1. #1
    Forum Member
    SLY4420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,003

    Default SAFER helping SAFER

    Quite a few interesting items in this document.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber
    LVFD301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,008

    Default

    Maybe I am reading this wrong, but it appears the final year of the SAFER grant they got in 2009, that was supposed to be where they kept the firefighters on paying 100 percent locally, is now being funded by SAFER?

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LVFD301 View Post
    Maybe I am reading this wrong, but it appears the final year of the SAFER grant they got in 2009, that was supposed to be where they kept the firefighters on paying 100 percent locally, is now being funded by SAFER?
    No I think you may be thinking nefariously here. They had a SAFER grant in 2009 to hire 28 firefighters and it looks like they must have satisfied those requirements and closed that grant as they were granted the SAFER award for 2012, something that most likely would not have happened if there was a problem with their 2009 SAFER. It appears by what I am reading that in 2009, with the matching dollar requirements and sustainablity clauses, 28 FFs were all that they could afford and sustain at the end of the 4 year period. They apparently still have need for another 38 FFs and since the matching requirements and retention requirements were waived, the decided to apply to SAFER to fund them.I do not see anything saying they are trying to "retain or prevent layoffs or rehire " it says they are trying to "hire" 38 more.

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    SLY4420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,003

    Default

    I know the quality is crappy, but it does clearly say that the 28 SAFER funded firefighters "expire" in December 2012 and they were using this to hire 34 firefighters "with no requirement to retain the SAFER funded firefighters."

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SLY4420 View Post
    I know the quality is crappy, but it does clearly say that the 28 SAFER funded firefighters "expire" in December 2012 and they were using this to hire 34 firefighters "with no requirement to retain the SAFER funded firefighters."
    OK Sly I see that but it just says the grant period will and has already expired. I guess I am not seeing your point here. I think what you are tying to imply here is that the new SAFER grant is being used to "retain" the existing 28 firefighters and get 7 more? If that is what you are thinking I don't see that at all because it says nothing about using the new SAFER grant to "retain or hire back" anyone. IMHO to me it simply says we want to bring on another 34 FFs and this time we don't have to match money or worry about retaining them as we did in 2009. Fulton County is huge and it would not surprise me at all that they have a need for an additional 34 firefighters even after having hired 28 in last 4 years.
    Kurt Bradley
    Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
    " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    SLY4420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,003

    Default

    This is a 2012 application (so it would have been filed in July) which was awarded in October. The 2009 grant expired in December...after this award.

    Call you shortly.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,637

    Default

    I would also read this as the new safer is being used to continue the employment of the previously hired FF's with a new safer that will have no cost to the county. No strings free money to maintain status quo,& hire a few additional FF's for the period of performance of the new grant.

    The report is written very nicely in "governmentese".

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,114

    Default

    Well without an application to verify, going to be hard to prove either of our points here. Sorry missed your call Jon had to go get some new headlights for truck. Back in office now. Hey look at what they did in Detroit? City gone belly up as of yesterday and they just got how much on a SAFER award? It what is wrong with the whole damn SAFER program. It needs to be scrapped.
    Kurt Bradley
    Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
    " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Safer
    By FMNPFD in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-21-2009, 10:32 PM
  2. Safer
    By Morgan in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-05-2008, 06:42 PM
  3. SAFER App #'s
    By capt4nocfa in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 06-28-2008, 04:10 PM
  4. Safer
    By savoy6 in forum Fire Explorer & Jr. Firefighting
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-18-2008, 10:13 AM
  5. We Got Safer!!!!!!!!!!
    By Flochief in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-03-2006, 11:52 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register