Call your Congressfolks - 2010 AFG Levels from House

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

From the CFSI email that just came in:

On Friday, June 12th, the House Appropriations Committee approved the Fiscal Year 2010 spending bill for homeland security (bill number pending at press time). The bill funds the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Grant program at $420 million, twice the amount that was appropriated for this important program in Fiscal Year 2009. Unfortunately the bill funds the Assistance to Firefighters (FIRE) Grant program at only $380 million, a 33% reduction from the Fiscal Year 2009 level. While it is disappointing to see the FIRE grant funding reduced, it is important to note the House committee rejected the Administration's proposal to cut the FIRE Grant program by as much as 70%.

In addition to funding FIRE and SAFER grants, the bill also provides funding for the United States Fire Administration (USFA). The House bill provides a slight increase for USFA, funding the agency at $45.5 million.

The bill will now proceed to the full House for consideration, which is expected to occur the week of June 15th. The Senate Appropriations Committee has yet to consider its version of the FY10 Homeland Security spending bill, but at a hearing on May 26th Senator Robert Byrd (WV), Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, stated his intention to approve a bill by mid-June. Once both houses of Congress have approved their respective spending bills, they will still need to resolve any differences before sending the final bill to the White House for the President's signature.

[superchef]

Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Grant program at $420 million, twice the amount that was appropriated for this important program in Fiscal Year 2009. Unfortunately the bill funds the Assistance to Firefighters (FIRE) Grant program at only $380 million, a 33% reduction from the Fiscal Year 2009 level.

Forgive me for asking a stupid question. Although I am happy to see SAFER get more money, it comes at the cost of AFG. What sort of logic is there in giving more money to a program for Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response" if you don't have adequate gear for the personnel you already have (since most of AFG goes to Operations and Safety).

Shouldn't there be a relationship between the need for Adequate Staffing and Operations and Safety? I see as AFG being the priority over SAFER but then again I can only approach this from my viewpoint which is outside of the fire service.



For whatever reason, this makes me think of that old debate argument, which came first, the chicken or the egg?

[BlandfordFire]

Forgive me for asking a stupid question. Although I am happy to see SAFER get more money, it comes at the cost of AFG. What sort of logic is there in giving more money to a program for Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response" if you don't have adequate gear for the personnel you already have (since most of AFG goes to Operations and Safety).

Shouldn't there be a relationship between the need for Adequate Staffing and Operations and Safety? I see as AFG being the priority over SAFER but then again I can only approach this from my viewpoint which is outside of the fire service.



For whatever reason, this makes me think of that old debate argument, which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Agreed. Also, how many departments had to refuse SAFER funding due to not being able to pick up the tab at the end. That's quite a bit of cash that could buy all sorts of firefighting equipment and training.

[CCCFire09]

I agree. Safer seems like it is more for the bigger departments. Personally i would rather lump the new funds into AFG

[neiowa]

Of course SAFER is for the big paid FD. UNION FD. This administration owes every piece of their anatomy to the AFL-CIO (etc). Not just owes but is OWNED. Everything they do has a significant segment to advance the power and wealth of the unions.

SAFER in the paid FD has been a failure. So expand it. Even by the typical standards of DC that is stupid. This it the "Change You Can Believe In". Got buyers remorse yet?

And while you're talking to your Congresscritter blast them on the stupid format/rules of the station grant program (see also union building).

[MarionMedic]

Agreed. Also, how many departments had to refuse SAFER funding due to not being able to pick up the tab at the end.

We did.

The continuation idea is good for the future, but not when there is no way of making that happen.

[jam24u]

Of course SAFER is for the big paid FD. UNION FD. This administration owes every piece of their anatomy to the AFL-CIO (etc). Not just owes but is OWNED. Everything they do has a significant segment to advance the power and wealth of the unions.

SAFER in the paid FD has been a failure. So expand it. Even by the typical standards of DC that is stupid. This it the "Change You Can Believe In". Got buyers remorse yet?

And while you're talking to your Congresscritter blast them on the stupid format/rules of the station grant program (see also union building).

BINGO!!!!,,,, There will be more of this. Much more. We are on the express elevator to total dependence on the government and if your not a demographic(?) in a large population area, your about to get it from behind then front. They are out of control and headed our way gentlemen.

[jam24u]

Brian, I will follow up my previous communications to our state senators and representatives. Do you think they get tired of repeated communications from same individual? I feel like I'm about to get blocked by their people who screen their correspondence. Last thing I want is for them to roll their eyes when they recognize my name. Or alias.

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

That's why you get a lot of other people involved also, not just yourself. You don't want to be the lone gunman, those tend to get lumped and ignored. Most are receptive if the conversation and correspondence is kept civil and fact presented. Argumentation is an art form, and yes that is a word. I thought it was made up until it was in my one MBA course on effective communications. I re-read it every grant period, helps set the frame of mind.

[jam24u]

I re-read 'Complete Idiots Guide to Negotiations'.

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

I'm an incomplete idiot, will reading that complete me?

[viperfire1]

If people don't have jobs, they cant pay their property taxes. If they don't pay their taxes we don't get funded. Provide jobs with SAFER, you provide property tax revenue. Granted not nearly the revenue as with AFG but still revenue.

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

umm, not even close? the matching over the 5 years is still over 50 percent local money even with the no match in the first 2. normally feds only pay 66 percent at the $40k max per FF hired. so the local area will absorb $20k plus for the 3rd year and $40k for the 5th for each hire and get maybe $4k a year in taxes? Hence the reason SAFER has been failing since Day 1 as a long-term solution. money would be better spent elsewhere since no one can make the 5 year obligation. in some areas it is working but based on the number of declined awards not many. give awards for equipment would employ more long-term jobs and free up local funding for payroll. grand scheme of things we need to bring manufacturing jobs back here. neither SAFER nor AFG will help LA with a $39mil deficit. that's another soap box.