Orange County NC Website
Page 1 of 3~ <br />. ~..:/ <br />Gwen Harvey <br />From: Travis Crabtree [TCrabtreeC~lci.carrboro.nc.us] <br />Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:25 PM <br />To: Kent McKenzie <br />Cc: Trey Mayo <br />Subject: Fre Rescue Study <br />I understood this to be a fire and rescue study. It appears that they just interviewed a person or two from each <br />department and inserted their comments into a template. Once the template was complete for the first <br />department, they produced a ditto for the other volunteer departments with slight variations. I could have done <br />this study with a digital camera for about $500 ($200 of which was_ for the camera). The county was robbedl! <br />Under the~scope of a fire rescue study., I wonder why Chapel Hilt, Carrboro, .North Chatham and Mebane were not <br />included. 1 spent about 3 hours in an interview and about 5 hours making copies for this study. I believe that <br />these 4 fire departments protect a large portion of this county and should be included. The Sage group still has <br />all of our records, they were never returned as promised. <br />I didn't see but one sentence relating to the Level and rarige of future service. Response times were not recorded <br />for any fire department. Where were the areas of projected growth? There was no methodology used to <br />determine new fire and rescue stations and I don't recall any mention. of a county wide fire education program <br />except through the Fire 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. I would think that a consulting <br />company would have notified the county and asked for assistance. Why was this not gathered and why the <br />county did not assist in intervening to obtain this information. It helps us alt. <br />I did not get a single briefing after our 3 hour interview. <br />The RFP asks for NFPA standards, OSHA regulations and ADA requirements were not referenced throughout. 1• <br />would expect at least a reference to NFPA 1720. A study immersing into a county wide training facility could have <br />created a document bigger than this. <br />The RFP also asks for identifying opportunities to assist the volunteer departments with paperwork. We could <br />use that at a career department also. This is a county wide service and we mutually help each .other, consistency <br />is key and should 6e across the board. <br />Page 3 of the study discusses a meeting with the chief of Carrboro and Chapel Hill fire departments, even though <br />this was not a primary focus of the study. i do not see anywhere that the study is just for the volunteer <br />departments. <br />Starting with page 11, the quality of the study lacks sufficient grammatical and spelling consideration when <br />persons with more degrees than a thermometer can not spell the name of one of the 100 counties correctly. <br />The current apparatus fleet far each department is not in the same format. . <br />What type of calculation was used to warrant the need of increasing everyone's taxes? <br />On page 30, (Efland) they mention that the fire department can provide 3,500 gallons of water. I calculate 5,500 <br />gallons according to their numbers and one is from a 500 gallon tanker. is it possible to have a 500 gallon tanker <br />per NFPA 1901? I don'tthink so. ~ ~ • <br />Page 37, they state that fire hydrants are not~an option for Eno. What are those red devices standing atl along <br />Highway 70 in their district? Look like fire hydrants to me. These water producing devices have been installed for <br />a couple of years. <br />11/13/2007 <br />