Bill Post submitted the following thoughts
On the 6PM Channel 2 Chicago News tonight (Friday) the opening story was about possible cuts to the Chicago Fire Department. Reporter Jay Levine mentioned that out of over 90 fire stations, 11 of them were older, single company stations that were said to be “old inefficient and going away” according to “fire department sources”. It was also cited that 5 or 6 stations could possibly be closed and the approximately 150 men that are assigned to them would “not be replaced but would instead be used to make up for the difference for firefighters who are retiring.”
Engine 78’s station was used as an example. Engine 83’s station was also used as an example. However it was a poor example as the said “merging slower fire houses” like Engine 83 on Wilson Ave in Uptown could save the city money, similar to the Mayor’s idea of closing some police stations. Since when is Engine 83 a “slower” house? Police stations and fire stations are like comparing apples and oranges. Most of the policemen assigned to the stations are out on the streets in their cars on patrol and assigned to beats while firefighters and paramedics are at their local fire station so they can protect the neighborhood that they serve. It is necessary for them to be there so they can be on the scene in less then 5 minutes.
Other sources of potential savings cited were “duty availability pay” costing about $15 million dollars, the clothing allowance costing about $5 million dollars annually and the specialty pay for hazardous materials specialists, scuba divers, and paramedic training that cost an extra 5% added to the firefighter’s salary.
I personally have a question. Who were the “fire department sources” that had said that single company stations were “old inefficient and going away”. It’s hard for me to imagine that anyone from the Chicago Fire Department would say that, as it is a known fact that in all major fire departments the ratio of Engine to Truck companies is always higher and therefore there are always more Single Engine Stations to multi company (Engine and Truck) stations in just about every major fire department.
#1 by TRK 30 on February 20, 2012 - 3:15 PM
CFD E116- Dont bash these guys on this site. This information needs to get out to the people who will be affected by this such as the residents who live near these single engine houses!!!!!! That is going to be who is affected by this!
#2 by CFD E116 on February 19, 2012 - 5:40 AM
Why don’t you guys all let those of us who this will **actually** effect deal with it?
#3 by Bill Post on February 19, 2012 - 1:14 AM
As recently as about 2 years ago (late 2009) the Chicago Fire Department had wanted to build additions to two of the “older single Engine stations”. They were Engine’s 99’s and 71’s stations. I’m pretty sure that in Engine 71’s case it would be so that they could accommodate an ambulance and in Engine 99’s case so that they would have more room for their current Ambulance as they have been using an older narrower model then most of the Ambulances currently in service.
Did you know that the Air/Sea Rescue station at Northerly Island (former Meigs Field) is still standing there and it even has a helicopter hangar that was opened with it in 1973. Instead of spending money on a new helicopter station at 9500 south on the lake front they could have just built a new helipad next to the Air/Sea Rescue station, which is a more centrally located then the one at 9500 south and the city could have spent the money instead for a much needed new fire station somewhere else.
#4 by Bill Post on February 18, 2012 - 6:03 PM
I would like to clarify a few things.
First the Channel 2 News Report on February 17th at 6:pm had specifically stated “Merging slower houses like Wilson avenue with others would reduce the number of fire houses and fire fighters on duty the same way the ranks of police officers and police stations have been cut”.
Engine 83 or 78 (which was also specifically featured in the report) are not slow fire stations. Engine 83 was the 13th busiest Engine company in the city in 2010 with 3,394 emergency runs, Truck 22 had 4033 runs and Ambulance 31 had 5447 runs making Truck 22 the third busiest Truck in the city and Ambulance 31 the 14th busiest Ambulance in the city. Engine 78 was the 16th busiest Engine in the city with 3339 runs and Ambulance 6 was the 15th busiest Ambulance in the city with 5411 runs.
Secondly the 5 or 6 stations that they want to close wouldn’t be “combined” into other stations, but the companies would be taken out of service as they even admitted that the “150” men from those stations would be used to replace men who are retiring from other companies.
When the CFD talks about combining stations they usually have meant moving single truck company stations in with single engine companies (usually into a new or larger station). For example in the beginning of 1962 the Chicago Fire Department had 15 single Truck company stations (14 if you consider that Engine 60 and Truck 37 were temporarily using Truck 16’s quarters along with Truck 16) while we had 61 Truck companies and 123 (land) Engine companies in service. Since then most of the single Trucks were moved in with Engine companies or (vice versa) leaving only Truck 24 in a single Truck station and Tower Ladder 63 without sharing quarters with an Engine company. Truck company 63 wasn’t even in service in 1962.
The only station that could really be combined with a single Engine company is Truck 24 (which the CFD had recommended to it in at least 2 separate studies).
As far as Engine companies go Chicago has already had it’s “Cuts” if you stop and consider that since 1962 the CFD has had 28 (land) Engine companies and 2 (fireboat) Engine companies taken out of service. Since 1980 ten of those Engines and two of those fireboats were taken out of service.
#5 by Jacob on February 18, 2012 - 12:05 PM
it said there r going to combine slower house. so basically there want to get rid of them because they would have to build a new house to fit all the rigs.