STEVE AUSTIN

I place a lot of value in fire service institutional memory. Perhaps it's an interest in history or just a healthy respect for the people who sacrificed to provide what we have today. No matter, when it comes to how the fire service is approaching Homeland Defense issues, it seems that what we experienced in the past is adversely affecting our ability to make good decisions today. It's time to take a different approach.

Let me explain. Starting during World War II and continuing to the present the, fire service has been coming up short when it comes to funding for homeland defense. I recall seeing articles and posters as early as the mid 1960's exalting the fire service at the "domestic defenders" of the nation while our military protected us from overseas threats. I also recall using WWII rain slickers and tin helmets provided by the Civil Defense people who shipped their excess and outdated gear to the local fire station.

Unfortunately in those times, many who held the title of emergency manager were political appointees with little if any experience in handling emergencies. That has changed a great deal and emergency managers have become much more professional.

As a general rule there has never been the level of cooperation between fire and emergency management that there should be. It is hard to imagine that one entity, the fire service could provide all the coordination that is needed in a disaster, especially if the damage is spread over several jurisdictions. At the same time it is unrealistic for emergency managers to consider their agencies as first responders. Most don't have the staff, training or equipment to respond to the smallest incident.

State emergency managers often are the legislatively mandated point of contact for federal disaster funds. Fire Officials were perplexed when they saw funds originally intended for fire department anti terrorism efforts reduced by amounts as high as 45% as they passed through state governments. This "overhead" or "handling charge" strikes a raw nerve. Even prior to 9-11 we experienced the pain during the first round of Weapons of Mass Destruction funding for the 160 largest metropolitan areas. Millions of dollars were raked off the top.

Simply put, much of the needed funds were consumed by others before fire departments got anything. It is this backdrop that makes fire service leadership extremely wary of how the funds from the President's $3.5 billion Homeland Defense Budget are going to be distributed.

It is difficult to put the past aside for those of us who lived through those times. Some say that political leaders who lived through Vietnam have difficulty in dealing with the new style conflicts of this century. Conceivably the fire service's prior experiences with emergency management might well be limiting our leadership in the post 9-11 world. The fire service needs to work to change that mind set.

If we learned anything from the attacks on our nation we discovered that while fire, police and ems were clearly the first responders there is a cadre of other disciplines such as public works, emergency management, public utilities etc. that are an integral part of the response and recovery efforts.

Coordinating all of this response plus the move up of fresh resources from fire departments requires that emergency management play a bigger role in major events.

It is unrealistic to think that every dollar of homeland defense money could come to fire departments without any requirement for coordination with various disciplines. The fire service doesn't have the greatest record of coordinating assets under normal conditions. Individual departments often purchase costly apparatus duplicating what is right next-door in an adjacent district. With that track record how could we unilaterally ever properly plan for a response to domestic terrorism that could impact an area much larger than our fire district?

The Homeland Defense people in the White House envision a regional approach to disaster response. By coordinating training and equipment needs along with exercises among various agencies, domestic terrorism responses can be efficient and well staffed. Just as important, routine calls that occur during a disaster can be answered with well trained and equipped mutual aid companies from the region. Most of us function as if we are 32,000 little armies of domestic defenders protecting our own turf. That might work for normal fire and rescue responses but not in the event of another terrorist attack.

To accomplish a regional approach some federal money must go to those agencies that have the responsibility for coordination. Forty five percent is too much. Perhaps a figure between 10 and 25% might work.

Funding notwithstanding, we must learn to build closer relationships with emergency managers and in fact all who provide resources to us the first responders. The "tin hat" or civil defense mentality of the emergency management community is long gone. It is time for us to take a new approach too. We can do that while fighting for our funding needs and at the same time dealing with the other disciplines with the utmost good faith. The citizens we both serve deserve it.