Author	Message
Jersey Dad	Posted: Wed, Jul 1 2009, 1:46 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn FYI- From our Township Code... Municipal Code wrote: Any alarm system which has three or more false alarms, subject to control by the alarm user, within a registration year is in violation of this article and is subject to a fine of $250 for each false alarm over three. Does this need to be more aggressive to minimize false alarms?
Guest	Posted: Wed, Jul 1 2009, 7:18 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn Have any of you here talked to the local firefighters about it? Perhaps they could answer your questions.
publius	Posted: Wed, Jul 1 2009, 12:32 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn If you wanna cut down on false alarms................why not charge people for them? Some fire companies charge to put out fires. At least, some used to do so.
publius	Posted: Wed, Jul 1 2009, 12:20 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn But, if firefighters are asleep, live beyond the sound of the siren, or happen to be too far from the horn when it goes on.............................what good does the thing do? Very Strange. I think people just get used to something, and no matter how outdated it becomes, they hold onto it for dear life. It has something to do with nostalgia or the fear of getting older, or some such nonsense rather than common sense.
Fuel_to_the_fire	Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2009, 3:00 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn An article about Rowley, Mass. fire siren from 2008. Seems to touch on a lot of the issues folks are talking about. Published: June 12, 2008 03:00 am ShareThisPrintThis Fire horn must blow, chief says By Lynne Hendricks Correspondent ROWLEY — The town's fire horn may become less frequent, but it's not going away. In response to residents' questions about the frequency and necessity of the fire horn, fire Chief James Broderick said this week the horn serves a vital function as a second line of fire defense, and while reducing the number of blasts is possible, it's not in the town's best interest to retire the horn completely. "We are required to have a secondary means of dispatching the alarm if the primary means becomes disabled," he wrote to selectmen. If the paging system is down, "the dispatch center would need to have the ability to sound the alarm." The horn has been blowing from Town Hall's cupola since the early 1900s, and is typically tested each day at noon. Despite technological advances in the form of pagers and cell phones, there is nothing quite as effective as a horn blast to get firefighters on the scene of an emergency, Broderick said. Rowley's mostly volunteer Fire Department, he noted, responds to calls from firefighters' homes — not from the Hammond Street station. While a few of the full-time firefighters have Nextel direct lines, he adds, the rest of the force use individual private cell phone carriers. "There is no capability to 'group call' any of the firefighters using these phones," writes Broderick. The pagers and the horn are all Rowley's got, he said, until the day it can afford and justify establishing its own 24-hour Fire Department. But in the meantime, Broderick said there are definitely ways to reduce the number of times the horn sounds, by initiating policies successfully being used in neighboring towns, for instance. He suggested the town consider blowing the horn only in the case of structure fires, automatic fire alarms, by direction of a chief officer of the Fire Department, and for mutual aid requests. "This particular policy comes from the West Newbury Fire Department, and could be adopted by (Rowley) with little problem," Broderick says. If the town were to adopt that policy, he adds, the horn would not sound in the case of trees or wires down, carbon monoxide or medical calls, or assists to the public. "With the reduction of the use of the horn it should reduce by 50 percent the amount of times the horn sounds, and will reduce the chance of the horn blowing during the night hours," Broderick told selectmen. Selectmen voted to support the chief's letter, which will be sent out to satisfy questions raised by Town Hall neighbor Kristopher Reynolds last week. "We definitely want to keep the fire horn blowing," added selectmen Chairman Dave Petersen. "Homeland Security mandates we have some sort of alternate system." Selectman Stuart Dalzell concurred, raising the specter of only two firefighters showing up to fight a fire because of dead batteries or cellular "dead spots", with no other means to bring out the cavalry. Selectman Jack Cook, a lifelong resident, agreed. "We don't want to jeopardize the people of this town," said Cook. "That's what (the horn) is for."
funny	Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2009, 2:20 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn I'm quite happy that they move it further away from my home. And if it is not that high up, fewer people will suffer from it...
publius	Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2009, 1:30 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn Guest wrote: "Who wants to hear that annoying bellow at 3 in the morning?" Ummmm....the firefighters. OI VEY!!!!!!! Another one who doesn't pay attention.
Guest	Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2009, 12:55 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn "Who wants to hear that annoying bellow at 3 in the morning?" Ummmm....the firefighters.
publius	Posted: Tue, Jun 30 2009, 12:00 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn A fire horn is a silly idea. Unless you expect people to form a bucket brigade.............that would make sense. Firefighters have cell phones and other devices. Who wants to hear that annoying bellow at 3 in the morning?
Jersey Dad	Posted: Mon, Jun 29 2009, 9:38 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn Guest343 wrote: The fire whistle wakes up your 2 year old?Suck it up. Guest343, The comment I made about the horn waking up my daughter was not a complaint. It was a response to a poster who incorrectly assumed that the horn isn't disruptive to residents in its current location. Thanks anyway for your neighborly compassion. Like many residents, when the horn goes off, I typically say a prayer for the volunteers and victims and go back to sleep. I am grateful for the volunteers, and I respect their time and commitment, which is why I went on to say that we should support aggressive measures to reduce false alarms. Changing the location of the horn, or even eliminating the horn, won't help the volunteers. Reducing false alarms will benefit everyone. JD
Guest	Posted: Sun, Jun 28 2009, 7:51 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn It would seem to be best to go that route and seek out potential employees than to go straight to the paid squad would it not. The town has approved only three slots and there may be others who would do it if offered the additional compensation which is smaller than creating jobs.
Guest	Posted: Sun, Jun 28 2009, 7:30 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn Quote: The best solution it appears would be to utilize more township employees and pay them as we already do the three employees already providing this type of service. This would only work if the township employees are able/willing to serve. Not everyone is suited to be a first responder to car accidents, heart attacks and other emergency situations.
Guest343	Posted: Sun, Jun 28 2009, 5:55 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn Guest wrote: We can discuss the pros and cons all day. In the end I hope that these calls get answered in a timely manner. Too often someone who needs help is left waiting 20 plus minutes for a surrounding town to respond because Cranbury members are unavailable. Whatever is the correct way to go, lets get moving on it so people are transported quickly to the hospital. You are right. The answer may not be easy or cheap but it must be addressed.
Guest	Posted: Sun, Jun 28 2009, 7:47 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn We can discuss the pros and cons all day. In the end I hope that these calls get answered in a timely manner. Too often someone who needs help is left waiting 20 plus minutes for a surrounding town to respond because Cranbury members are unavailable. Whatever is the correct way to go, lets get moving on it so people are transported quickly to the hospital.
Guest	Posted: Sat, Jun 27 2009, 10:59 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn If you can find a people who are available to be paid per call and only per call that is great idea. However, if you are expecting a staff of people or a couple of people to be present and on call during a period of time then you need to be able to cover that expense with the calls. If no calls come in during a day, then the expenses for that group need to be covered outside of that budget. If the squad feels there is a business case for this it would be good to see it presented. The concern is that it becomes a slippery slope and then these employees seek unionization, benefits, etc...and the costs aren't covered. The one thing that doesn't seem to get reported is how many First Aid calls are answered or come in as opposed to police and fire. The best solution it appears would be to utilize more township employees and pay them as we already do the three employees already providing this type of service. Then they are not employees of the squad or department and the costs can be offset with insurance with less cost than a dedicated employee of the squad or department.
1st Aid	Posted: Sat, Jun 27 2009, 10:26 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Fire Horn Having a paid squad does not have to cost the town anything. The squad could bill the person or business they respond to and let the insurance cover it. Unfortunately the Cranbury squad does not respond to too many calls lately. If you look at the calls and who responded you will find that Monroe or Plainsboro quite frequently cover the first aid calls. The horn is outdated, I believe most members have pagers at present. The horn just makes that annoying noise !