[strwblue]

The city of Duluth is considering it and now Superior may be too.
The Superior City Council is looking into having the city's fire department run ambulance service. The city has launched a fact finding committee to look at the pros and cons.
Multimedia

Councilor Greg Mertzig said the idea came about because of an earlier budget crisis with the fire department. Whether or not this service would help with the budget problem, Mertzig said he's not sure.

"That's what this fact finding commission will reveal. If we'll get the best bang for our buck doing it with the Superior fire department or if in fact Gold Cross can provide quality service for the best bang for our buck," Mertzig said.

Members from the finance and public safety committees will head the fact finding committee and report their findings to the council in 90 days.



I will wait to chime in on my feels about yet another attempt to make Emergency Medical Services personnel fireman after some input from your all.

[PSYCtest040]

The City of Rochester is looking at the same thing.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...=2009910190311

[SpotsyMedic]

Originally Posted by strwblue

I will wait to chime in on my feels about yet another attempt to make Emergency Medical Services personnel fireman after some input from your all.

Of course it makes financial sense. The municipality or county gets a "twofer" by having its' Fire and EMS people cross-trained. Plus, if they opt to go "bill for services," it becomes an offsetting revenue generator, reducing the overall cost of operations to the municipality or county, whereas fire services alone rarely bill for services... it's just a bottomless money suck. At least that's the theory, anyway.

Unfortunately, for those of us who are EMS purists, it sucks. Unless, of course, you're a hose-head. As for me and my house... I have absolutely no interest in running into burning buildings. Whatsoever.

[BGSD]

I have mixed feelings about this. While I think it's always nice to have extra training in anything you're doing, some ff's should only be ff's and some medics should only be medics.

Here in happy valley EVERY fire dpt is also ems. We have 2 private ambulance companies in the ENTIRE state. One of them only does transport. You can't get a job anywhere unless you have fire/medic or fire/emt. The smaller towns will hire you on to volunteer with one or the other, but even some of the volunteer dpts require fire/emt.

The volunteer dpt I work for is really small and sometimes we go 2 weeks without a call, sometimes we get 2 calls a day (skiing accidents). But some of our ff's won't respond to the medical/mva calls because they're not interested in ems. With twice a month trainings, if we were separated, ems could have strictly ems trainings and fire could have strictly fire trainings.

When I first started my training I was kind of sitting on the fence on weather or not I wanted to do fire. But I have to if I want a job. Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely interested in the fire side and I'm excited for my upcoming classes, but I'm way more interested in ems. If I could just do ems, I probably would.

[prncssmdc]

Originally Posted by SpotsyMedic

Of course it makes financial sense. The municipality or county gets a "twofer" by having its' Fire and EMS people cross-trained. Plus, if they opt to go "bill for services," it becomes an offsetting revenue generator, reducing the overall cost of operations to the municipality or county, whereas fire services alone rarely bill for services... it's just a bottomless money suck. At least that's the theory, anyway.

Unfortunately, for those of us who are EMS purists, it sucks. Unless, of course, you're a hose-head. As for me and my house... I have absolutely no interest in running into burning buildings. Whatsoever.

I call BS...and here's why.

I currently work for a private that had a contract with the city we run in. Just shy of 2 years ago the local FD "took over" EMS (911) in the city but not in our county service area (yet).

The whole time the FD wanted this contract they insisted that this would be a "money maker" for the city. Even though our ambulance service does not charge a contract or services fee. My private is a user fee only service. But nope the FD convinced the city council that it could bill and make money for the city...infact they stated they could make over $400,000 yr by doing EMS.

Now some citizen action groups have gotten together and done some digging and multiple groups have come up with a cost to the city between $800,000 and $1.3 million a year for the FD run EMS service that was supposed to make $$ for the city. (Currently this is being overlooked as the mayor of this city has made national news for stating that his sister-in-law gives good "hummers" and allegedly firing his HR director for not having sex with him...but I digress). The politics in that city (I live a city away, and only work in that city, fortunately) have been dirty and backwards for years, so I am not surprised they choose the FD and now are turning a blind eye to the fact that in a time of budget crisis they could save atleast $1 million a year by returning EMS back to the private (or any private for that matter).

Furthermore, the FD in that city is constantly robbing Peter to pay Paul for staffing. There are multiple times a week that the citizens of that city are unaware that they are without the same level of EMS service they had just 2yrs ago, and at no cost to them.

As for being an EMS purist...absolutely I am.

If my house is on fire, I want a firefighter...or rather an appropriately staffed and trained FD and I want it NOW! I don't want to risk my family's lives because all of their FF's were also Paramedics/EMT's that are out on EMS calls at the time my house starts on fire. Likewise, I don't want to be wondering why it took so long for the ambulance to get there when my kid gets hit by a car crossing the street and has a head injury and is posturing on the pavement...all because the Paramedics were on a fire call and had to clear to go to the EMS call.

The American way of running a fire service is a far out dated one in my opinion. And personally I think it is only a matter of time before they shoot themselves in the foot with the over the top "tradition" and "brotherhood" propaganda facilitated and encouraged by "The Union". There is something to be said for tradition and brotherhood, but when it blinds you and obstructs postitive change you are destined for failure.

[SpotsyMedic]

Originally Posted by prncssmdc

I call BS...and here's why.

That's why I said it was the THEORY. :)

[strwblue]

Originally Posted by prncssmdc

I call BS...and here's why.

I currently work for a private that had a contract with the city we run in. Just shy of 2 years ago the local FD "took over" EMS (911) in the city but not in our county service area (yet).

The whole time the FD wanted this contract they insisted that this would be a "money maker" for the city. Even though our ambulance service does not charge a contract or services fee. My private is a user fee only service. But nope the FD convinced the city council that it could bill and make money for the city...infact they stated they could make over $400,000 yr by doing EMS.

Now some citizen action groups have gotten together and done some digging and multiple groups have come up with a cost to the city between $800,000 and $1.3 million a year for the FD run EMS service that was supposed to make $$ for the city. (Currently this is being overlooked as the mayor of this city has made national news for stating that his sister-in-law gives good "hummers" and allegedly firing his HR director for not having sex with him...but I digress). The politics in that city (I live a city away, and only work in that city, fortunately) have been dirty and backwards for years, so I am not surprised they choose the FD and now are turning a blind eye to the fact that in a time of budget crisis they could save atleast $1 million a year by returning EMS back to the private (or any private for that matter).

Furthermore, the FD in that city is constantly robbing Peter to pay Paul for staffing. There are multiple times a week that the citizens of that city are unaware that they are without the same level of EMS service they had just 2yrs ago, and at no cost to them.

As for being an EMS purist...absolutely I am.

If my house is on fire, I want a firefighter...or rather an appropriately staffed and trained FD and I want it NOW! I don't want to risk my family's lives because all of their FF's were also Paramedics/EMT's that are out on EMS calls at the time my house starts on fire. Likewise, I don't want to be wondering why it took so long for the ambulance to get there when my kid gets hit by a car crossing the street and has a head injury and is posturing on the pavement...all because the Paramedics were on a fire call and had to clear to go to the EMS call.

The American way of running a fire service is a far out dated one in my opinion. And personally I think it is only a matter of time before they shoot themselves in the foot with the over the top "tradition" and "brotherhood" propaganda facilitated and encouraged by "The Union". There is something to be said for tradition and brotherhood, but when it blinds you and obstructs postitive change you are destined for failure.

I second this post

[ecfr1978]

Fire based EMS, the demise of the Fire Service. I'd rather be at a fire than a medical call any day. Multi tasking is not always a good thing. The modern day FF, "A jack of all trades and master of none".

[wvditchdoc]

Originally Posted by ecfr1978

The modern day FF, "A jack of all trades and master of none".

Ummmm, yeah I am gonna just leave this one alone.

[Medic101Charlie]

hehe....he said jack.

yep yep.

eh eh.