Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
33 <br /> <br />Gwen Harvey _ ' <br />t=rarrr: Travis Crabtree [t'CrabtreeC~lcr.carrbaro.ncusj . <br />Serer Wednesday, January 10, 20[17 5:25 PM ~ • <br />To: Kent McKenzie <br />Cc: Trey Mayo <br />Subject: Fre Rescue Sludy ~ , <br />i understood this to be a fire and rescue study. it appears that they just interviewed a person or two from each <br />departrnerrt and inserted their cammerris lulu a template. Once the template was complete forthe first <br />department, they produced a d'rfin far the other volunteer departmerrfs with siigitt variations. 1 could have done <br />this study with a dig'rtat camera for about $500 ($200 bf which was far the camera). The county was robbedti <br />Under the;scope of ~. fire rescue stridy,• I wonder vifiy Chapel hill, Carr6ara, .North Chatham and Mebane we're not <br />included. ~ ! spent about 3 hours in an infea~ean ~ this ~~ty ~ ~~id be n~ lua a The Sage group st7~1 h <br />these 4 fire departments protect a large p <br />art of our recoMs, They were never returned as promised. <br />!didn`t see butane sentence relating tD the !.suet and range of future service. Response times were not recorded <br />far any fire deparlmerr~ Where were the areas of projected growth? 'there was na methodology used to <br />determine new fire and rescue stations and 1 don't recall arty mention of a county wide fire education program <br />except through the rite Marshal's office. <br />Ideas of improving, efficiency, reducing costs or improving overall services were not mentioned either. <br />1 wonder why specific information that was not received from several departments. 1 wauid think that a consulting <br />company would have naUFied the county and asked~for assistance. Why was this not gathered and wiry the <br />caurdydid not assist in intervening to obtain this infarrnelfan. It helps us alt. <br />1 did not get a single briefing offer our 3 hour interview. <br />Tile RFP asks for NFPA standards, OSHA regulations and ADA requirements were not referenced throughout: I• <br />vivoutd expect at feast a reference to NFPA 1720. A study immersing into a caurrfy wide training #acility could have <br />createfl a document bigger than this. <br />The RFP also asks for identifying opportunities to assist the volunteer departments with Paperwork. We.cauld <br />use That at a career departnierrt~atso. This is a county wide service and•we mutually help each ,other, consistency <br />is key and 'should be across the board. <br />Page 8 of the study discusses a meeting with the chief of Cairrboro and Chapel Hill fire departments, even fftougY,r <br />this was not a primary focus of the study. 1 da not she anywhere thatthe study is just farthe volunteer <br />departments. . <br />Starling with page i 1, the quality of the study tacks suffiGrent grammatical and spelling cansideratian when <br />persons wrth mare degrees than a tirermameter can not spell the name of one of the 100 counties carrectiy. <br />The current apparatus fleet far each department is not fi the same formal; <br />What type of calculation was used th wamantthe need of increasing everyone's loxes? <br />On page 30, (Eftand) they mention that the fire deparimerrt can pnivide 3,50D gattons of water. 1 calculate 5,50D ' <br />gallons according to (heir numbers and one is from a 500 gallon tanker. is ~ possible to have a 500 gaitan tanker <br />per NFPA 1901? t dan'tthink so. - <br />Page 37, they state that fire hydrants are nat:an option far ~rra. What are thane red derrrces standing at[ along <br />Highway 70 in their district? Loak like fire hydrants to me. These water Producing devices have been installed for <br />a caupte of years. • <br />llll3/Zt)07 <br />