March 20, 2023 marks the last time the Nottingham Fire and Rescue Department was fully staffed and in compliance with the 2022 warrant article providing 24/7 coverage. Since that date, Nottingham and its Fire Department have been turned into the laughing stock of the seacoast and the entirety of Rockingham County.
Relying heavily on mutual aid from surrounding communities while not being able to fulfill their end of the bargain in assisting neighboring towns when their calls for help go out.
A total embarrassment.
You can thank Ellen White and your Nottingham Board of Selectman for their role in this. John Morin, Donna Danis, Ben Bartlett, Timothy Dabreio, Matthew Shitland, Steve Welch.
These Einstein’s already tried the simple minded approach of throwing money at the problem last year when spontaneous massive unprecedented and un-budgeted pay increases were handed out only leading to more rats fleeing the sinking ship. It’s all public information and has been previously covered here in this informative blog.
Failed leadership and massive damage is what we’re faced with.
It didn’t work then.
It won’t work now.
Get a clue.
Using money like band aids cannot resolve these deep issues.
Someone might want to let the fork tongued ‘Capt’ Pederson know that Seacoast Chief Mutual Aid District has minimum staffing requirements for mutual aid apparatus.
ONE RESPONDER ON A TANKER DOES NOT MEET THAT REQUIREMENT.
"March 20, 2023 marks the last time the Nottingham Fire and Rescue Department was fully staffed"
I believe this is wrong. This is around the time the last chief was put on leave but I don't recall any reporting about staff leaving around that same time. I thought the station was fully staffed from March through October of 2023. That would mean it took an entire year after the warrant article passed to get to full staffing. Does that mean, according to you, the former chief demonstrated "Failed leadership and massive damage" to the department for the entire year after the warrant article passed and full staffing was not achieved? If not, can you please explain the differences in the situation facing the department then vs now? Specifically, can you explain how the former chief was not responsible for clearly evident recruitment and retention issues since, according to you, accountability rests a the top?
"Seacoast Chief Mutual Aid District has minimum staffing requirements for mutual aid apparatus."
The best part is that as a former FF/Paramedic myself, in a neighboring town, I can't tell you how many times I personally rolled the tanker out the door with just myself. All you're doing is shuttling water from a pond to the scene- you don't need two people to do that. Even if you're pulling from a pressurized hydrant, you don't need two people. I would rather have the tank on wheels with one person than no tanker at all.
For suppression apparatus (engine, ladder, forestry) a minimum complement (driver, officer to command that crew, and a crew) makes sense- no sense in an engine or other piece of equipment to show up with just a driver and officer- since the purpose of those responses is for manpower or specialized equipment in case of a ladder truck.
The poster above just has an axe to grind, I believe.
Hey Frank what neighboring town were you a FF/paramedic in?
I’d like to hear what the Chief of that ‘neighboring town’ has to say about your open admission to violating the seacoast Chief’s minimum staff requirements for mutual aid apparatus.
The town, at the time wasn't, and still isn't, part of the Seacoast Chief's Association, so their "standards" don't apply for "violating" anything. Nice try- their standards don't apply to non-member towns.
Regardless of the "standards" of the Seacoast Chiefs, the Incident Commander, per NH RSA 154, can do what they want, and if they want the tanker with just a driver, they can get it. Even the district agreement document states:
"1. Whenever it is deemed advisable by the senior officer of a department that is party to this agreement, or by the senior officer of any such fire department actually present at any fire or other emergency, to request assistance under the terms of this agreement, he/she is authorized to do so. The senior officer on duty at the fire department receiving the request shall forthwith take the following action:
A. Immediately determine if apparatus, equipment and personnel can be spared in response to the call;
B. Determine what apparatus, equipment and personnel might most effectively be dispatched, the mission to be assigned in accordance with the plans and procedures of operation drawn by the technical heads of the fire departments involved;
C. Dispatch such apparatus, equipment and personnel as in his/her judgment should be sent under the terms of this agreement; provided, however, that upon receiving a call for assistance, that it shall be referred at once to the Chief of Department or his/her duly authorized duty officer when any apparatus, equipment or personnel is dispatched;"
Seems entirely contradictory to the "standards" you keep talking about, when the agreement above, from their own website, states it's up to the person in charge at the department aid is being requested from to make determinations of what can go, who can go, and how it is done effectively. So with that, rolling a TANKER, typically a two-seat piece of apparatus, with just a driver to get the resource (water) to the incident, may be appropriate, both in terms of personnel use, efficiency, and to complete the mission- to preserve life and property.
By the way, you still haven't produced a copy of the "standards" you keep quoting. You purport to be some sort of authority on how the fire service works, but seem to lack common sense of how it -actually- works.
"March 20, 2023 marks the last time the Nottingham Fire and Rescue Department was fully staffed"
I believe this is wrong’
Brett Webster
‘Believe’ whatever you’d like to believe but the fact of the matter is the last time NFRD was fully staffed and in compliance with the warrant article was March 23, 2023. So you are wrong.
Since that date the department has not had 6 full time fire fighters per the warrant article. This is a fact and not up for debate, what you ‘feel’ or believe’ has no basis whatsoever here. It’s all been thoroughly discussed and documented.
Since the Nottingham fire department was in fact fully staffed under the former fire chief that would make the rest of your verbal diarrhea commentary hypothetical and irrelevant with no value in reality or this discussion.
Talk about an ‘axe to grind’ lol why bother commenting when you do not have all the information?
It is the current fire chief and administration that is not in compliance with the will of the voters and the warrant article requiring 6 full time fire fighters and 24/7 coverage.
"In 2022 Nottingham voters passed a warrant article to fund having the fire station staffed by two firefighters 24/7".
That was two years ago now. We know many firefighters have come and gone and that the department is not at full staffing. However, what needs to be done to fix it? We know staffing for public safety (fire and police) is a regional, statewide, and national problem. How much money will it cost to fix? That is a much better discussion to have then pointing out a problem that seems obvious because the department is not fully staffed. When things aren't working on a budget that is two years old (in both inflation terms and in terms of supply and demand of qualified public safety employees) it should not come as a surprise that there is a staffing issue. The Town could pass a warrant article to staff the FD with 6 per day at minimum wage... in reality it would be staffed at 0 and that is not a surprise.
Important questions:
- How much money is needed for achieving adequate staffing at FD (and PD)?
- How many applications have been received for the open positions?
- What is the capability of nearby towns to cover calls?
You make excellent points. Also worth asking - what is the town paying versus surrounding towns, or the remainder of the state on average? All of the towns are competing to attract the same dwindling pool of potential applicants, and NH changed the retirement plan for firefighters. WMUR published an article on this about a year ago.: https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-fire-departments-hiring-101023/45500151.
We went into this *knowing* there was a shortage, but it seems to me as a town we haven't done anything to try to entice applicants such as offering better pay. 225k for 3 salaries and costs of benefits isn't much. On top of that, we expect people to have certifications and experience? Not for that money. I think that warrant article was underfunded from the beginning, let alone what we need now for all six positions total.
March 20, 2023 marks the last time the Nottingham Fire and Rescue Department was fully staffed and in compliance with the 2022 warrant article providing 24/7 coverage. Since that date, Nottingham and its Fire Department have been turned into the laughing stock of the seacoast and the entirety of Rockingham County.
Relying heavily on mutual aid from surrounding communities while not being able to fulfill their end of the bargain in assisting neighboring towns when their calls for help go out.
A total embarrassment.
You can thank Ellen White and your Nottingham Board of Selectman for their role in this. John Morin, Donna Danis, Ben Bartlett, Timothy Dabreio, Matthew Shitland, Steve Welch.
These Einstein’s already tried the simple minded approach of throwing money at the problem last year when spontaneous massive unprecedented and un-budgeted pay increases were handed out only leading to more rats fleeing the sinking ship. It’s all public information and has been previously covered here in this informative blog.
Failed leadership and massive damage is what we’re faced with.
It didn’t work then.
It won’t work now.
Get a clue.
Using money like band aids cannot resolve these deep issues.
Someone might want to let the fork tongued ‘Capt’ Pederson know that Seacoast Chief Mutual Aid District has minimum staffing requirements for mutual aid apparatus.
ONE RESPONDER ON A TANKER DOES NOT MEET THAT REQUIREMENT.
Guess he missed that briefing?
The ineptitude in Nottingham is astounding.
"March 20, 2023 marks the last time the Nottingham Fire and Rescue Department was fully staffed"
I believe this is wrong. This is around the time the last chief was put on leave but I don't recall any reporting about staff leaving around that same time. I thought the station was fully staffed from March through October of 2023. That would mean it took an entire year after the warrant article passed to get to full staffing. Does that mean, according to you, the former chief demonstrated "Failed leadership and massive damage" to the department for the entire year after the warrant article passed and full staffing was not achieved? If not, can you please explain the differences in the situation facing the department then vs now? Specifically, can you explain how the former chief was not responsible for clearly evident recruitment and retention issues since, according to you, accountability rests a the top?
"Seacoast Chief Mutual Aid District has minimum staffing requirements for mutual aid apparatus."
Sounds reasonable. Care to cite your sources?
https://seacoastchiefs.com/by-laws/
The best part is that as a former FF/Paramedic myself, in a neighboring town, I can't tell you how many times I personally rolled the tanker out the door with just myself. All you're doing is shuttling water from a pond to the scene- you don't need two people to do that. Even if you're pulling from a pressurized hydrant, you don't need two people. I would rather have the tank on wheels with one person than no tanker at all.
For suppression apparatus (engine, ladder, forestry) a minimum complement (driver, officer to command that crew, and a crew) makes sense- no sense in an engine or other piece of equipment to show up with just a driver and officer- since the purpose of those responses is for manpower or specialized equipment in case of a ladder truck.
The poster above just has an axe to grind, I believe.
Hey Frank what neighboring town were you a FF/paramedic in?
I’d like to hear what the Chief of that ‘neighboring town’ has to say about your open admission to violating the seacoast Chief’s minimum staff requirements for mutual aid apparatus.
The town, at the time wasn't, and still isn't, part of the Seacoast Chief's Association, so their "standards" don't apply for "violating" anything. Nice try- their standards don't apply to non-member towns.
Regardless of the "standards" of the Seacoast Chiefs, the Incident Commander, per NH RSA 154, can do what they want, and if they want the tanker with just a driver, they can get it. Even the district agreement document states:
"1. Whenever it is deemed advisable by the senior officer of a department that is party to this agreement, or by the senior officer of any such fire department actually present at any fire or other emergency, to request assistance under the terms of this agreement, he/she is authorized to do so. The senior officer on duty at the fire department receiving the request shall forthwith take the following action:
A. Immediately determine if apparatus, equipment and personnel can be spared in response to the call;
B. Determine what apparatus, equipment and personnel might most effectively be dispatched, the mission to be assigned in accordance with the plans and procedures of operation drawn by the technical heads of the fire departments involved;
C. Dispatch such apparatus, equipment and personnel as in his/her judgment should be sent under the terms of this agreement; provided, however, that upon receiving a call for assistance, that it shall be referred at once to the Chief of Department or his/her duly authorized duty officer when any apparatus, equipment or personnel is dispatched;"
Seems entirely contradictory to the "standards" you keep talking about, when the agreement above, from their own website, states it's up to the person in charge at the department aid is being requested from to make determinations of what can go, who can go, and how it is done effectively. So with that, rolling a TANKER, typically a two-seat piece of apparatus, with just a driver to get the resource (water) to the incident, may be appropriate, both in terms of personnel use, efficiency, and to complete the mission- to preserve life and property.
By the way, you still haven't produced a copy of the "standards" you keep quoting. You purport to be some sort of authority on how the fire service works, but seem to lack common sense of how it -actually- works.
"March 20, 2023 marks the last time the Nottingham Fire and Rescue Department was fully staffed"
I believe this is wrong’
Brett Webster
‘Believe’ whatever you’d like to believe but the fact of the matter is the last time NFRD was fully staffed and in compliance with the warrant article was March 23, 2023. So you are wrong.
Since that date the department has not had 6 full time fire fighters per the warrant article. This is a fact and not up for debate, what you ‘feel’ or believe’ has no basis whatsoever here. It’s all been thoroughly discussed and documented.
Since the Nottingham fire department was in fact fully staffed under the former fire chief that would make the rest of your verbal diarrhea commentary hypothetical and irrelevant with no value in reality or this discussion.
Talk about an ‘axe to grind’ lol why bother commenting when you do not have all the information?
It is the current fire chief and administration that is not in compliance with the will of the voters and the warrant article requiring 6 full time fire fighters and 24/7 coverage.
Nobody takes Nottingham seriously.
"In 2022 Nottingham voters passed a warrant article to fund having the fire station staffed by two firefighters 24/7".
That was two years ago now. We know many firefighters have come and gone and that the department is not at full staffing. However, what needs to be done to fix it? We know staffing for public safety (fire and police) is a regional, statewide, and national problem. How much money will it cost to fix? That is a much better discussion to have then pointing out a problem that seems obvious because the department is not fully staffed. When things aren't working on a budget that is two years old (in both inflation terms and in terms of supply and demand of qualified public safety employees) it should not come as a surprise that there is a staffing issue. The Town could pass a warrant article to staff the FD with 6 per day at minimum wage... in reality it would be staffed at 0 and that is not a surprise.
Important questions:
- How much money is needed for achieving adequate staffing at FD (and PD)?
- How many applications have been received for the open positions?
- What is the capability of nearby towns to cover calls?
You make excellent points. Also worth asking - what is the town paying versus surrounding towns, or the remainder of the state on average? All of the towns are competing to attract the same dwindling pool of potential applicants, and NH changed the retirement plan for firefighters. WMUR published an article on this about a year ago.: https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-fire-departments-hiring-101023/45500151.
Prior to that, Seacoastonline had an article in 2021, before the town passed the warrant article: https://www.seacoastonline.com/story/news/local/2021/10/06/seacoast-nh-firefighter-shortage-applicants-dwindle-911-calls-increase/6005894001/
We went into this *knowing* there was a shortage, but it seems to me as a town we haven't done anything to try to entice applicants such as offering better pay. 225k for 3 salaries and costs of benefits isn't much. On top of that, we expect people to have certifications and experience? Not for that money. I think that warrant article was underfunded from the beginning, let alone what we need now for all six positions total.