Blogging Bayport Alameda

May 21, 2015

You’re never fully dressed

Filed under: Alameda, City Council — Lauren Do @ 6:01 am

I haven’t finished watching Tuesday night’s City Council meeting, but I did watch the section about the contracts for Fire Station 3 and the Emergency Operations thingie.

The discussion went off the rails rather quickly with tangentially related items being brought up like salt water pumping stations. The part that was most puzzling and mildly entertaining was when Trish Spencer asked about the ICMA report aka the report that proves that we only need a garden hose and some galoshes to fight fires in this town. Interim Fire Chief Doug Long (is he official yet? I can’t recall, but after last night he deserves it) basically said that the ICMA report is problematic and people in other towns have figured out that ICMA may not be the experts that some would make them out to be.

He reminded me when he brought up the fact that ICMA had cut and paste their recommendations for Alameda for other cities that I had written about that in this post in 2012. Highlights:

In fact in one City, Lake Havasu in Arizona they were roundly criticized by that City Council who felt they overpaid for a cut and paste job. From the minutes:

Councilmember Callahan said that after thoroughly reviewing this ICMA report, he thought there were a lot of inconsistencies, and he believed the city overpaid for this report.
Councilmember Nyberg felt the ICMA merely copied the report from the City of Alameda, California, for the Lake Havasu City report, and she thought some of the information was inaccurate.

Seriously that should just be appended in the comments to anyone who brings up the ICMA report again in the future.

Then, after the Fire Chief described the difficulties of dressing in Fire Station 3 — apparently because of the way that the old station and living quarters it is not a simple process to get dressed in the fire gear which lengthens the response time for any call to that fire station.  Additionally because there are not proper facilities, the firefighters have to bring their gear to another station to wash up to eliminate combustible contaminates.  Anyway, after this discussion Trish Spencer brings up that there is a female firefighter at that station that shared to her that she (the female firefighter) had to sometimes get her gear on outside because of the problems.  Trish Spencer, rightly, was concerned about this and felt like this needed to be addressed.  Of course her “concern” came after she voted against the contract for the construction of the new Fire Station 3. So…yeah, concern rings a little hollow when you don’t do anything to remedy the issue.



  1. Didn’t Trish end up voting for it this week, even though she voted against it a few months ago?

    Comment by BMac — May 21, 2015 @ 8:23 am

  2. The inconsistency is confusing, no?

    Comment by Lauren Do — May 21, 2015 @ 8:34 am

  3. yeah, Alamedan said 4-1 vote but Frank was the no vote and I belive it was over the emergency center not the fire house. The salt water pump thing is not exactly extraneous. If we can get some they need to be housed somewhere and since we of course have none, they are not accommodated in the design. The Alamedan also mentioned that Marilyn questioned why the emergency center went from two stories to one, but thought the explanation was adequate. I managed to watch the planning board meeting where the original design was discussed but didn’t realize it had been changed. Member JKW commented at that meeting that San Leandro (?) had managed to establish an emergency response center within existing infrastructure for a couple million and voted against the design at that time. Correct me if that is wrong John.

    When I was on vacation in March Trish must have made a comment that we don’t need to maintain the station to which Jeff Del Bono wrote a letter saying that would create an unsafe situation. Local contractor Ken Gutleben then wrote an op ed stating that it wouldn’t matter if after a quake we had no water pressure at all, which is likely. When I read that op ed I called Ken and emailed Jeff. Jeff suggested we all meet which we did. He was very positive about salt water pumps and said that the head of Public Works is also. The history of discussing these pumps is long and sordid, but it seems previous momentum for them was quashed under Kapler and Gallant. Jeff offered to pursue the subject within the department, but the timing with the contract couldn’t have been worse for working collaboratively. I haven’t heard anything from anybody.

    Just because pumps weren’t on the agenda doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be because it is a fact that it will be impossible to fight fires post quake if the mains from EBMUD are busted. It would be prohibitively expensive for us to built a dual system with stationary pumps, though that would be best. I’d rather see money spent on mobile pumps than the emergency response center. Once again, in order to have a really qualified opinion requires a lot of research and I’m not prepared to do it. So in Cobalt style I have to ask, what exactly is wrong with the basement of the police station other than not having room for 30 people as stated in the Alamedan. Seems to this lay person those folks would be better on the street. How many cooks does it take to tend the post quake stew which will be Alameda?

    Comment by MI — May 21, 2015 @ 8:58 am

  4. In the event of a major quake and roads and major highways are damaged , how many of our firefighters live in Alameda and will be able to actually help ?

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 9:15 am

  5. Lauren, just to set the record straight, the Mayor did vote for the construction of the Fire Station and EOC on Tuesday night.

    Comment by Bob Haun, Interim Assistant City Manager and Public Works Director — May 21, 2015 @ 9:25 am

  6. In the event of a major quake the predicated percent of land at Alameda Point and Bay Farm to Liquefy is 73%.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 9:26 am

  7. Lauren, Fire Chief Doug Long was appointed Chief by John Russo effective April 19, 2015.

    Comment by Jon Spangler — May 21, 2015 @ 9:28 am

  8. Cobalt, reasonable question from an emergency standpoint perhaps, but how many fire fighters in any city live in that city? Anecdotally I seem to recall we have a few. You have an agenda don’t you? We could mandate that all employees in all departments live here, but we might not be that happy with the quality of service as a result.

    Comment by MI — May 21, 2015 @ 9:30 am

  9. It’s fairly common to require police & fire to live in the city that employs them. It happens all across the nation.

    Comment by dave — May 21, 2015 @ 9:32 am

  10. I have no agenda…….If you don’t ask questions how can you solve any issue or come to a reasonable conclusion on any issue. Quality of your questions gives you a better understanding. But WTFDIK

    If we have major quake how many actually live here and can help.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 9:42 am

  11. You might hate Trish Spencer, But she asked some fabulous questions while sitting on School Board and NO ONE wanted to address or answer. Probably why she voted NO on many issues.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 9:49 am

  12. 11. As in her thoughts on Lesson 9? Why that was never raised in the mayoral election escapes me.

    Comment by BC — May 21, 2015 @ 9:53 am

  13. If we are TRULY worried about Safety and know a Major Quake is going to hit in next few years, I think it’s important to know where our safety people reside.

    If this is the real reality and a major Quake is going to hit and we are planning on building in a highly predicated area to Liquefy would should plan accordingly.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 9:58 am

  14. 12) I didn’t follow alameda politics very closely and like most trusted what was going on .

    It’s all I know is people minds change as we do as individuals.
    It’s called neuroplasticity. People are not static…..We change daily both physically and mentally…….

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 10:08 am

  15. 3: An EOC in a basement?!? you have to be kidding: a) collapse of the building above, and b) flooding. I rest my case…

    From some of the council comments Tuesday night, I was afraid that our elected leaders would continue to “fiddle while Rome burns” and throw away yet another opportunity to properly prepare Alameda for the inevitable. I am very glad that good sense prevailed in the end, but I think our elected representatives could save a lot of time by staying on-topic and perhaps preparing more thoroughly for their meetings.

    It was very distressing to hear so many tangential and skeptical comments from our intelligent, thoughtful City Council members about the immediate need for both Fire Station 3 and the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) as proposed. Some comments seemed to indicate a lack of comprehension of the realities of living on top of three (3) major earthquake faults (Hayward, Calaveras, and San Andreas).

    Fire Chief Long’s explanation of why the ICMA report is not credible deserves wider circulation, since it is oft-publicized by opponents of the AFD or its unions. (I give Frank Matarrese credit for pointing out that the proposed and actual development along the Northern Waterfront since that report was issued renders it obsolete.)

    Trying to pinch pennies by putting the EOC in the new library or using the crowded APD basement just left me speechless. ( can only imagine how our Director of Library Services must feel…)

    Bob Haun’s presentation and responses were (typically, for him) comprehensive, articulate, and to the point. Why so much time was wasted on pursuing the Rockefeller Foundation grants again–after Haun pointed out that he was pursuing that option–or the (obvious) need to keep expanding the CERT program and the city’s “human” emergency response /volunteers (also underway, but clearly limited by the constraints of an underfunded AFD) was also beyond me as I sat in the Council Chambers.

    While I, too, am concerned about the $5 million in debt service that these combined projects will cost, it appeared that that obstacle alone would keep the CC from moving forward with an urgently-needed emergency response contract.

    Thank goodness that our City Council did the right thing–even if they took far too many detours along the way and took too long to agree to it.

    Comment by Jon Spangler — May 21, 2015 @ 10:08 am

  16. dave and Cobalt. If it is in fact common requirement, then can you cite some sources? Not saying it wouldn’t be a great thing, but other than unusual emergency like a quake, it doesn’t seem like it would be so critical, so I’m not certain why it would be a requirement. Obviously volunteer departments would be locals, but despite Cobalt chomping at the bit to sign up, I don’t think that is a practical option.

    Comment by MI — May 21, 2015 @ 10:12 am

  17. a quick search seems to indicate that 15 mile radius is some sort of standard. Admittedly these communities are probably not worried that police and fire will not be able to use roadways, but I think the requirement may actually be fairly uncommon.

    Comment by MI — May 21, 2015 @ 10:18 am

  18. I don’t have a percentage of cities where that is required, but a fair bit of anecdotal & episodic evidence. It’s policy in a number of cities in which I been involved in bond issuance, for example, and I’ve seen it noted in articles referring to labor issues in various publications.

    It was policy in Cleveland OH when I briefly lived there. Some of the best neighborhoods in the city limits were the ones with concentrations of cops & firemen.

    Comment by dave — May 21, 2015 @ 10:24 am

  19. 4, 8, 9, 10: Our firefighters work 3-day or 4-day shifts (I think), eating and sleeping at the firehouse, and each shift and station must be fully staffed. In an earthquake or other major emergency, it is clearly helpful to have everyone on duty ASAP–“all hands on deck.” In an ideal world (one with less costly housing), the requirement might be reasonable.

    If we want to make it possible–or required–for city employees–including public safety workers–to live in Alameda, we have to make living here more affordable than it is. That will take either: a) spending a lot more money to subsidize city employee housing costs, or b) changing regional and state housing trends and conditions. I do not see the community supporting any additional expenses given the limited “recovery” most of us are (not) seeing and the gaping holes in our still-shredded city budget that need to be backfilled. As to changing statewide or regional housing costs–good luck…

    Comment by Jon Spangler — May 21, 2015 @ 10:25 am

  20. If we are worried about basements collapsing and major flooding occurring as Jon Spangler alludes to , we will not have to worry about safety getting here from 15 miles because most highways will be down.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 10:29 am

  21. Jon living in Bay Area is not affordable for most. Let alone a new family just starting out.

    Just read a article” How Soaring Housing Costs Impoverish a Whole Generation and Maul the Real Economy”

    How many years would it take first-time homebuyers, earning a median household income, to save enough money for the standard 20% down payment on a median home? Are you sitting down?

    He looked at 30 large US cities, using their local median incomes and median home prices. It assumed that young households could accomplish the tough feat of saving 5% of their income, year after year, through bouts of unemployment, illness, shopping sprees, family expansions, or extended vacations.

    The results are stunning – if just a tad discouraging for first-time buyers.

    In my beloved and crazy boom-and-bust town of San Francisco, where a median home (for example, a two-bedroom no-view apartment in a so-so neighborhood) costs $1 million, it would take – are you ready? – 37 effing years.

    Given its higher median income, San Francisco is only in second place. The winner by a few months is another Bay Area city, San Jose. In San Diego, it would take 33 years. In Los Angeles, 32 years. First-time buyers might be retired before they scrape their theoretical down payment together. Theoretical, because in reality, too many things change, and they’re chasing after a moving target.

    So lower your expectations and step down to buy a below-median home? Here is what TwistedPolitix found on the market in that price category:

    Yes folks, step right up and get your 700 sq. ft. home in Redwood City, California, heart of the Silicon Valley, for just $649,000! The American Dream! 1 bedroom, 1 bath for just $3,154 per month on a mortgage with super low interest rates if you put down 20%.

    If you pay the mortgage back according to the standard 30-year schedule, in April 2045 you will have paid $1,135,721 for a tiny little [bleep] shack. Brilliant!

    And that 20% down payment would still amount to $130,000. How long would it take first-time buyers with a median household income to save up this much money? About a quarter century!

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 10:33 am

  22. OK, CBKJ, then how can firefighters live in town as you’d like? I agree with the writer about housing costs. Hence the need for housing across the region. But I’m at a loss as to how this relates to a new fire station.

    Comment by BC — May 21, 2015 @ 10:42 am

  23. 22) I was just responding to Jon Spanglers point…..You can follow along if you choose.

    My Main Point

    If we are TRULY worried about Safety and know a Major Quake is going to hit in next few years, I think it’s important to know where our safety people reside.

    If this is the real reality and a major Quake is going to hit and we are planning on building in a highly predicated area to Liquefy we should plan accordingly.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 11:03 am

  24. 19. Kapler took me in the Park street station once to explain the 7 day schedule on the wall. Maybe Jeff Del Bono or somebody will post accurate schedule info. I think it is 24 hours on /24 off /24 hours on and then four days in a row off, but that only accounts for 48 hours in seven days and they do 54 or 56 a week before overtime so there is more to it. Probabaly fourth day off is only 18 hours before returning to work.

    In The Big One no city will be able to follow through on mutual assistance because every city will be fully involved one way or the other. There will be plenty of instant volunteers as we saw in Marina district during the ’89 event and probably very unlikely any civilians or fire fighters will stand by as with Zach incident because the emergency will be so extreme. ALL hands on deck, whoever we are.

    Having been to Nepal I’m somewhat hopeful for us because of all the buildings left standing there, but downtown Oakland and Park street are going to look similar to Kathmandu. Interesting that Gutleben likes to hold court at Blue Danube because despite some retrofitting I expect that building to be a heap in the street. My wife works at Books Inc two days a week and it scares me, but that building does have steel moment frames or I wouldn’t let her work there. I’ve urged her to rehearse in her mind about diving on the floor near the cash register kiosk which is about the only place which won’t be books, brick and broken glass.

    Comment by MI — May 21, 2015 @ 11:05 am

  25. A new fire station is only as effective as the persons manning it. Having Firefighters live within a conservative distance from where they are supposed to fight a fire would seem to be Common Sense, as it is in the United Kingdom:

    From the Wikipedia article;

    “When available for a call, retained firefighters carry radio pagers to alert them to an emergency call. They must live or work a maximum of 4.5 minutes from the fire station at which they serve and respond to the fire station before manning the fire appliance and attending an incident. The time is dependent on which fire and rescue organisation they work for.”

    But then, there’s California, where firefighters can even live in Another State:

    Comment by vigi — May 21, 2015 @ 11:33 am

  26. On a related note, has anyone heard anything about the U-Haul down the street from the planned EOC closing this month? Is the auto mechanic closing also?

    Comment by Jason — May 21, 2015 @ 11:52 am

  27. Spangler began to address it above but…. Firefighters work 1 day in 3, meaning 33% are on duty at any given time, assuming full staffing. We have ‘x’ amount of equipment and apparatus and staff our stations with enough firefighters to operate that. When the Big One hits, we have people to operate that equipment. Sure, it would be great to have more hands on deck, but calling in an off duty firefighter in non emergency ain’t gonna mean we will have more fire engines and trucks to fight fires with.

    That said, let’s assume about one third of our firefighters live within city limits. So, in addition to having four fully staffed fire stations with one third of our personnel on hand, another 22%, in this scenario, could be called in. That means we would have maybe 55% of our staff to fight fires with apparatus enough to occupy 33%. I guess we should hope the Big One hits at shift change and we have 66% of our staff on hand.

    Residency requirments don’t seem necessary for FFs. I could support a requirment for Police to be at least 50% residents, on the other hand. A San Leandro resident will see an alameda fire the same way an Alameda resident would. An Alameda resident cop might view a resident he or she was policing differently than one from another town.

    Comment by BMac — May 21, 2015 @ 12:06 pm

  28. Vigi, our fire stations are manned 24/7. If we ran our FD on the cheap and didn’t have personnel on hand when calls came in, then of course residency requirments matter.

    You guys all know the fire stations don’t close and get locked up at night, right?

    Comment by BMac — May 21, 2015 @ 12:10 pm

  29. Regarding Comment 24 by MI – The Alameda Fire Department members work 48 consecutive hours, then are off-duty 96 consecutive hours. This 48 / 96 schedule configuration is becoming more prevalent in the fire service, and results in firefighters averaging 56-hours per week at work. Of the 56 hours, 53 are at a regular pay rate, and the additional three are overtime. This overtime is mandated for firefighters by the Fair Labor Standard Act “7k exemption” ( If firefighters fill-in on other shifts due to absences, they received overtime for this additional work.

    Comment by Jim Colburn, Secretary - Alameda Firefighters Association — May 21, 2015 @ 12:38 pm

  30. Curious logic, BMac. FFs do more than operate equipment. I was under the impression that FF also enter buildings and rescue trapped people in an emergency. Some of them even know how to save lives! The bigger the emergency, [“the Big One”] the more victims, the more FF needed. Police, not so much.

    Weren’t you living in Alameda on October 17, 1989?

    Comment by vigi — May 21, 2015 @ 12:51 pm

  31. 29) Jim how many firefighters live in Alameda?

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 1:07 pm

  32. cos, of course, vigi was and therefore none of us who weren’t can comment with any authority.

    Comment by BC — May 21, 2015 @ 1:08 pm

  33. 29) Would we not Avoid all the overtime if we had Fire Department work 1 Day on 24 hours One day off 24 Hours 1 day on 8 hours on 3 days off.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 1:25 pm

  34. Should read

    Work 24 Hours
    Off 24 Hours
    Work 24 Hours
    off 24 Hours
    Work 8 Hours
    Off 64 Hours

    Total of 168 hours in week]
    Work 52 Work 2.2 Days
    Off 116 Off 4.8 Days

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 1:29 pm

  35. 29) how much did spend in Overtime in 2014 for Fire Department?

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 1:32 pm

  36. Should Read ….How much did City Spend in Overtime in 2014 for Fire Department?

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 1:33 pm

  37. From the state constitution: “A city or county, including any chartered city or chartered county, or public district, may not require that its employees be residents of such city, county, or district; except that such employees may be required to reside within a reasonable and specific distance of their place of employment or other designated location.”

    Alameda’s City Charter was amended to comply with state law. See Sec. 2-5. Every elected officer of the City shall be a registered voter of the
    City at the time of filing nomination papers and for a period of thirty days immediately preceding the date of filing. Every elected officer and every officer appointed to a Board or Commission shall be a resident of the City during his or her tenure of office. Employees of the City, other than such officers, shall reside within the City, or within such distance of the City limits thereof as the Council may by ordinance prescribe.

    Comment by Alan — May 21, 2015 @ 1:33 pm

  38. 29. thanks for correction. Last Saturday I spoke to brother of fire fighter from another from municipality who described 24 on/off/on plus four days off. If there is a very active 48 shift fire fighters could get pretty bleary, but you guys know what works.

    32. and if you were born after ’89 you can never qualify to have an opinion ever.

    27. the only thing about your scenario for Big One is that without water and with many wood farmed structures we could be dealing fire storm on top of a huge number of injuries and people buried in rubble. Your scenario makes for enough people to man all the equipment we have, but maybe in that scenario it won’t be enough equipment. I’ve been informed that action on auxiliary pumps is pending which is terrific news. I’m not implying that aside from auxiliary water source there is a lot more than AFD can do to prepare for a quake which is a once in 150 year event, but maybe we civilians could be vigilant and think about CERT.

    Comment by MI — May 21, 2015 @ 1:33 pm

  39. Loma Prieta was a pretty “big one”. I would think any preparation for the next quake would reflect on lessons learned from the Loma Prieta, which is largely missing from these discussions. Otherwise, wild speculation abounds. You are correct, you lack authority.

    Didn’t voters turn down Measure C, that would have funded this project? Those voters must have been the ones who did live thru Loma Prieta and don’t comment here.

    Comment by vigi — May 21, 2015 @ 1:34 pm

  40. Should Read

    Work 24 Hours
    Off 24 Hours
    Work 24 Hours
    off 24 Hours
    Work 4 Hours
    Off 68 Hours
    Total of 168 hours in week]
    Work 52 Work 2.2 Days
    Off 116 Off 4.8 Days

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 1:39 pm

  41. 24 Hours On and 48 Hours Off

    Most cities in the United States employ the 24 hours on and 48 hours off scheduling system for firefighters. This schedule requires firefighters to remain in a fire station for a 24-hour period and respond to fire calls at any time during this period. This shift is followed by 48 hours off, after which another 24-hour shift is required. Typically, this results in a firefighter working more than 50 hours per week. An average of ten of these 24-hour shifts are usually worked each month. An additional day off every month is arranged in order to comply with the Fair Labor Standards Act.

    Shift Cycles

    Though not as common as the 24-hour shifts scheduling system, some municipalities require that firefighters work for three to four days in a row. Shifts are generally during the daytime and are between eight and 12 hours per day. This schedule is followed by 12- to 14-hour night shifts for three to four days. Then, firefighters have three or four consecutive days off before the cycle begins again.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 2:09 pm

  42. I don’t know whey we are spending so much money on a new Sealion dragout pier. They all just relocated to this thread and now feasting on red herrings!!!

    Bottom line, we should not spend a single dime more on firehouses or emergency centers or public safety until we get a commute schedule for the firefighters sorted out.

    Also, can anyone tell me when all the streets were repaved and what the schedule is for maintenance? Fire trucks cannot run on cracked streets with chuckholes everywhere!!!!!

    Comment by AJ — May 21, 2015 @ 2:40 pm

  43. Is the U-Haul and auto repair shop closing?

    Comment by Jospeh — May 21, 2015 @ 2:44 pm

  44. as a follow up to AJ’s excellent points, we also need to know when the world is ending so we don’t waste a lot of time and money, in case its coming up very soon.

    Comment by John P. — May 21, 2015 @ 5:40 pm

  45. Must have got to hot in here for…..Jim Colburn, Secretary – Alameda Firefighters Association — Couldn’t quite answer the simple questions like

    29) Jim how many firefighters live in Alameda?

    How much did City Spend in Overtime in 2014 for Fire Department?

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 5:43 pm

  46. John P

    Your Our Fire Dept put the fear of god in us last night that we need this EOC and new Fire station and that a BIG EARTHQUAKE is Eminent. That we couldn’t handle a major emergency.

    So asking where our firefighters live is important question.

    Like it or not they shouldn’t play the Zack game and go mute.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 21, 2015 @ 5:56 pm

  47. And we needed the new Bay Bridge because OMG…earthquake.

    Comment by people can be unreasonable ------- — May 21, 2015 @ 7:12 pm

  48. 47. really? I hope you and Colbalt are ready to wait a while when you are stuck in collapsed buildings which are burning with beams crushing down on your tiny skulls. Lots of time to reflect on your preposterous comments here. I know what you think you are saying about boondoggle projects, and all, Har-har. But yeah, OMG earthquake is right. Coming to a town near you….and sooner than later. So knock back another cocktail and put your feet up.

    vigi, “Loma Prieta was a pretty “big one””. Exactly, but Hayward event is likely to be TEN TIMES stronger and last at least FOUR times as long. Think about that. I doubt you will feel like the authority you imagine yourself to be when you are being tossed around like a rag doll. Hope your walker holds up.

    Comment by MI — May 21, 2015 @ 9:46 pm

  49. Comment by dc — May 21, 2015 @ 9:58 pm

  50. An earthquake may be immanent, but in terms of time, not eminent, #46. And bringing up poor Mr. Zack has nothing to do with this issue, which has to do with the need (or not) of a new fire station and EOC and how we will fund it. If you just want to diss the firefighters, you need to wait for another thread. The “where do they live?” is also a bit of a red herring to this issue; the City has that information and it can be obtained by a request for it. Since it is posed without respect to the full staffing of the fire stations 24/7, the likelihood that there will be no additional equipment from nearby cities, and training of local civilians (Red Cross, CERT, etc.) who could be helpful in times of emergency, it may be that the intention is to obliquely suggest that the firefighters, not being residents, really are not “invested” in Alameda’s safety. Not too helpful for the discussion of the topic, either.

    Comment by Kate Quick — May 21, 2015 @ 10:18 pm

  51. 9. The standard is to not require public safety employees to live in the city in which they work. The reason is that it limits housing choices, so unions oppose it. When I worked for the city of Boston for.four years, I was required to show proof of residency, but police and fire were exempt. If you want to force public safety employees to live in Alameda, it will cost you either more in salary, benefits or pensions.

    Comment by Larry Witte — May 22, 2015 @ 4:11 am

  52. MI, I thought you were working on your anger management. That fantasy you played out there in your head about my skull being crushed is a little sick. Sorry for you that you published it.

    Comment by people can be unreasonable ------- — May 22, 2015 @ 7:38 am

  53. Sealions are appealing animals. If they had the brains of CBKJ and the personality of people can be, then people would be calling vector control, not trying to save them.

    Comment by BC — May 22, 2015 @ 7:56 am

  54. When you have a presentation that focuses on the Event of a Major Emergency and the building of a new EOC everything seemed to be covered in the Presentation

    Safety #1 one Priority

    We learned we Have NO Seismically Safe Bridges to Alameda

    We face additional Risk because of our location of being a Island and Soil Condition

    Liquefaction is major issue

    Sand Boils will cause buildings to Collapse

    Sitting on 3 major faults

    There will be NO Bridges in the event of major Earthquake and one is Eminent

    So asking Where our Firefighters Live would be more than a fair question and probably the most important question if we had a Emergency.

    Refusing to answer a simple question and Being mute on this just makes this all ring hollow and doesn’t build much trust in the community.

    There is NO Right or Wrong Answer …..Just the Truth

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 22, 2015 @ 8:36 am

  55. #50 The death of Raymond Zack does belong in this discussion.

    After being paid high salaries and being guaranteed high benefits, the City’s fire and police employees responded to a call for fast action. Memorial Day (2012 I believe)

    Sure, they responded quickly, and then stood there, chatting, and looking out at the water while Mr. Zack stood looking at them, fully clothed, in calm, chest deep water about 450′ from shore.

    He soon collapsed, fell into the water and died.

    and the firemen and police stood by and watched.

    After his body washed up into the shallow water and a civilian woman pulled his body out of the shallow water and onto the sand.

    Then, and only then, did the firemen or policemen act like the first responders they’re supposed to be.

    This Memorial Day weekend is a good time to think about all of this.

    Comment by A Neighbor — May 22, 2015 @ 8:52 am

  56. Jim Colburn, Secretary – Alameda Firefighters Association — May 21, 2015 brought up the Work Schedule and Overtime.

    I asked Simple question ” How much Did The City Pay the Fire Department in Overtime in 2014.

    Sounds reasonable and a Simple question. He brought up their schedule and Overtime so why don’t they just be honest and answer.

    There are NO right or wrong answers.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — May 22, 2015 @ 8:58 am

  57. BC. I’ve downgraded (upgraded?) you in my mind from a**hole to mentally ill.

    Comment by people can be unreasonable ------- — May 22, 2015 @ 9:16 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at