CFD bans 'booster' hoses; some on City Council seek more involvement

carolinapanther (anonymous) says...

I also support fire chief Rusty Thomas and I believe that he has learned some valuable lessons from this incident and will be a better fire chief for it.

August 22, 2007 at 12:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

nickiegarbeil (anonymous) says...

At least Mr. Fishburne isn't afraid to stand up for what's right! Hats off to Mr. Fishburne!! Hit with the hard questions while you can...

August 22, 2007 at 1:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

mac0cm4 (anonymous) says...

City Council should have little to do with the operations of the fire department. Oversight is appropriate for councilmembers. They just want to ride the coattails of any 'good' political fallout that will come from this when Joe makes it look like 'he' fixed the FD.

August 22, 2007 at 3:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

jifdeng3 (anonymous) says...

Just in the nick of time

August 22, 2007 at 6:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lyfe1999 (anonymous) says...

These recommendations have been made weeks ago, and should have been implemented weeks ago. Give me a break. Joe is just playing politics. Timing is everything in an election year. Joe has to go. I hope the people of this great city can see this for what it is, but then again he has been doing it for 33 years now.

August 22, 2007 at 6:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

kaylee (anonymous) says...

I thought Riley would of been gone for all the taxes he keeps raisng to keep parks in Charleston. I put a lot of this blame on Riley. If the price wouldn't of been so high, the store would of paid & there would of been water in the store.Guess who helped set the price? Riley did. So lets share the blame on several factors.

August 22, 2007 at 7:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fyrmnjim (anonymous) says...

The mayor also reaffirmed support for Fire Chief Rusty Thomas.
"He is the fire chief, the excellent fire chief, and I support him unequivocally," Riley said.

This proves it, your mayor is an idiot.

August 22, 2007 at 8:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

jadmom (anonymous) says...

I think it's a good idea that some City Council members are seeking more involvement. It gives another accountability point, which can't be bad for the CFD.

August 22, 2007 at 8:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

vesta (anonymous) says...

The involvement of at least some of the council members is a step in the right direction. As someone else pointed out, maybe it is time for a strong council/strong manager/figure head mayor for the city. With all due respect, the Mayor has NOT a CLUE about the fire department. If he did, he would NOT have announced the morning after the fire, that every procedure was followed correctly because the CFD has an ISO #1 rating and is the top fd in the nation. If he "unequivocally" supports Thomas, why bother to convene a $150,000 panel to study mistakes? Perhaps if Riley is NOT re-elected, a new mayor will see fit to cull out the inadequate leadership of the CFD. This is all politics for Joe...he has been on every news cast for the past month, supporting every element known to society (the parks, the children, spotted dogs with bronchial infections :), etc.)

August 22, 2007 at 8:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Local (anonymous) says...

Joe is here to stay, y'all, that is a fact of life. If we keep the pressure up perhaps he can at least be persuaded to remove Rusty Thomas from leadership of the CFD. Nice job, Mr. Fishburne, for saying what many are thinking.

August 22, 2007 at 8:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

SCFF (anonymous) says...

Since the day all of this happened both the mayor and Rusty have mentioned several times that the City of Charleston Fire Department is an ISO class 1 Fire Department. I think that not only should the fire department be investigated maybe ISO should be investigated as well. There is no way a "class 1" fire department operates the way Charleston City operated that day.

August 22, 2007 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Fire_Inspector (anonymous) says...

Now they need to BAN booster hoses entirely.

And by 5" hose.

Have real training...

August 22, 2007 at 9:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

WardLaFrance (anonymous) says...

The only way that Rusty Thomas can be a good fire chief is if he is retired fire chief. And obviously, Joe Riley should be the second to go. Good job to Mr. Fishburne! Although I generally wouldn't think it is a good idea to have council involved in the CFD, in this case we need more of the city leaders involved. Joe wants re-election and Mr. Fishburne wants safe and competent fire service. Is this all that happened at the council meeting?

August 22, 2007 at 9:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LI58 (anonymous) says...

City council and the Mayor need to keep their ideas to themselves. Why is it that politics has such a tight rein on what the CFD does? The citizens of Charleston need to wake up and demand the removal of the fire chief and vote mayor Joe Riley out of office.

This incident may have never happened in the first place if the equipment was up to ISO Class 1 code and the chief followed proper protocol.

August 22, 2007 at 9:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

exorcist_pencocky (anonymous) says...

But he won't answer questions on his web site. Think of how great a city charleston could be without riley at the helm. Now think of all the expensive projects he has ready for charleston.

>>> The mayor also reaffirmed support for Fire Chief Rusty Thomas.

"He is the fire chief, the excellent fire chief, and I support him unequivocally," Riley said. <<<

When a Liberal Democrat says that you can be assured that he has the termination papers for fire chief rusty on his desk, waiting to be signed.

Hey rusty, maybe now is a good time to beat him at his own game and resign. You could claim lack of support from the city of charleston mayor, over the years, as the reason. You would come out looking like the 'Hero' and force the mayor and council to do good for the fire department.

August 22, 2007 at 9:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fyrmnjim (anonymous) says...

Fire Insp, Right you are, get them off those engines. Remove the temptation. Easier to use? Well, they are easier to take up, but I bet I can lay out a line of 1 3/4 in about a minute or so of pulling a booster. Given that I then have more than twice the firepower, I have more than enough to make up for that lost time.

To Councilpersons Bleecker and Lewis. Why not be pro-active? CFD has been either reactive ot inactive since this tragedy. Why wait, move to save more lives, quit being status quo politicians and step up to the plate.

Councilman Fishburne: Kudos, keep pushing.

August 22, 2007 at 9:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

eddiestow (anonymous) says...

The City of Charleston has grown too much for one person to run the show. It's time for the good ole boy hiring and promotion system to end and the only way is for more input from government and professional sources.

August 22, 2007 at 9:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

SCFF (anonymous) says...

Per ISO it recommends that the fire department conducts pre-fire planning of industrial,commercial,institutions and other similar structures TWICE a year. Records of the ispections should include complete and up-to-date notes and sketches. Garvin admits he walked through this building shortly before the fire, Did he include in the notes of his "pre-plan" that the building had light weight truss construcion, how the building was laid out, special hazards?Was the pre-plan even used that day, or was in sitting beside the thermal imager? "Class 1" no where near it folks.

August 22, 2007 at 9:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

nickiegarbeil (anonymous) says...

I think many of us mirror your sentiments, SCFF...Fortunately, the panel is in place and they are very intelligent men...I have a hard time believing that they will let much get past them...Once the word comes out from them, then the real fight begins..

August 22, 2007 at 11:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

FireBoss (anonymous) says...

Dont put too much faith in ISO. They are a paper tiger.Some insurance companies dont pay much attention to them. They can only " recommend" to the city any changes that need to be made in fire protection.If the city or fire department does not have the resources ( money ) to carry out the changes then there is no penalty, except that coveted rating. We have spent 30 years and lots of money on some of the recommendations and we are still a Class 5. Check out their rate schedule and see which gives the most rating, maybe record keeping and water supply?

August 22, 2007 at 12:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

east3 (anonymous) says...

This is the limit. Everyone else, including Council, is told to wait for the completion of the investigations before jumping to conclusions. Except the Mayor, who without any investigation can "unequivocally" clear the Chief.

ISO does not rate fire department tactics. They grade the quantity of fire protection resources in a community, the water, the hydrants, the station locations, the number of and equipment on engines and ladders,etc. Having a #1 rating means the resources to be among the best are present. An "excellent" fire chief would have made the best use of them over the past 15 years.

An "excellent" fire chief would know - and care - whether his policies meet state and federal guidelines.

An "excellent" fire chief would know enough about hydraulics to know that you can pump one 2.5" hose to its burst pressure and you will still not get enough water to supply multiple hose lines.

An "excellent" fire chief would not just holler for more pressure, he would have bought larger supply hose 15 years ago and there wouldn't be a water problem.

An "excellent" chief would have instituted an incident command system long ago and would be complying with NIMS today so that his department could qualify for federal fire grants.

An "excellent" chief would know that it is reckless to send multiple crews into a large working fire without a water supply line.

An "excellent" chief on arriving at a large commercial structure with a dangerous fireload and a spreading fire and no supply line would order an immediate evacuation before his crews are overrun.

An "excellent chief" would recognize the serious hazard of a lightweight truss roof exposed to fire.

How do I know all this? Training and common sense and experience - and books. Firefighters cannot afford to have chiefs learn just from experience. Tactics texts as much as 30 years old warn about truss roofs and large area fires.

The Mayor needs to set aside his personal feelings and show there is some accountablity in his city. If he is too close personally to the Chief to be impartial, he should recuse himself and let others deal with the personnel questions.

There is no excuse for the outdated protocols of the CFD. There is no excuse for the multiple tactical blunders at the fire. The reason, however, is clear: neglect of professional standards. How else could the panel have produced an "instant" set of recommendations on how to begin to bring the department up to minimum standards unless the deficencies were so obvious that any fire service professional reviewing this incident could see them immediately even at a distance.

Why was nothing done for two months? Why was nothing done for 15 years? Why were all the external critiques simply ignored, even though they proved to be consistent with the panel's recommendatons? Where is the internal CFD review?

What is the Mayor's definition of "excellence"?
Your firefighters deserve both progress and justice.

August 22, 2007 at 1:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

FireBoss (anonymous) says...

Thank You east3, words of wisdom. EXACTLY the way it should be.

August 22, 2007 at 1:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BILLYBOB (anonymous) says...

LIL'JOE SPENDS ALL OF HIS MONEY SUEING THE TOWNE OF JAMES ISLAND--THAT MONEY WOULD HAVE PURCHASED A LOT OF LARGER SIZE HOSE--AND TRAINING

August 22, 2007 at 2:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Kerry (anonymous) says...

An "excellent" summation by east3.

August 22, 2007 at 2:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

nickiegarbeil (anonymous) says...

Thanks for the intelligent, precise expression East3...too bad YOU aren't our Chief...we need a good one.

August 22, 2007 at 4:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

vesta (anonymous) says...

East3: All excellent points. Out of curiosity, do you feel that the panel, when they next present findings specifically about the fire on June 18, will again "dance around" the issues? I, for one, cannot believe they, as experts, would have "recommended" that positions of importance which they saw as necessary, such as safety chief, and someone to oversee training should come from within a department with such inadequate training (from the top to the bottom) and antiquated procedures on the fire ground. Of course the money which is now or will be in their pockets came from the city, so..... don't bite the hand that feeds you. It appears that no one takes responsibility for their actions any more.

August 22, 2007 at 5:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

nickiegarbeil (anonymous) says...

Interesting facts from the City Council meeting...The city approved the invoice payment for $61,900.61 payable to SC State Firefighter's Association for the memorial...and a transfer of the amount of $84,249.00 to the CFD fund, for consultant services (I believe if I remember correctly, the mayor mentioned the panel fees, as well as legal expenses)...

Unfortunately...that full sum of money would have made a wonderful training budget, and might have even prevented so many deaths...An ounce of prevention...that's all it would have taken...

PS, for those opposing...before you do, I was there last night, I have this directly from the meeting agenda...

August 22, 2007 at 5:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

charleytowngirl (anonymous) says...

East3:
Excellent post! You need to put that in an email and send it to all of the council members AND the Mayor!

August 22, 2007 at 6:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

UberBlitzkrieg (anonymous) says...

The city is only liable for $250,000 on any pending litigation on this event. State Insurance Fund picks up the rest.

August 22, 2007 at 7:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

charleytowngirl (anonymous) says...

Glad to see that at least one of the city's council members has the kahuna's to ask questions. Good going, Mr. Fishburne. Keep at it! Keep asking questions!

Unfortunately, I think the other members of council, like the mayor, are burying their heads in the sand. This issue will not go away and the public's concern for the remaining firefighters and the concern for public safety needs to be heard by council NOW! You don't need the official reports to come out to see what is going on! You already have a preliminary report from one panel.....now ask the same question Mr. Fishburne asked? Why did it take so long if these recommendations had already been made? Demand an answer from the Mayor, don't be satisfied with his stonewalling!! That answer is right up there with the Chief's "I don't know!"

You other council members need to step up to the plate! Don't you people see what is going on? Aren't you concerned for our firefighter's safety and for your own personal property. YOU are in a position to do something about it! You know what needs to be done! JUST DO IT!

August 22, 2007 at 8:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

charleytowngirl (anonymous) says...

To Mayor Riley:

WTF????!!!

August 22, 2007 at 8:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ssm (anonymous) says...

Uber, Just curious-how does that work? Does the City of Charleston being self-insured have any impact?

August 22, 2007 at 8:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

charleytowngirl (anonymous) says...

Uber: $250,000 x 9 = 2,250,000 (see, not so dumb after all even with my SC education!)

Maybe the mayor sees that sum of money as such a small amount compared to what he spends on aquariums and such that it's the reason he does not seem to care about the safety issues of the fire dept. and stands so proudly by his chief.

August 22, 2007 at 8:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

charlestonclemsonfan (anonymous) says...

everyone says that the city only has $6000.00 for the training budget but it is broken down a lot further than you know because Chief Ricky,and Capt. Dale Jernkins salary is figured in salaries but actually are in training so maybe you should get all the facts before commenting on the budget because things are broken futher down and you may not know all the figures,and further more many of the current firemen come from smaller departments that all were certified through the state and the fire academy,along with many taking courses from the National fire academy so it makes you smarter if you know all the facts before speaking and not guessing

August 22, 2007 at 9:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

charleytowngirl (anonymous) says...

Did anyone follow that one long sentence? What is charlestonclemsonfan trying to say?

August 22, 2007 at 9:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

vesta (anonymous) says...

charlestonclemsonfan: Are you saying that Chief Ricky and Capt Dale Jernkins are splitting the $6,000.00 in the training budget as their salary? Please be a little more clear about what you are saying. Is there more than $6,000.00 in the training budget? If so, how much more? Why is the CFD budget such a secret? If the taxpayers are paying your salary (along with every other ff and chief's salary in the department), they are entitled to know how much they are paying for your training.

August 22, 2007 at 9:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

east3 (anonymous) says...

Vesta

I cannot speak for the panel. I think in four days they took a courageous action just to produce a preliminary report like they did. Note that the positions are for six months. Hard to get a serving officer from outside to leave their job for a six month appointment. Maybe a couple of retired chiefs could have been sought out. The six months takes us past next January. Perhaps they expect that they will have their report done by then and/or there might be a new chief by then. Then the city could look to fill permanent postitions. I expect more recommendations on reorganization, basically 2-4 Assistant or Deputy Chiefs at HQ to run Divisions such as Operations, Training, Support... A couple of panel members might even be available... Probably sugggest taking the ACs off platoon shift, putting them on 40 hrs.

But I absolutely do not think any of these guys will hold back for the few bucks they are getting for this. It is surely more of a pain than it's worth financially. They do have other lives. And they have professional reputations that are worth a lot more than what they will make here. What's the Mayor going to do if they displease him - fire them? He said they were completely independent.

Whether they will directly confront individual actions is hard to say. Personnel matters seem to be pretty well reserved to the Mayor and it seems clear he has no intention to even explore whether any culpable error occurred. They may get into a more detailed critique than NIOSH because they can be less formal and they are not really answerable to anybody. But they still may hesitate to really name names and I am sure they would not recommend any particular personnel actions, but we shall have to wait and see.

The two chiefs who were promoted apparently have had some outside training and may be willing to assert themselves for the good of their firefighters. They will probably be distrusted by everybody either as "Rangers" or potential "traitors" so it is not a job I envy them. They deserve a chance. The next month or two will give some indication of how serious they are and whether they will be supported or obstructed from above.

I think the Public Safety committee (City Council)and the Task Force should both monitor what is done and what is not done. A series of new Standard Operating Guidelines, orders, requisitions, etc. should begin to flow. The press should also dog the CFD a little to see how fires are being fought. We always get interviewed after a fire, so ask the BC or AC on scene what's new this week? Or the PIO when they get one. There should be some requisitions and funding requests at the next council meeting.

Banning the boosters is a good first step, but why not take a wrench to them and get them off the engines. That would be a good symbolic action.

August 22, 2007 at 9:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

bvfd271 (anonymous) says...

I agree wth many of the comments posted here.Booster lines are a thing of the past.ISO does not give credit for them anyway.As was posted,give me an 1 3/4 hose i can have it out and on the ground in less the minute,and extenguish alot more fire in less time,and save wear and tear on pumps and apparatus.Using booster lines on a fire,any fire is a waste of time,water and not safe.If CFD is as modern as claimed,then have modern equipment and tactics to back the claim.Hats off to City Council Members for long overdue getting involved in the CFD.What CFD needs is new Fire Chief,young,with fresh new ideals to turn the CFD into an effcient Fire Department.The days of tradition are long gone,and its time the CFD follows suit and modernizes thier tactics.My question is,why are all CFD Firetrucks not equipped with Thermal Imaging Cameras?Look at where City funds go,to annexations,not to the Police and Fire Departments where it should.CPD now has a new Chief with new ideas and the ideal of " We are all in it together",instead of the " we are number 1" as Former Chief Greenburg's attitude was.Its time for the same kind of change within the CFD now.Hire a new,non-partisan Chief who has no relative with or formerly employed by the CFD,and turn the CFD around.AS i have seen mentioned many times in comments posted since the Sofa Super Store Fire,the ISO rating the CFD has is just that,a number.It does not mean they are better than any other Department in Charleston County,or the State,or Nation.The only ones who recieve benefits from an ISO Rating of 1 is Industry,not residential or commerical.If CFD wants to learn how to be an effective,reactive Fire Department,My suggestion is send thier Firefighters to ride along with North Charleston,St.Andrews,St.John's,or James Island Fire Departments,now those are 4 Departments that have the proper equipment,know how to use it,does use it and has the proper training and Standard Operating Procedures to safely and effectively fight fires.They may not have the budget that CFD has,they may not have the manpower CFD has,but those 4 mentioned are better Departments 10 fold than CFD Sorry,but thats the way it is..Get the training,get the equipment,and use it.Chief Thomas states they are a reactive Fire Department,thats just a political statement,If you call reactive standing outside a home with a fire in the rear,spraying water through the windows,then someone needs to have him the definition of the word in Websters Dictionary.Citizens of Charleston,get angry,and demand better for your tax dollars.

August 22, 2007 at 10:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

vesta (anonymous) says...

east3: Guess I was hoping the panel would recommend two retired chiefs (who had no aspirations for Rusty's job)for the two new temporary positions. CFD desperately needs outside knowledge and leadership, even temporarily. "...MAY be willing to assert themselves for the good of their firefighters". May is the operative word. Embracing the tradition of the old school for over a decade makes for slow change or no change from within. Your word "chance" makes my skin tingle..."they (the two chiefs) deserve a chance". Little adequate equipment or lack of use of equipment available and a lack of training, a chaotic IC on the fire ground and then throw in "chance" (a big, dangerous fire) and nine brave souls met an untimely and certain death on June 18.

I definitely concur that some entity should be monitoring what IS and IS NOT being done. When a fire ground is handled properly, the department should be given credit at this point. The ffs need a morale boost.

I also agree that the booster lines need to go. If they aren't there, neither is the temptation to use them.

Chance is what worries me most....if and until these improvements take place, there is a "chance" this could happen again. It might not be nine lives, but if it is even one (ff or civilian), it is one life too many.

August 22, 2007 at 10:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

UberBlitzkrieg (anonymous) says...

>>Uber: $250,000 x 9 = 2,250,000 (see, not so dumb after all even with my SC education!)

Maybe the mayor sees that sum of money as such a small amount compared to what he spends on aquariums and such that it's the reason he does not seem to care about the safety issues of the fire dept. and stands so proudly by his chief.

Not really. They could seek a court to wrap it all together (more tax $ going to legal fees). In essence the people will get their money. Just where it comes from is the deal. This is one of the reasons the Insurance fudn is set up. It keeps a city from being bankrupted from lawsuits.

August 23, 2007 at 11:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

vesta (anonymous) says...

Check out this Channel 5 site that just came up on SCONFIRE:

http://www.live5news.com/news/state/9...

August 23, 2007 at 9:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )