has swept an area? Is that somehow captured in your SOGs?

Are you prepared to handle a school shooting, knowing that on average that there is a victim every five seconds a shooter is in the building, and that those victims may be friends, neighbors or children of the responders?

If you haven’t squirmed in your chair by now, then know that I did for nearly the entire three-day class. But I also came out of those sessions knowing we must have this discussion to be better prepared to respond to the unthinkable in our area.

One of the more reprehensible things I’ve seen in recent years has been the damage done to chief officers’ reputations by accusations from anonymous sources. These accusations have been sent to commissioners or administrators via letter or e-mail or through strategically placed rumors, and in at least two instances have marred very innovative chiefs with unfounded allegations against their character. In both of these cases, the chiefs turned marginal departments into progressive organizations, cutting dead wood as they evolved. While difficult to prove, these anonymous character assassinations seemed to follow instances where individuals were passed over or demoted for their failure to perform.

In one instance where the wrongly accused chief decided to leave because of the lack of support he received from his commissioners, the fire district he oversaw reverted back into the two departments he had help consolidate. It has been several years since his decision to leave, and while one of the departments continued to progress under strong leadership, the other has struggled just to provide day-to-day operations and has had two catastrophic meltdowns following major fires in past years.

In the most recent example of this type of adversity, a chief held on long enough to retire, leaving a legacy within his department of two new stations, a complete turnover of the fire and EMS fleet, a significant decrease in his district’s response time, a set of written SOGs, as well as inspection and public-education programs that enhanced both citizen and firefighter safety. Unfortunately, he may not be remembered for all the progress he brought to his community, but rather for the unfounded accusations against him. Since his retirement, my friend has diligently sought another career in the fire service. He has hit these allegations head on by openly discussing them with potential employers and sharing copies of the two reports that exonerate him of all the alleged charges.

What has kept my friend going is the support he has received from within his network of fellow chiefs. Early on, he made it a point to reach out to a select circle of close friends for advice and fortunately for him has received continued support and strength through this process. What I have learned is that despite the efforts of two of the finest chiefs I’ve known, sometimes the dark side of human nature turns those we are compelled to discipline into cowardly, vindictive individuals bent only on the destruction of our best and brightest.

Occasionally I remind myself that leadership requires understanding of why we have adversity and opposition to our vision. The truth is that the greater a leader’s accomplishments, the greater the opposition or discouragement an adversary will attempt to throw at your plans. Their objective is to derail the progress or bring the chief down to their level. The trick is to expect and even anticipate this adversity and know that it is a sign that you as chief are actually doing the right thing for your organization. The best way both my friends and I have found in difficult situations is to surround ourselves with a network of true professionals whom we can call upon for frank, honest advice, and then carry through with our ideas while maintaining our professionalism and integrity.

I wonder how many chiefs actually read the reports on line-of-duty deaths or pay particular attention to the lessons learned from each fatality. If they do, how many chiefs themselves into believing that the unthinkable will never happen to them or their department?

I‘ve tried to pay close attention to several studies that have similarities with occupancies in my own area. The most recent of these is the Charleston report, issued just three months ago. But in my travels, I continue to see some of the same mistakes occurring over and over again at fire and emergency scenes.

Charleston‘s communications issues, especially in missing the multiple maydays, reinforced the need for command to operate in an environment that is free from the distractions on the fire ground and allows the IC to concentrate on the progress of the incident while evaluating the strategy and tactics being employed. I marvel at how many in command fail to use a vehicle even if it‘s just the closest engine company to run the incident. Worse yet is they continue to use portable radios from various locations on the fire ground while wearing nothing to distinguish themselves from other arriving officers. This practice is compounded when sufficient progress isn‘t being made and command tries to simultaneously work at the task level.

The Charleston report clearly indicated the failure of not having a single person in command who was attentive to monitoring the radio traffic. This lax greatly contributed to missing the maydays that in part lead to the firefighter fatalities. The problem remains that this situation is almost identical to multiple firefighter fatalities that occurred in Chesapeake, Va., and Patterson, N.J., 10 to 20 years ago. When will we get the message?

The Charleston report also re-enforced the value of a 360° walk around any structure, and the need to limit how far a crew should stretch into a big-box unsprinklered building without clear multiple exits. It emphasized that with drop ceilings it is imperative that ceiling panels be popped every few feet to check for overhead fire extension. Adopting these practices has already paid dividends to officers around the country, but many more still have paid attention to these lessons.

In one instance here in Wyoming, the initial company officer arriving at the scene of what appeared to be a smoky, heavily involved kitchen fire extending into the living room grabbed the thermal imaging camera and used it during a walk around. That brief reconnaissance made him aware that the main body of fire was in the basement, and that he was seeing the fire extending through the partially collapsed floors of each room. His tactics changed and he decided on alternate ways to attack the basement fire without endangering his crew on the weakened floors.

The bottom line is what are we learning from these tragedies? What will it take to get chiefs to alter their “business as usual” mentality; to become role models for safety to their firefighters which includes the chief wearing full PPE; to have adequate and enforceable SOG‘s and to get back to the basics of incident command. Until we heed these lessons, we have doomed more firefighters to similar tragic fates.