I take the bus to work. And yesterday, my fellow riders and I were startled by a middle-age man who was screaming angrily about the current government, taxation, health care, 401K fraud and cutbacks in public services. Nutcases on public transportation add to the joy of living in Chicago. It’s a daily event to hear someone off his rocker preaching about one issue or another. But when he started to yelp about the city’s plan to force police and fire personnel to take furlough days, he caught my attention.

Last week, the city rolled out its 2010 budget. Mayor Richard Daley included 24 unpaid days (12 holidays, 12 furlough days) for all non-union and many union city employees — including the city’s firefighters and police officers. Of course, the mayor can’t force the departments to take furlough days based on union contracts. But he seems determined to strong arm the city’s first responders into being team players and making sacrifices like the rest of the city’s workers. In fact, he said publicly that, “Everyone has to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. And that’s why I’m taking 24 days without pay, and I got other people to take that, because you have to show that government understands the suffering that is going on throughout your communities.”

If police and fire unions agreed to furloughs, the city would save $120 million, city Budget Director Eugene Munin said publicly at a city council budget hearing. That is a huge cost savings. It’s great the city can save money by forcing folks to take a month off. But to save money at the expense of public safety is ridiculous. Many will argue that there are not enough first responders on the street already, especially after nationally publicized events like the beating death of a Fenger High School student. And a time when the nation is at war against domestic and international terrorists, as well as facing threats from biological, chemical and radiological attacks and then the potential swine flu pandemic, don’t we need our first responders at work more than ever?

In fact, cutting the amount of first responders on the street may actually cost the city money. Imagine the lawsuits and liability coming from this. If it takes an ambulance or fire department 10 minutes longer to reach a victim who then dies, will a lawsuit ensue? And how much money would it cost the city’s lawyers to fight the suit, and then ultimately settle it to keep the victims’ families quiet? My guess is somewhere in the millions of dollars.

I give Daley credit because he also plans on taking furlough days. I understand the city’s broke. But the firefighter union shouldn’t have to take these days. I have another idea. Maybe the city should look at the layers of leadership and cut from there. Instead of 50 aldermen, maybe we should combine districts and cut that number by half. Or maybe they only need to meet once a week, and get paid for 52 days. Or maybe, just maybe, being an alderman shouldn’t be a full-time job. Maybe instead it should be a calling to public service. Yes. Maybe they should work for free. Cost-savings should come off the backs of politicians and their cronies, not first responders. Because in the end, an alderman rarely saves a life — while for police and firefighters serving and protecting the community is part of their moral code. We need them on the streets, 24/7. If not, the consequences may be great.

Like most Americans, I have been forced to buckle down and count my pennies to survive the current economic climate. I’ve clipped coupons. I’ve cancelled cable. And I bring my lunch to work every day.

According to economists, the U.S. economy will be slow to recover, as corporate profits take time to stabilize and governments try to meet their budgetary shortfalls. Fire departments are no different, said Bruce Evans, the assistant chief of support services for the City of North Las Vegas Fire Department. He’s responsible for EMS, training, business processes, accreditation, facility maintenance and vehicle acquisition — and just learned he must cut $3 million from his budget.

That’s a tall order, and Evans said one area that won’t be cut is firefighting training.

“Sometimes the first thing fire departments do is cut the entire training budget,” Evans said. “So that obviously not wise because that is an investment in the future and can also lead to a risk management issue later on.”

Instead, Evans said support services will be cut across the board. At the same time he’s considering ways to save money. For example, he’s re-negotiating prices on service contracts or on reconsidering equipment purchases — sometimes choosing the lower bidder and sacrificing bells and whistles. He also is working with vendors willing to deliver items right the first time in an efficient manner, which saves money in the long run, he said.

Evans also is considering ways to generate revenue by reexamining fees for ambulance services. In many cases, fire departments can start expanding coverage areas or bill car insurance companies. Departments can raise other fees, such as building inspection and permitting for hazardous materials.

“Those are all things that would potential have increases in fees,” Evans said.

Evans said departments need to track every penny and get reimbursed. For example, he said a neighboring department transports 600 patients a year and doesn’t bill for it because it occurs in an overload situation when a private ambulance doesn’t have a unit unavailable.

“In the past, those would have went uncollected or unprocessed,” he said. “Even though it’s a small amount of money you can’t leave that sitting on the table anymore. You have to go after it.”

In addition, fire departments should know how much each response costs, including what a fire engine costs per hour based on the specific staffing pattern. Documentation of staffing and other administrative processes is important money as well, Evans said. He recommends chiefs track costs on a mapping software so city officials can be convinced with data how much the fire service needs to operate based on the types of calls, their location and the response time.

“So when the city council says ‘well do we really need this fire truck in this location’ based on calls you can go back and prove the need using the data,” Evans said.

Evans noted departments must be innovative without compromising a good work environment, safety or gains toward technology and better service to the community.

“But if you are not innovative, your [department] won’t survive,” he said.

Rural fire departments struggle to provide services. They depend on free manpower, the goodwill of community fundraising and the empathy of a city council that believes the fire service should be properly funded. Without such support, volunteer fire departments have to depend on their own sweat equity to make the department run, including tweaking equipment to make it last one more year or spending mornings flipping pancakes for a fundraiser in hopes of purchasing new bunker gear.

It’s not fair. And frankly, I don’t understand it. How do people work full-time jobs, take care of family responsibilities, and still find time to not only train for the fire service and fight fires, but also to donate to fundraising administrative tasks like stuffing envelopes for a letter-writing campaign?

I spoke recently about this with Jim Bollinger, 30-year chief of the Marble Hill Fire Department in southeast Missouri. The department is one of the lucky ones; it has an annual budget of $100,000 to support community services and to provide gear and training to the 22 volunteers on the team.

The fire department also is part of an automatic mutual-aid system with surrounding towns and is the only department that runs extrication rescues in the rural area.

“That’s because some of the surrounding fire departments don’t even get a budget from their city,” Bollinger said. “It’s like in some of these areas the fire departments are treated like the bastard child and that’s not right.”

Bollinger admits he doesn’t have an answer, only worries on how departments will stay operational while modernizing to meet current safety standards. He points to the NFPA standards for SCBA devices that pushed the price up significantly. Marble Hill is ready for an upgrade, but Bollinger is shocked by the sticker price.

“We are ready for an upgrade, and when we bought the units six years ago they cost around $1,600,” he said. “Now, I hear they may be around $7,000. It is virtually impossible at my department’s size to afford the units… and some other departments depended on fundraisers. What are they going to do?”

Bollinger believes in safety standards and has no complaint there. He just can’t see in today’s economic climate that volunteer departments are going to be able to comply — although he says they must to protect the lives of firefighters. However, the departments just don’t have the funding support from cities and counties — and can’t operate if they don’t meet the standards, he said.

“The fire service really needs support from local government,” he said. “Remember, a fire doesn’t know the difference between a volunteer and career firefighter.”

It’s not like Bollinger is saying anything new. So what’s next? Will more governments add volunteer departments into their fiscal budgets or will services be slashed across the country? I am unsure as of now, but would hate to see volunteer fire departments across the nation slowly shut down, leaving pockets of our rural communities vulnerable to fires.

By Dave Murphy

I am not a huge fan of modern television. My mindless wandering of non-fulfilling channels drives me crazy and I usually give up and go on to bed. However, I recently watched (for the third or fourth time) the History Channel’s presentation of “Band of Brothers,” which details the exploits of the U.S. Army 101st Airborne — specifically the men of Easy Company — during World War II. Tom Brokow labeled these great warriors and those steadfast Americans who supported them the “greatest generation.” Brokaw was correct in bestowing this distinction.

I had the privilege of knowing one of these men — my uncle, Master Sgt. Wallace Hornsby. He went ashore at Utah Beach on D-Day. He wore the uniform proudly during the war and never hesitated to stand up for the patriotic values that he held so dear even after. Wallace died in 1968 at age 56. Other than a few faded memories, his pictures, bronze stars and a purple heart, I have very little memory of him.

Good soldiers and good firefighters share some traits. First of all, they believe in what they do and do so with willing hearts and firm resolve. My uncle was all about heart. He would call you out on any matter relating to respect of a lady or national security. If he were alive still, he would not approve of the general lack of concern regarding national security.

FIRE Act money is slowly decreasing. Federal grant money has provided for many needed and long overdue equipment upgrades in fire stations across our nation. And now those funds are drying up. But who will be the first called when the next cowardly act of terrorism is perpetrated? The U.S. fire service. And the fire service will be there to mitigate the incident long after CNN has left the scene. It is proper and fitting those federal funds are appropriated to provide safe and efficient equipment for those that must respond.

Regardless of funding, and while the bureaucrats argue over who is in charge, it is us, the new Band of Brothers, who are on the front lines. We must stand together, just as those gallant Americans did not so long ago. The fire service must continue to maintain a firm resolve and rise to the challenges that we will ultimately face. What can you do you ask? Be accountable and ready to do your part. Maintain a state of physical, mental, and professional readiness — demand that our politicians recognize that we are the first line of defense.

Dave Murphy retired as assistant chief of the Richmond (Ky.) Fire Department and currently is an associate professor in the fire-safety engineering technology program at the University of North Carolina–Charlotte. He is a past eastern director of the Fire Department Safety Officers Association.

By Patrick Kelly

How many firefighters and officers have sat around the kitchen table and complained that they never see “the administration.” Have you ever heard them say that administration doesn’t understand what goes on in the field? Each and every one of you has been on both sides of this discussion at some point in your careers. And the longer that perception persists, the more it becomes reality.

Change the department mindset that the fire chief only interacts with the troops at graduations, funerals and to administer punishment. You are the only one who can make this happen. However, it will take commitment on your part to leave your comfortable office and face the tough questions from the troops on their turf.

Management by walking around (MBWA) can be used at all levels within the organization. This style of management/leadership has been around in many forms for quite some time. MBWA has been attributed to Bill Hewlett and David Packard in the building of their business. It has also been used widely in recent years by many company executives as a way of keeping in touch with the pulse of their staff, employees and industry changes as technology moves at light speed in reshaping most professions and industries around the globe.

However, the American fire service has been slow to take up and embrace this contemporary strategic management/leadership tool. Way too many fire chiefs stay locked up in their safe offices believing they and/or their executive staff are the only ones who have the knowledge, skills and ability to lead the organization. Perhaps this is due to a lack of self-confidence, the fear of letting go of too much control, or a combination of these and other factors. No matter the reason, it is imperative that all members of senior management make it a priority in their schedules to get out of the office and stay current at the street level.

To simply walk and snoop around and not act on information provided by all members will accomplish nothing. In fact, this strategy will probably be detrimental as it will lend credence to the perception that staff listens but rarely hears and seldom if ever acts on some great ideas that are being discussed at all level throughout the organization. Great leaders listen, learn, and absorb as much as possible. They store this knowledge and information away in their “toolbox” to be used in the overall management of the department as challenges arise.

Leaders also must be patient while listening. You must act only when you are comfortable that you have an accurate assessment of the situation. Making rash decisions without obtaining the pulse of the department many times leads to inappropriate organizational or change decisions that are doomed to failure. We see this on the fireground when a hasty size-up is made and decisions implemented prior to obtaining all the facts. In both instances it is difficult, if not impossible, to obtain a positive outcome once we have gone down the wrong path. It is imperative to do everything you can to gather enough good information to produce positive outcomes from the start.

Leaders must be willing to get down and dirty while letting the members of the organization see first hand they are willing to do whatever it takes to get the job done. Commit to showing up at emergency scenes at all hours of the day or night and perform basic functions such as pull hose, carry medical equipment or walk around and observe both the positive and negative aspects of every scene. Attend post-event critiques and provide input and guidance to help educate younger managers. Or simply show up for dinner or lunch and sit around and talk honestly and openly with the troops. These simple but effective team-building exercises can’t be a one-time occurrence but something leaders are committed to on a daily basis.

When you think you have a good insight into the psyche of the department and have figured out what makes it tick, it is time to start over again. The fire service is an ever-changing profession and change is frightening to many within the fire service since it removes us from tradition and our comfort zone.

Make the daily commitment to be involved at the ground level. You will see big dividends within the organization in a relatively short time.

Monday’s decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in Ricci v. DeStafano (Docket No. 07-1428) does little to resolve long-standing questions about the proper place of race in public hiring and promotional processes. In siding with the appellant, the court has made the case that process (disparate treatment) outweighs results (disparate impact) in determining whether racial preferences have violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution of the United States.

Previous courts have ruled that results alone could could satisfy the “strong basis in evidence test” used to determine that a process was inherently biased and therefore flawed. Today’s decision swings the pendulum too far in the other direction by indicating that a sound process alone outweighs what many see as a flawed result.

It’s worth noting that the city of New Haven sought only to retest its candidates for promotion, not to deny promotions outright. Although the city had apparently gone to great lengths to ensure the fairness of its promotional exam, the written examination still produced an unexpected result.

That the result was unwelcome as well as unexpected should come as no surprise to anyone. Neither the white firefighters (and one Hispanic) whose promotions were put off by the decision to annul the test results nor the minority candidates who failed to score highly enough to warrant further consideration under the contested process won anything in today’s ruling. Whether the city will have to promote the highest scoring candidates remains undecided largely because the court failed to add anything substantive to the debate. Lower courts that now receive the case on remand will have to grope about for a remedy secure only in the knowledge that precedent is no guide.

If we had bothered to pay attention to history, we might have learned that process and results both matter. A fair process does not always produce results that everyone agrees are fair, especially when such results are projected against a backdrop of bias or neglect. Clearly, context matters (thank you Justice Ginsberg for noticing this in your minority opinion). Flawed results will only prove acceptable when people can all agree that the process was fair. This hardly seems likely in New Haven for the foreseeable future.

The people of New Haven and its firefighters have suffered through a long history of racial bias in hiring and promotion. If, as those supporting the court majority argue, transparency is required in public hiring and promotional processes, then why not adopt methods that favor diversity and ensure public service agencies reflect the communities they serve? By telling us only that the written exam’s results do not satisfy the “strong basis in evidence test,” the court has failed to provide any meaningful guidance as to what would justify an outcome as disparate as the one achieved in this case.

Respondents in this case did not argue that racial or ethnic diversity represents a “job-related business necessity” in a public work force consistent with the provisions of Title VII of the Civil Right Act. To many, such an argument would have been wrong on its face. Still others recognize that public employees do not serve themselves. Rather, they serve a public that longs for opportunities to see public employment as a means to build a better life for everyone in their community. Until employment practices achieve this end, no one can or should be satisfied with either the process or the results.

I never thought much about large furniture stores with their overstocked shelves, overflowing bins and maze-like furniture displays. I didn’t, that is, until two years ago, when nine Charleston, S.C. firefighters died in such a store. Now every time I walk into a large store, I stop to figure out where the exits are located — I want to know how to get out.

Hundreds upon hundreds of firefighters have died needlessly over the years, but none more so than the Charleston Nine. Their deaths have brought about much-needed changes, highlighted by the report compiled by the Charleston Post-Incident Assessment and Review Team.

Charleston has worked hard to implement the more than 200 task-force recommendations. The city hired a new fire chief, Thomas Carr, late last year. This week, John Tippett joined the department as deputy chief of operations. He is the last commissioned officer to be brought onto the department.

“Many positive things in the works right now,” he said.

Among those positive things is increased staffing. The department’s current 29-member recruit class will allow for four-person staffing on every apparatus. With SAFER grant funds, another 12-member recruit class will graduate in October and will become battalion chief aides.

“The department is also close to getting the SOPs completed and has been working with surrounding departments to have a regional response SOP,” Tippett added. “The departments have readily supported it, too.”

Tippett told me that as part of the remembrance of the two-year anniversary of the tragedy, the fire department has asked the city’s building department to pull listings of all the properties that have a profile similar to the Sofa Super Store. Fire crews have been visiting these locations and updating or creating preplans. The firefighters are familiarizing themselves with the buildings and meeting with storeowners about fire safety.

In addition to the prevention efforts, Tippet said the city also will hold a memorial service at the site of the fire on June 18. The city purchased the land and plans to use it for a memorial and possibly a new fire department headquarters. A period of time has been set aside for the Charleston Fire Department members to come and pay their respects. The site then will be open for the public to pay their respects.

“It’s a vacant lot now, but there is a small memorial with a post and American flag where the bodies were located,” Tippett said.

The fire service vowed to never forget the Charleston Nine: Capt. Michael Benke, Capt. Billy Hutchinson, Capt. Louis Mulkey, Engineer Brad Baity, Engineer Mark Kelsey, Asst. Engineer Michael French, Firefighter Melvin Champaign, Firefighter Earl Drayton and Firefighter Brandon Thompson.

Charleston’s progress shows they haven’t forgotten either.

The first decade of the 21st century has seen no meaningful changes to the fire service culture’s tolerance of fire deaths, injuries and property loss. Yes, I said “tolerance.”

American has known it’s had a fire problem since at least 1948, when President Harry S. Truman received the Report of the Continuing Committee of the President’s Conference on Fire Prevention and Education. Our 33rd president responded to the report by stating:

“The serious losses in life and property resulting annually from fires cause me deep concern. I am sure that such unnecessary waste can be reduced. The substantial progress made in the science of fire prevention and fire protection in this country during the past forty years convinces me that the means are available for limiting this unnecessary destruction.”

The authors of that report, along with the participants at the five Wingspread symposiums since — Wingspread Conference on Fire Service Administration, Education and Research (1966), Wingspread II (1976), III (1986), IV (1996), and V (2003) — have all said the same thing when it comes to addressing the fire problem in America:

“Fire prevention and accident prevention employ same technique. – Over the years, the approaches to the accident problem have been popularly designated as the Three E’s of Safety – Engineering, Enforcement, and Education. These ‘Three E’s’ are equally applicable to fire prevention and protection.”

So, where are we today? According to the U.S. Fire Administration, an average of 3,695 people suffered fire-related deaths in the United States between 1998 and 2007. (Those numbers do not include those who lost their lives on 9/11.) In a decade we lost the population of a small city —36,950. And thousands more suffer fire-related injuries and the property losses reach into the billions of dollars.

If we’re serious in our profession about ridding the United States of this “epidemic of fire,” I propose the following manifesto for every community in the United States.

Engineering:

• Require residential sprinklers in all newly constructed one-and two-family homes. Period.
  
• Change building codes so that all building materials must pass fire resistance performance standards, not just “gravity-defiance” standards.
  
• Change building codes in the wildland-urban interface to prohibit the use of combustible building materials. Mandate the use of block, concrete, stucco and other non-combustible materials.
  
• Mandate fire-safe cigarettes.
  

Education:

• Require that all residential property in a locality — rental and occupant-owned — has a copy of the locality’s fire-prevention code do’s and don’ts, written in plain English and other applicable languages for the community.
  
• Require fire departments and school systems to jointly deliver a standard fire prevention curriculum in elementary, middle, and high schools every two years.
  
• Require completion of fire prevention course of study as prerequisite for obtaining a residential lease or buying a home.
  
• Require insurance companies to inspect rental and occupant-owned residential properties before insuring the property. Require policy-holders to submit an affidavit to their insurance company stating that they comply with the fire prevention provisions of their policy and their locality every year as a condition to renew their coverage.
  

Enforcement:

• Investigate all fires and issue a court summons to the building occupant if a fire is determined to have been caused by their negligence. (Just like a traffic accident: if you’re at fault, you pay the price.)
  
• Bill the occupant for the cost of fire suppression services when a fire is determined to have been the result of occupant negligence.
  
• Fine builders and contractors when a fire investigation reveals that improper building materials or building practices (a) started the fire or (b) contributed to the spread of the fire.
  
• Fine rental-property owners who do not maintain their rental properties and whose properties are not in compliance with the locality’s fire prevention code.
  
• Incorporate a locality’s level of fire protection and history of fire loss into the financial processes that financial institutions use to determine a locality’s bond rating.
  

Sound rather harsh? Sound unrealistic? Consider for a moment what has happened since 9/11 to fight the “war on terror” — creation of DHS and TSA, hundreds of billions of dollars spent, laws adopted and changed, new training, new equipment, new ways to do our jobs. With all that and more, we’ve not suffered a single terrorist-related death or injury on United States soil since that day. We have, however, lost a “city” of 29,560 people in that same period. What are we waiting for?

Communities everywhere are confronting difficult budget decisions the likes of which many leaders have never faced. Not since the early 1980s and in some cases the mid-70s have so many communities faced the combined problems of rising costs and falling revenues.

Mayors, commissioners, city managers and finance directors have finally succumbed to the realization that the public’s priorities and ability to pay for them are on a collision course. Unfortunately, many chiefs and unions have not yet arrived at that point.

Avoiding a collision requires someone to yield. In most cases, this means adjusting our priorities or finding altogether new ones since few state or local governments have the authority to fund deficit spending on operations. Even with the recently passed federal stimulus package, most communities have no choice but to cut back services in the near term.

This reveals the root of the problem facing fire and emergency services. Following the last big round of recessions in the mid-70s and early 80s — the unusually mild ones we experienced in the early 1990s and 2000s were little more than speed-bumps compared to the ditch we are now in — state and local governments have adopted many reforms to improve government efficiency and accountability. Relatively few of these interventions, however, have found their way into fire and emergency services delivery.

Now that is not to say such reforms did not have an effect on us. As jurisdictions looked harder at the way they delivered public safety services, chiefs and unions — prone to a sort of siege mentality around budgeting — formed an unnatural, if not unholy, alliance to set national standards and develop accreditation models.

The combined effect of the apparent labor/management compact and reasonably stable budget environments made it unattractive for communities to do anything other than go along without giving up. The result: Few jurisdictions recognized NFPA 1710, but most found it worthwhile to grudgingly accept recommendations that advanced their agencies toward compliance anyway. To recap, from the labor/management perspective using standards in place of sound reasoning about local conditions was not only simple, it was often successful.

In light of the current economic situation, our definition of success now requires close and careful scrutiny. Who benefits more from staffing and response time standards, firefighters or the citizens they serve? Who suffers when libraries close instead of fire stations? Which capability can the community more easily replace if government no longer delivers a service?

Benjamin Franklin, recognized by many as the father of the American fire service for his founding of a fire company funded by fire insurance premiums, first established schools, libraries, and other civic institutions. I suspect he could scarcely have imagined the fire service as it exists today. By the same token, I am supremely confident he saw investments in literacy, education, and civic participation to be his most important and lasting legacies, as indeed they are.

Franklin’s own writings underscore this sentiment: “An investment in knowledge pays the best interest.” Clearly, our reverence for Franklin does not spring from our acceptance of his sage advice or we would not so easily marginalize or even ignore his other words of wisdom, like “A penny saved is a penny earned” and “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” You get the picture.

Rather than looking for ways to bolster our arguments in support of more firefighters and shorter response times — the current NIST study comes to mind — we should be looking for ways to rebuild the community’s capacity to care for itself. I am not talking about a return to purely volunteer fire companies in every city, but I am thinking about ways we can support badly needed reforms in the way we deliver and pay for health service for instance.

As the current economic crisis plays out we would do well to look at some of the genuine innovations spawned by the last big dips we faced almost 30 years ago. These included the creation of fire investigation task forces to combat arson, fire service involvement in the model code development process, a renewed commitment to fire and life safety education and the creation of new school-based curricula, improvements in personal protective equipment, new radio and computer-aided dispatch systems, lightweight response vehicles, and the introduction of fire service-based emergency medical services. All of these innovations occurred in large measure because of — not in spite of — meager resources and tough budget conditions.

This all suggests the time has come to take off our fire helmets and put on our thinking caps. The destiny of fire and emergency services is in our hands if only we choose to take hold of it and be creative.

I’ve had two conversations recently that bear repeating. The first conversation was a formal interview with Mark McMullen, a senior economist for Moody’s Economy.com. McMullen’s area of expertise is government finance. I first interviewed him nearly a year ago when it seemed obvious that the economy hadn’t merely stumbled but was in recession. The U.S. housing market was in bad shape, driving down home prices. It was a troubling sign for fire departments that depend on property-tax revenue.

We didn’t realize just how deep the problem ran, but we’d soon find out. The number of foreclosures on homes bought with sub-prime loans indicated that lending institutions were in for tough times. Fuel prices were at record highs and several fire departments started cost-saving measures in anticipation of budget cuts or cost overruns. Then, of course, giant financial institutions toppled, banks became squeamish about lending to each other and almost anyone else, job losses ballooned, prices started on a dangerous deflationary path, and people on Wall Street and Main Street held tight to the money they had.

Early this year, McMullen said that one warning sign that fire chiefs should look for that the economy is worsening is a sharp fall in retail sales. That’s because it would be a double gut punch of lower property taxes and lower sales taxes. That, of course, happened and many municipalities are doubled over with the wind knocked out of their budgets.

My most recent interview with McMullen appears on page 88 of FIRE CHIEF’s December issue; a longer version of the interview will be posted later this month at firechief.com. He says the economy is now worse than most experts expected. Most fire departments already feel the pinch, some through staff reductions. McMullen expects the economy to bottom out in the second half of 2009. Recovery, he says, will be slow.

Here’s what struck me: In both interviews, McMullen said that fire departments are in a better position than school districts when it comes to competing for public money. He reasons that because there are fewer children in K-12 schools, there is less demand for building new schools. That, he further reasons, should free up money for fire departments. Departments, he said, should be in position to get a bigger chunk of the pie, albeit from a smaller pie.

The second conversation I had was with a progressive fire chief of a medium-size department. His city administrator asked how much the chief could trim from his budget. He told the administrator that he could cut as much as he liked. The only thing the chief needed to know was how much risk the administrator was comfortable accepting. In other words, what number of civilian deaths from fire or other emergencies could the administrator live with?

For his part, McMullen takes measurable facts and applies reason to understand a present condition and predict future conditions (fewer children need fewer school space, freeing more money for fire departments).

But public servants’ decisions, especially spending decisions, often are based on factors outside cold analysis and logic. And beyond political pressures, there is tremendous economic pressure right now to make deep budget cuts. Recent data from the National Conference of State Legislators shows that, collectively, state governments need an extra $100 billion to break even over the next 18 to 24 months.

It may be that federal money will bail out the states and that the states will funnel that money to municipalities and counties. Even so, chiefs will face a tough battle to hang on to the money they need. At the least, it will take combining cold facts with an emotional appeal, as did the chief I spoke with, to get the attention of those holding the purse strings.

The conversation between the chief and his administrator did not end in enlightened resolution. And I suspect those two will be having that same conversation several more times in the coming months. I also suspect many other fire chiefs are having similar conversations with their administrators.

If you are a chief and have not shaped your argument against extreme budget cuts, you need to do so. If you’ve had success in the budget process, please share your strategies with others in the comment section below. (Please log in or create an account to leave a comment.)