Editorial “Fire Fight” states:
“We can’t say for sure who’s right in this dispute. We agree the city can’t balance the budget with benefit costs soaring from 34 percent of the fire budget to 46 percent over the last eight years. And we suspect Lancastrians can’t be safe with 12 firefighters for every 10,000 people in the city — a lower ratio than Bethlehem, Altoona or York.”
WATCHDOG: A wag of the tail for a thoughtful article.
Concerning the issue of ratio of fire fighters to population, we recommend “Magic Numbers Do Departments No Favors”:
FIRE CHIEF: “ ‘How many firefighters should a community have? How many should your community have? Despite a 300-year history of fire protection in this country, there’s no clear-cut answer to that question. But there are people who have attempted to resolve that question by establishing a series of “magic numbers” that are somewhat illusionary at best.’ ”…
“Consider this example. I’ve seen many staff reports that reference the ratio of one firefighter to 1,000 citizens. Says who? It’s the International City/County Management Association, which publishes a yearly report that often compares the number of firefighters to populations. However, there’s a caveat to that number. It doesn’t apply to every fire department, and it’s an average. In addition, that ratio has been declining over the years and therefore can’t be a permanent baseline or benchmark for the measurement of fire protection…”
This is a money problem and a life saving problem, not a firefighter problem. How much are taxpayers willing to pay for full time firefighters in salary and benefits (and police for that matter). We need volunteers to supplement what we can afford. Not to put out fires but to inspect for working smoke detectors, get people out of burning houses before the fire becomes too intense, remind people of fire safety etc.