For those incensed about the treatment of the free rider...

[hayu_lol]

in Obion County Tennessee, here are the facts, the ACTUAL DOCUMENTS that apply as furnished to DU by Hannah Bell which provide the words and numbers one needs to decide the issue about the subscription fire service in Obion County.

Note that in the entire pdf file, S Fulton is listed as an Obion asset--it's Kentucky location is not mentioned at all.

The commissioner who approved the subscription service clearly states that those property owners who subscribe will get fire service in return for the $75/year fee. If called, S Fulton is entitled to a fee of $500. There are no legal means to recover this money in Tennessee if the subscribers fail to pay. Non-subscribers are NOT ENTITLED TO SERVICE AND WILL GET NONE.

OBION COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT

http://troytn.com/Obion County Fire Department Presentation Presented to the County Commission.pdf

News Report on Commissioner's meeting

http://www.nwtntoday.com/news.php?view_Story=25587

For a digested version of the high points, here is Hannah's thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9263353

From this material, you can see how bad or non-existant fire service is in Obion County Tennessee.

[TwilightGardener]

1. I hope the next time you need help in an emergency, someone

first researches you, pulls out paperwork and statistics, and passes appropriate judgment upon you.

[hobbit709]

2. -10

[TwilightGardener]

3. -20. LOL.

[AngryAmish]

18. Square root of -1

[TwilightGardener]

22. Teh maths is getting too hard!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

82. Wait. Are you fer it or agin it?

:crazy:

[sinkingfeeling]

4. This is way after the 'emergency'.

[TwilightGardener]

5. Seems like it's a justification of non-response to an emergency.

[hayu_lol]

7. The head commissioner of Obion County clearly states...

that NON-SUBSCRIBERS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO SERVICE AND WILL GET NONE.

The history of the S. Fulton Fire Department is that they took on all fires, subscribers or not. They have reached the point where they and the town that supports them with taxes are going broke. They have two engines($250,000 each)and much of the gear that goes with them.

The commissioners fought over a fee attached to light meters or subscriber service.

Whether some agree with the commissioners or not, S. Fulton was performing a service for which their expenses were not covered. By not opting to set up their own fire department, a real one and not just one on paper, Obion County lost the opportunity for hundreds of thousands of dollars of Federal grants as well as solve one of the big problems in Obion County.

S Fulton had already put out a fire at another location for this family who were NOT subscribers at the time. A bill was sent for the Commissioner approved amount of $500. This family has not paid this bill and has failed at both properties to join the membership service.

[TwilightGardener]

11. He called for help. Therefore, he's a subscriber. Failure to collect payment

for past services, while clearly demonstrating the agency's incompetence, is not relevant in a public emergency (fires don't stay private and subscribed, necessarily).

[Hannah Bell]

23. Huh? By what logic am I a "subscriber" because I call a city in which I don't live for help?

[TwilightGardener]

31. ??--does that fire department not serve the area under subscription service?

Or are you trying to say that they can't sign him up when he calls for help? What's the waiting period? Can NEW homeowners sign up and call the next day, or do they have to have paid a month or more in advance before making any calls? Can't the neighbor next door say "Here's $75, fight my neighbor's fire"? What about those who are caught between not renewing their annual fee, but haven't gotten the mailed reminder yet?

[Hannah Bell]

40. No, it doesn't "serve the area". It serves the properties of the subscribers.

The man received a letter & a phone call from the city offering the service. He declined to subscribe.

The county chose the system & declined to tax its citizens to provide any fire service whatsoever, preferring to allow its citizens to chose whether or not they wanted to pay the city for fire protection.

Presumably the 19-1 vote represented the wishes of their constituents.

The city is not obliged to fight fires outside the city *at all*.

[TwilightGardener]

47. Was there another agency he was supposed to call, say, if he wanted

to suddenly subscribe to fire protection? Let's say his subscribed neighbor has built a giant bonfire on a windy day, and things aren't looking too good. Or let's say his wife changes her mind and says, I want to subscribe. When are they covered--one month, one day, one hour before disaster strikes? We've already established that this really isn't a form of insurance, so insurance laws wouldn't apply. This is why it's ridiculous--and I'm not sure the man won't have grounds for a suit for the non-response, really. They may have had a duty to respond if he had a change of heart.

[Hannah Bell]

62. no, there is no county fire protection. BECAUSE THE COUNTY RESIDENTS DECLINE TO TAX THEMSELVES TO

FUND ANY. REPEATEDLY. OVER DECADES.

What don't you get?

How is this the problem of the city which DOES tax its residents to fund a fire service for its residents, AND IS SMALLER & POORER THAN THE COUNTY?

State law says there are no grounds for a suit. The city is not obligated to provide fire service outside its service area.

[TwilightGardener]

64. I'm not sure what YOU don't get. You just go on and on about

"Poor city" vs "rich county" like there's some sort of big-time class-warfare going on here, instead of just really bad officials and some ignorant voters who all need saving from themselves. I understand what the county did, what the city is complaining about, I get the whole dysfunctional structure. But if this man wants to be part of the structure in place and get help from the only designated agency available to him, for whatever reason, and get billed for services, why can't he?

[Hannah Bell]

70. There is no designated agency available to him unless he pays the city subscription.

This is what the county -- & its residents -- chose.

The issue has been ongoing for decades. The county has twice refused to set up a county volunteer fire department. The city has been paying the freight for the county for decades.

I'm not sure why you think the county residents are ignorant dupes of their county commissioners. This man already *had* a previous fire & was notified of the subscription system by letter & phone. He didn't subscribe after the first fire, he didn't subscribe after he was notified.

He has variously stated that he "forgot," that he "thought they'd come out anyway," that the department "came out for someone else who hadn't paid."

The fact is, the county has no fire service because it won't tax its residents to fund universal fire protection. It leaves it up to individuals to contract with the city -- enabling people like yourself to blame the city instead of the county when the predictable consequences of the county's reprehensible policy occur.

[TwilightGardener]

81. We're just going in circles here. You keep saying, he turned down

the subscription, and I'm saying, why can't he subscribe when he calls, and still receive service, and owe all sorts of money, or even have to pay the full cost of the fire. I'm blaming everybody involved, not one entity vs. another--and I know that if they let him get away with not paying then no one will pay, slippery slope, this is what they voted for, blah blah...but in the end, public safety must come first, and failure to respond to a fire when the means and manpower are available and nearby is not putting public safety first. I think your need to work this into a larger point or parable about the system, or the background politics, or the type of people involved in this situation is blinding you to common sense, and that's a shame. So we'll have to agree to disagree, and leave it at that.

[Rabrrrrrr]

108. Why can't he do that? Because then EVERYONE should be allowed to do so,

and most would.

Why pay for car insurance if I can just call the insurance agent after the accident and pick some up then?

The department needs people's subscription money to survive, with the understanding that the bast majority of those subscriptions will be "wasted" because people will never need the services - but the money they paid in helps the cover the costs for those for whom it is needed.

It's called "insurance", not "fee for service".

Otherwise, hell, let's go with your idea and make it a true fee for service - no subscription, just bill the homeowner for actual costs of fighting the fire and the time it took. Perhaps anywhere from $5K to $20K per fire. Then the firemen can send a salesmen as part of the firefighting team to go to the homes of neighbors and say "We can help protect your home now for just $2500 (we take credit cards!), or you can take the chance that your home, too, will catch on fire, and then you'll be paying $5-20K".

That's the scenario from which you are arguing.

[Rabrrrrrr]

85. Oh, please - the irresponsible shitstain proved over and over that he didn't want fire protection.

By refusing it over the course of many years, and refusing to pay for the services he took advantage before, he made the decision - he stated, boldly and blatantly, that he didn't want anyone to come out and put out a fire if it started on his property.

he had many chances to saddle up and get some protection, and he very was very clear and determined to state that he did not want any coverage from the firefighters.

If I tell the car dealer that I don't want to pay for airbags in the car, I can't call him up 2 seconds before the crash and say "Okay, put 'em in now - I need 'em!!!!!!!"

Calling the fire department and offering to pay for protection once the fire started is gaming the system, and it's just as unethical as it was fucking stupid to deny it in the first place.

Fucker decided that he needs to play only by his own rules and fuck the society he's in; the society had the courage to tell him, "Okay, we'll play it by your rules, then".

Bullies don't change until someone stands up to them and tells them what a piece of shit they are.

[Mimosa]

100. The idiot risked his home instead of paying 75 bucks and he was NOT POOR

He paid for homeowner's insurance. He gambled and he lost.

[Rabrrrrrr]

107. That's exactly it.

[sweetapogee]

63. no lawsuit

I have looked into this in every possible way. I'm a volly firefighter and EMT in PA so I know a few things. The homeowner has absolutely no basis for a lawsuit, none, zero, zip, nada. Frivolous would not do justice to any attempt to litigate this in court. In fact, the only court action I see is the son of the homeowner facing felony assault charges against the fire chief. The son is going to be lucky if he avoids some big jail time.

[hayu_lol]

66. Twilight, this is the only answer I can give you...

to find out the terms of subscribing, you would have to call the City of Fulton Kentucky AND the commissioners of Obion County Tennessee.

This man has a reputation for not paying for service. One fire 3 years ago that the Fulton FD took care of, even though the guy was not a subscriber. They billed him for the effort and he has never paid the bill according to all reports. Neither property at this time is subscribed.

[TwilightGardener]

67. Reputation? Is that how we determine emergency response and aid

in a public safety emergency? Never heard of that before--in fact, in the medical field, you often see "frequent fliers", but they are not turned away for past nonpayment or delinquency on bills, nor for non-compliance with their treatment regimens. Police return to the same houses over and over again, same assholes causing the same trouble--but if they don't respond, something bad might happen.

[sweetapogee]

78. in the case....

...in the case of frequent flyer's, the cost is paid by both the tax payers and mainly cost shifting from patients who have health insurance to those who don't pay. This is why ALS trips cost $800.00 or more for a 5 mile trip to the ER, because half of those using the system don't pay. According to an article I read in a recent edition of JEMS, HCR, by the way, is going to put an end to frequent flyer's free ride.

Don't shoot the messenger!!!

[TwilightGardener]

87. And...so? Judgment isn't passed on any individual during a crisis,

in terms of response or treatment. That would be highly unethical.

[sweetapogee]

115. i guess...

...I guess as long as there is someone willing and able to provide said care and transportation.

[sweetapogee]

56. I don't think so

South Fulton Fire Dept uses volunteer labor. In order to operate the fire department, half of the volunteer labor time is spent training and responding to calls, the other half or more is spent running fundraisers to make up the difference between the amount of funding the city pays and the amount of funding needed to actually operate the fire dept. What other government department runs fund raisers to make expenses? None.

When people receiving the services, regardless of how deserving they may be don't pay or contribute in kind, then the volunteer labor force has to make up even more of the difference. Put enough of these non-payers who in this case are not only outside of the fire district, they are out of state, and eventually the volunteers will go into full scale revolt.

In my fire company we have a hard time finding new members. And know this, we are considered one of, if not the best trained in the county. Even if we were to toss out the fund raising requirement (which we cannot do) and go with just state mandated minimum training, the amount of time and effort is steep, really steep. It is a know fact within the industry that the absolute biggest challenge facing the volunteer fire corps in the US, which by the way, 3/4 of the nations firefighters are volunteers, is getting new and maintaining older active members.

I'm lucky in that we have adequate membership, at least for now. Sooner or later though, the volunteer system is going to fall apart unless the public steps up to the plate like they used to do. When and if the volly system falls apart, it will be a complete nightmare for 85% of the country. Because of the volunteer system and the amount of fiscal responsibility the volunteer fire service takes on for itself, folks have really no idea how much money it takes to provide this service. When they find out, it will be a rude awakening.

[TwilightGardener]

61. What does that have to do with a subscription?

We all know it's a dysfunctional mess, and the system is fucked up in a lot of places, and fire depts don't get enough support. But what does that have to do with refusing to help a caller who offers to subscribe or pay? The only conclusion I can draw is, they want someone to serve as an example, to keep everyone's fees current and demonstrate how badly it can bite you when you don't. That's even shittier than deadbeat residents, IMO. That's letting your kid grab a hot pot off the stove to show him why we don't grab hot pots off the stove.

[hayu_lol]

69. Twilight, this man was offered a subscription for fire service by ...

letter, by personal phone call, and many were visited by the Fire Chief of the Fulton FD. He declined to subscribe leaving him holding the bag left by his elected commissioners who have clearly stated that subscribe for service(in lieu of taxes)or you will get no service. Only about 50% of the people in his area have subscribed, yet 75% of the Fulton VFDs emergencies are in the subscriber area. The residents of Fulton Kentucky are paying the freight for this VFD.

[sweetapogee]

77. no...

...the man REFUSED the offer of the subscription. He apparently refused this every year for many years. I'm scratching my pointed little head trying to understand your line of reasoning.

[TwilightGardener]

89. And now he wants it, presumably. Because his house is on fire.

Or maybe he wanted it the day before the fire. Or maybe last week he wrote himself a reminder: "Burning trash next week, should get fire subscription". But he can't have it, because...then he might be getting away with not arranging it beforehand, and then the neighbors will all freeload!! That's really what it's all about, as I've said. Head on a pike, for all the townfolk to see.

[Rabrrrrrr]

110. He could just as easily have bought it last week, or even the day before.

He just can't wait until his house on fire and then say "Oooh, I want that insurance now!"

That's assholery at the height of assholery.

[Bluerthanblue]

133. no he didn't-

do some research. The family had paid the fee several years previously.

[COLGATE4]

44. You seem to believe that some people are entitled to receive for

free that which others must pay for. Strange idea.

[TwilightGardener]

48. They are.

(edit to add: that's what makes me human).

[Little Star]

106. One way to settle this is

no one should pay the fee, ever!!!! Lets see how well that works out. Maybe the county is just better off not offering fire service at all. If one will not pay, none should pay!

[Scout]

52. they would find that i had paid all the appropriate and required fees, so i got no problem with that

if that's the situation.

[TwilightGardener]

54. So you support agencies checking to see if you paid your taxes

before they agree to send police or ambulance? Do you agree that strangers from out of town are not entitled to emergency services because they've never paid a dime in the jurisdiction where it's needed?

[Hannah Bell]

119. a pumper truck costs $600K.

[TwilightGardener]

124. And it was right next door. I'll repeat the question above--do you support

the investigation of tax-payment status before anyone is helped, and do you support refusal of emergency aid to those who have never paid any local fees or taxes in any particular jurisdiction?

[Scout]

126. if that is the policy that i have agreed to participate in, yes.

strangers from out of town are not at all the same situation, so not bothering to answer that.

[KittyWampus]

80. I'm sure the OP'er goes out of their way to help others. You get what you give.

[mkultra]

94. i hope you choose to not pay for fire protection then whine when your house burns down

[fishwax]

97. I hope the next time you need help in an emergency, your local services haven't gone bankrupt b/c

they spent all their resources answering calls from people in other counties and in other states who often refuse (even after services are rendered) to contribute in anyway to maintain your community's emergency services.

[Hannah Bell]

120. tell it to the county. tell them a fire engine & a pumper truck will run close to a million dollars

while you're at it.

[DefenseLawyer]

6. I'm not sure at this point if we truly have this many libertarian cranks among us

or if the thrust of much of this insanity is based people having some kind of worship mentality for firefighters, such that this has been seen as some kind of "attack on firemen" and thus must be defended. It may be like many people who will defend the police no matter how egregious their behavior, lest they be seen has "anti-police". The fireman were, in my opinion, pretty heartless in what they did. However, it's the system that is wrong. It's the philosophy behind it that is perverse. No one is really blaming the firemen for this philosophy or this system. You have kind of tipped your hand by referring to the "free rider" (You might as well say "deadbeat", you know you want to). But for almost everyone else, we have to get past the question of right or wrong on the technical points of who paid and who didn't and who had notice and who was just doing their jobs and ask yourself, is this the world we want to live in?

[Bluerthanblue]

9. I've yet to hear a Firefighter defend the "action" (non-action) that these

'firefighters' chose.

I've talked with several of my friends who are active members of the fire dept, and every single one of them condemn this fiasco-

I can't understand the motivation behind those here on DU who defend this foolishness, and to be honest, I'm glad I can't climb inside their heads.

:shrug:

[Swede]

46. Here you go.

If the rules of the people who write the checks are at fault not the firefighters themselves Fire protection is not free it cost lots of money and someone must pay for it. If my town council said we could no longer respond outside of city then we would no longer respond. I wouldn't like it but they pay the bills so they make the rules it sucks but that is how it works. You cant blame the firefighter for doing what they were told. I sure it was killing them to stand by and watch but what else could you do if your job was on the line.

Don't preach to me about duty. For 33 years, I have, and still will, put my hide at risk for other people, and for FREE. I do, however, expect some help from those I'm helping. Buy a smoke detector, plan an escape route, wear your seatbelt, help pay for a firetruck, etc. If there is a financial issue, bring it to the department's attention. There are food stamps and all other types of aid; something can always be worked out. DON'T EXPECT OTHER PEOPLE TO PROVIDE FOR YOUR WANTON NEGLECT. We have one homeowner in our area; half-million dollar home; lives between and outside 2 fire districts; wealthy man; won't pay a dime to either district; never contributes or attends any fundraising event at either dept. I make YOU sick? He makes ME sick. That's all I have to say about that.

Why do those idiots outside the city chose NOT to have a fire service? Why is the city department taking the heat?
They were there protecting the house next door which had contracted their service. They had a duty to act and did it.
How much man power and resources were committed to other areas of the fire? How many resources were left to protect the city?
A lot of assumptions being made on here with limited information.
For the Chief who said he would fire his guys, wow just wow.

Fire Apparatus & equipment cost money to purchase. Someone has to provide the necessary funding. Concerned, sensible, prudent individuals are willing to contribute toward this goal. Selfish, stingy tightwads sponge off of other people. Cronic gamblers believe they will always be lucky. Well, luck doesn't always go our way and it is reprehensible to expect others to pay our debts. Who would build or purchase a $200,000+ house and not insure it? We expect too much from the world. Pray that God will save you, but get off the tracks when you hear the whistle. Should I risk my life, the lives of my unpaid firemen, and a firetruck paid for & insured with other people's money for someone too stingy to attend our dept spaghetti supper, buy our fund-raising raffle ticket, or pay a subscription fee? I'll have to think hard about that one.

This appears to be a city department willing to cover a rural area. The rural area needs to step up to the plate and form a department. As far as the department standing by, too bad. Those living in the rural area were able to buy into the protection and those that did have coverage and those that don't made that choice. It was the only way to offset the cost to the city taxpayers. If they just put out all fires, who would pay?

http://www.firehouse.com/stateprovince/tennessee/tenn-chief-attacked-over-house-allowed-burn

[Bluerthanblue]

65. thanks, and thank goodness this person is in the vast minority-

he doesn't represent the mind of the mainstream firefighters.

If this person has to think hard about risking their life for someone he doesn't respect, he's not really cut out for the job. It isn't about the victim, it is a calling to do what needs to be done, regardless of who is in need, or why.

:hi:

[Hannah Bell]

72. that isn't just one person: those quotes are from multiple people on the firefighters' forum.

[Swede]

73. Uhm,each paragraph are different entries,there were lots of others.

I just picked a few from the firefighter site.

[Bluerthanblue]

79. I realize that now, but the voices you picked were in the vast

minority-

And the responses from those against the choice not to act as they are trained to act really speak to the voices of firefighters everywhere imo.

The IAFF came out vocally against this issue- and there are people who claim to be firefighters who defend the inaction, it's pretty clear that they don't represent the perspective of those who are actually on the ground doing the work.

here's a link to the IAFF's statement-

http://www.firerescue1.com/fire-department-management/articles/889128-IAFF-criticizes-Tenn-fire-department-for-letting-house-burn/

[Swede]

83. LOL. Did you read the responses,every one disagreed with Schaitberger.

Every single one.

[Bluerthanblue]

93. yes I did actually, and if you look at the pitiful number of them, you'll

see that they are typical of online keyboard warriors.

You might head down to your own local FD and ask those who serve you what they think of this incident.

If you hear many voices like those, I'd be very surprised, and if I were you, concerned.

peace

[EFerrari]

12. People are conflating responding to this fire with

funding the fire department as if they are inseparable.

And maybe I'm wrong but can't help thinking that enforcing the libertarian punishment of letting the house burn because the man didn't pay is simply to become what you are resisting.

[Pithlet]

14. It's not about enforcing the libertarian punishment

it's about not bankrupting the city because the county chose that libertarian way of doing things.

[EFerrari]

16. I don't think you've understood my post and will leave it at that. n/t

[Pithlet]

45. I don't think you, and others who take your position

truly understand why we take the position we do. Maybe we should leave it at that.

[EFerrari]

59. As my post demonstrates, I do "truly understand" and I also disagree. n/t

[SidDithers]

27. Agreed...

they're completely separate issues. Put out the fucking fire and let the administrators figure out how to pay for the service.

And fix the damn system that created this situation in the first place.

Sid

[EFerrari]

34. Oh dear, we agreed on something. Now one of us has to die.

lol

:)

[SidDithers]

39. Must be opposite day at DU...

:hi:

Sid

[Hannah Bell]

42. The issue has been ongoing for decades, & the city has been putting out fires for free for decades.

This *is* the "solution" the county came up with after two years of negotiation over the issue.

[EFerrari]

58. Right. And obviously, it's not working. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

75. no, it's not, very predictably. what do you propose? yes, the county "should" tax itself

to cover all its residents.

who's going to make them?

yes, the fire department "shouldn't" let houses burn down.

who's going to pay for the 75% of calls that come from the county?

[EFerrari]

113. I've already posted my proposal at least twice, Hannah

and now am heading into the spam zone.

The city needs to go to court if this county refuses to pay for their service one way or another. There are a lot of ways to get these people off their ass and the city manager needs to get with it and make it happen. This has been going on so long, I have to wonder if someone in the city offices is getting paid off not to pursue it or what.

[KittyWampus]

86. I can't believe we have this many people unable to accept realities other than their own.

Some people CHOOSE to live in hell.

[fishwax]

99. it's neither

The people defending the firemen (on this site, at least) are certainly not libertarian cranks. Nor are they just knee-jerk defending firemen.

We have three elements in play here: first, a system that funds essential services through taxes levied for the protection of the common good--that would be the fire department of South Fulton, Kentucky. Second, a system that believes avoiding taxes is more important than protecting the common good, so has refused to fund a fire department--that would be Obion County, Tennessee. Third, the individual, a member of the latter community who found himself in need of help from the former.

It's worth noting that the very existence of the socially-responsible, publicly-funded system would be threatened were they to regularly expend resources to answer calls in another state for people who are outside their tax base and refuse to contribute (sometimes even after services have been rendered) to the maintenance of the service.

Those on this site who are defending the fire department are doing so because they consider it important to defend the system that funds essential services through taxes levied for the common good. That's a perfectly natural impulse for a progressive to have.

Those posters attacking the fire department are not generally (on this site, at least) opposed to the government providing essential services, either. They're just horrified that this guy has lost his house and apparently his animals. That's also a perfectly natural impulse for a progressive to have.

It's not the case that (all of the) people defending the fire department are heartless, soulless bastards who either embrace the libertarian experiment or who are happy to see the individual "punished" in some way for the libertarian sins of the county. At the same time, it's not the case that (all of the) people attacking the fire department are interested in attacking public services or public servants, or are supportive of those who refuse to contribute to the public good even while expecting someone else to provide them in an emergency. I think the discussions on this issue would benefit greatly if everyone could see those things, and tone down the rhetoric accordingly.

Not that this is likely to happen. And not that I mean to imply that your post was an example of the overheated rhetoric--so perhaps in that sense this post rambled a bit off topic--it's just something I've seen repeatedly for the last 24 hours.

[fasttense]

8. TN has more homes and businesses burn to the ground than anywhere I've lived.

Every other day, there is news of another house or restaurant burning down. We pass the burnt out shells on the road regularly.

It's very sad to see that the Fire Department is contributing to it.

[hayu_lol]

17. Defense Lawyer...you are aware that...

the S. Fulton fire department was called out for the neighbor to the burning house. When the fire crossed the property line and threatened, the fire department put out the fire.

One engine and one tanker. What is their liability if they were to fight the non-scriber housefire and have the subscriber's house burn down?

Neither of us know what the fire departments orders were on this call. The City of Fulton has tried to service all fires without regard to subscriber status. As stated many times in many threads, this particular family had another fire at another location 3 years ago when they were non-members. The FD arrived and fought the fire. A bill, amount approved by the commissioners of Obion County, was sent and never has been paid. I did read in one thread that there was a list of subscribers at the S.Fulton/911 location and I assume that the fire location was checked for subscriber status.

In the furnished documents, the Commissioners clearly state that under Tennessee Law, these bills cannot be collected if the people choose not to pay.

Who then, besides the residents and businesses in Fulton, will help support this volunteer FD?

[EFerrari]

21. Yes, we do know what the orders were.

"Jeff Vowell, city manager of South Fulton, told the Union City Daily Messenger that the city fire department let Gene Cranick's doublewide trailer home burn last week because he didn't pay the subscription common in many rural areas."


http://www.myeyewitnessnews.com/news/local/story/Firefighters-Let-Home-Burn-Owner-Didnt-Pay-Fire/w9Bg1HxTrkmRg2pxSyw9Ag.cspx?rss=59

[hayu_lol]

38. EFerrari, thanks for that link...

Obion County has the poorest fire service in Tennessee. Rural areas are told to subscribe or face potential loss. Some of the other counties spend a massive amount in comparison to Obion. The varying amounts and kinds of FDs are covered in the linked documentation.

About 50% of the homes in this rural area are covered by subscription.

Maybe the commissioners will now be forced to take some action by either fees or taxes.

[raccoon]

50. Maybe arson is contributing to it. nt

[ProdigalJunkMail]

10. 8 of top 10 threads in GD now about this shit...

FFS...

[EFerrari]

15. I think it resonates with people because like it or not

this privatized cr@p is what all of us are dealing with in one way or another. Our schools, our health care (or lack of health care), our government outsourcing everything they can, our financial institutions. So, the discussion isn't really only about this one fire.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

30. I know...but the resonance is deafening...

there are rather important elections coming up and I would rather see more focus on that. I know this can be tied to that in a roundabout way...I just find it disheartening to see this level of argument...

sP

[EFerrari]

33. DU can rarely be faulted for indifference, that's for sure.

:hi:

[ProdigalJunkMail]

35. lord knows i have gotten into my pissing matches here

and probably over stuff a lot more trivial than this.

thanks for the smile...it is a good day for one and right back at ya! :fistbump:

sP

[myrna minx]

36. Yeah - we're definitely not *Meh Underground*

or *Shrugs Underground*

:D

[ProdigalJunkMail]

41. nice...

:-)

sP

[EFerrari]

60. LOL!

[Bluerthanblue]

98. I think it's even more about our responsibilities to one another,

especially with all the tea-party/conservative "me" "my country" "I want" "keep more of MY money" shit that is being thrown at us by the media and the talking heads 24/7. There is an arrogance and selfishness boiling up around us which is disgusting imo.

I think you're right though, it is about much more than a fire in Tenn.

:hi:

[Amaril]

68. +1,000,000,000

FFS is right.

[qb]

13. I am truly thankful that my city has a socialist fire department.

and police department.
and schools.
and parks.
and public works.
.
.
.

[hayu_lol]

29. Yeah qb, I agree...

I live in an isolated city of about 19,000 with surrounding suburbs contributing(county)another 25,000. Looked at my city taxes for a fulltime professional fire department with multiple stations with complete equipment and staff...about $125/year. Our city, county and federal(national forests)fire departments service each territory but combine when something goes really wrong. We also have federal fire service at the local combination air base/airport.

City schools are 1st class, county, not as good. Matter of the amount of taxes paid.

[MadHound]

19. Then that's on the idiots of S. Fulton, they set up a contract without means for a legal recourse

It is pretty standard legal boilerplate to have a legal recourse for getting fees out of people. That they didn't include this boileplate only goes to show how foolish they were.

[Hannah Bell]

28. The county set up the system.

http://www.nwtntoday.com/news.php?viewStory=25587

The city has never had a "contract" with the county to provide its fire protection.

The city provided fire protection as a courtesy, until it got too expensive.

Currently the city has contracts with some individuals in the county who have voluntarily subscribed.

[MadHound]

37. Then this is where the problem lies

Handshake agreements, or simple common courtesy can all too easily go to the wayside, winding up with shit like this. Perhaps this incident will prompt those on all sides to put things in writing.

Still and all though, the fire department did the absolute wrong thing in this case. You are not a firefighter if you simply watch and let somebody's house burn to the ground. You are nothing more than an extortionist, letting fire become your muscle.

[COLGATE4]

49. That's your opinion but it doesn't fit the facts.

[MadHound]

74. That's your opinion,

Reality is a different matter entirely.

[hayu_lol]

57. MadHound...Fulton is in Kentucky...under Tennessee Law...

there is no way to take funds from Tennessee for the fire department in Kentucky. If not subscribed for...these Tennessee fires are paid for by the city of Fulton, KY. Only the Commissioners and residents of Obion County can establish fees and/or a tax base.

Worth reading the documentation if you haven't done so as yet.

Even if these were poor people which they are not, this $75/year fee only comes to $1.44/week.

[MadHound]

71. You can't do intra state contracts for emergency services?

Wow, better inform St. Louis/East St. Louis about that. Also, Kansas City Mo and KC KS as well.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

90. How do you enforce a contract that never existed?

There is no contract with the county because they washed their hands of the matter and told the homeowners to contact the city.

The city has no contract with the non-subscribers so how can they enforce any contract?

It seems to me the county should reach out to the city and set up a contract AND collection system. I get the feeling that would be to socialist for the good ole boys in the county seat. They've already said they don't want to be in the fire protection business.

[mmonk]

20. We know. We're just human.

[KamaAina]

24. South Fulton is in TN

it's right across the state line -- in fact, across State Line Road -- from Fulton, KY.

[Hannah Bell]

32. yes, this is a point of some confusion. fulton ky & s. fulton, tn are twin cities.

fulton has a mutual aid pact with south fulton & goes out on its rural calls if asked to:

In the early 1990’s the City of Fulton Fire Department had to limit its rural areas response to mutual aid requests from other departments. It currently has an automatic mutual aid agreement with the fire department in South Fulton, Tennessee.

http://www.fulton-ky.com/fire.html

[slackmaster]

25. Does Tennessee state law allow insurance companies to refuse to sell fire policies to a locale?

Including policies to cover government-owned property?

If I ran an insurance company, I'd see that policy as about as fucked up as a football bat, and I'd refuse to write any policies in the county if I could.

That would "motivate" the county to change its ways.

[Hannah Bell]

43. apparently it does, as the homeowner says his policy will build him a new house.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

92. I wondered about that when I saw the KO interview.

He seemed to think his insurance would pay up - although he seemed to hint he was under-insured.

I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop if the insurance denies the claim for failure to maintain coverage. I find it hard to imagine an insurance company missing THAT trick.

[Mimosa]

101. Me, too. n/t

[Bonhomme Richard]

26. My two cents. This is a result of cowardice from the county.....

leaders in regards to taxation. My guess is that they run on a "no tax increases" platform and this Darwinism is a result of their failure to lead. I am willing to bet there is a lot of self sufficiency talk and more than likely the guy whose house burnt down is one of them but of that I do not have any facts.
My bottom line is that this is exactly why we have government and taxes to take care of all in times of need. If there is a fire the towns still need to send their trucks whether the guy paid or not just to protect the neighbor who did pay. They didn't save a dime.
Reminds me of a local guy here in CT who refused to pay for fire insurance on his house. He could afford it but was making a choice. Lo and behold the guys house catches fire and burns down. The fire company couldn't save it. Anyway, next thing I know his friends are having a fundraiser to help out the guy. I wasn't interested in giving the guy a dime.

[joeybee12]

51. No one is arguing what the rules are for this PHUCKED SYSTEM...just

that it is PHUCKED UP.

[NYC Liberal]

53. So as a HUMAN BEING, you would stand and watch

someone else's house burn to the ground?

If you were a doctor and someone needed medical help, you would refuse because...why should you work for free?

[hayu_lol]

76. Good intentions will not put fuel in that pumper's tanks...

neither will it fill the accompanying tankers fuel or water tanks. Good intentions will not buy a hose, will not buy a $250,000 pumper, or provide training for volunteer firemen. It will not contribute one iota of help to pay the expenses of a fireman who could be injured on the job or killed.

These subscription fees take the place of taxes which these rural residents do not pay.

Everyone is sorry the guy lost his house(trailer). For $1.44 a week, he could have had the assistance he needed. That $1.44/week would put some fuel in the tanks or buy a tire.

[Bluerthanblue]

91. the problem is, the FD had the hoses, the water, the manpower, and

the opportunity to help, and they made a choice to stand by and do NOTHING.

That goes against everything they stand for- and goes against what binds us together as a society. If you check out the story, I believe the person who lived next door, the one who HAD paid the fee, asked the FD to help the neighbor, and even said that they'd pay any extra fees- It's all too easy to distance ourselves from this person who didn't pay and who lost everything. Maybe some people have to hate and vilify him, because it's too scary to think that we live in a society where people will put the dollar ahead of simple, basic human compassion.
Firefighters TRAIN to protect and serve the public, Volunteer, and "Professional" alike- They don't take into account who the victims might be, - their 'calling' is to FIGHT FIRES- and to safeguard lives and property, not to pick and choose who is deserving of their training and effort.
This dept. belongs to a "Mutual Aid" compact from what their site says, and that relationship requires that they respond to other towns/cities who don't financially support them. What if one town has lots of aid calls and another doesn't?

The argument that is bantered around saying that if people were helped even if they didn't pay the fee then what's to stop everyone from paying, is a hypothetical one. The reality was, that they had the resources, manpower, and opportunity to DO the right thing, and they didn't.

I can't defend that- no one honestly can.

:hi:

[Mimosa]

102. "These subscription fees take the place of taxes which these rural residents do not pay."

Exactly. No taxes, no fees, no services.

[Skidmore]

104. What if there had been someone trapped in that house and

the firefighters were needed to make a rescue?

How would billing the guy later not put gas in the tanks of those pumpers? They apparently had enough to get there to watch the house burn down.

[NYC Liberal]

112. So, you would refuse to help then? Nt

[speppin]

55. The issue is that fire should not be a fee for service but part of the

county tax burden for all. it is a public safety issue.

[hayu_lol]

84. speppin, Yeah, it should be. The documentation linked to...

at the top showed the commissioners split between placing a fee on the light bills or providing some sort of subscription service. They chose the subscription service to avoid raising anything.

This is an unusual county. Five FDs provide most of the county's fire service. Three of them are set up like this one with subscription service. Want fire service? Subscribe or get no service. The other two are city FDs which are tax supported but who do not go out into the rural areas around them. Those rural areas do not get any fire service at all.

S. Fulton(apologies to all...I read that they were in KY)has carried their rural area for years without getting their expenses for doing so paid for. The city residents taxed themselves to provide fire service...they shouldn't have to pay the expenses of people who will not pull their share of the load. We all know what things cost today compared to what they cost just a few years ago.

[Bluerthanblue]

96. do you support public education?

I do-

Many people are paying to support loads that they haven't participated in creating.

Life isn't fair, and many people contribute far more than "their share" towards the betterment of all. That's all part of living in a society- of being part of a community.

Money shouldn't be the deciding factor when it comes to life and death, and this fire could very easily have cost someone their life.

Fire/Police/Emergency Medical are essential services.

[Mimosa]

103. BUT the county residents voted 19-1 against that. n/t

[AlabamaLibrul]

88. All in unison now: "Don't get sick! If you do get sick, die quickly!"

:eyes:

[mkultra]

95. and if insurance is only $75 a year and you can easily pay for it.

Then do it.

[BzaDem]

105. One should not need to "decide the issue." Anyone who supports the fire department's actions here

needs to re-examine their own political ideology ASAP.

I can't believe this is even a debate. Emergency rooms treat people who have no hope of paying. Should we tell ER victims to stuff it as well?

The fire department should have put out the fire and billed the homeowner thousands of dollars (or whatever it cost them to put out the fire and run the department). If they didn't pay but could afford it, the fire department can sue them. If the homeowner goes bankrupt, then maybe the fire department won't collect on everything. But that is EXACTLY what happens when hospitals help ER victims who refuse to pay. They help first and ask questions later.

[depakid]

111. +1

[AngryOldDem]

109. "Free rider"?

Christ in a sidecar.

If this is where we're headed, I want off the train now.

[Hannah Bell]

116. you think those with the means to fund public services should be given a pass?

and allowed to bankrupt them?

you think a small town should pay for the fire protection of a larger, richer county?

i want off your train.

[depakid]

118. Amazing, isn't it?

It's not just the right wing that's gone off the rail in this situation.

[TexasObserver]

114. I call bullshit.

"There are no legal means to recover this money in Tennessee if the subscribers fail to pay" is what you say.

Please cite the statute that you think prevents a provider of services to sue for their services.

You do realize, don't you, that the fire department often runs the ambulance service, and routinely charges for such? And you do realize, don't you, that cities routinely sue for services they provide that are unpaid?

This storyline that they have no legal recourse sounds like a fabricated talking point. If you can substantiate it with a citation to a controlling statute, I'll read it and tell you if it says what you think it does.

[depakid]

117. Hell, they can probably just slap a mechanic's lien on the property

[TexasObserver]

122. Exactly. The homeowner asked for the services. File a lien.

Sue to enforce it. Serve the first lien holder, if there is one.

It'll get paid.

Anyone who has a home can have that home title encumbered with a lien, and they can pay now, or later, but they're going to pay.

What they need is a city attorney who kicks ass and takes names.

[hayu_lol]

125. TexasObserver, the statement that money owed for fire...

service by non-subscribers could not be collected in Obion County Tennessee was made in the first link offered in the original post. Who made that statement? The head commissioner of the county commissions of Obion County. If he doesn't know, who would?

The collection of such bills, he said, are unenforceable.

[TexasObserver]

127. Then he doesn't know what he's talking about.

The head commissioner of a county with 32,000 people is not the guy who would know.

The county attorney is. Or the city attorney. It's the city which has the claim to assert, so the city attorney would be the person to ask, not some county commissioner.

He may have meant that half the people billed didn't pay them billed amount. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about making them pay by liening their property and suing them.

[hayu_lol]

128. LOL TexasObserver...

the head commissioner pays the salary of the county attorney who was present when the head commissioner made that statement and made no comment for or against the statement.

[TexasObserver]

132. The head commissioner has nothing to do with this matter.

The head commissioner has no role in the business of the city. The city is who operates the fire department. The city is the entity which can make demand for payment, not the county.

As I said, he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's a county official, and if he thinks the city can't collect, he's an idiot.

The city can pursue payment and should. If they don't, that's their problem. The county has absolutely no role in the collection of the costs for the fire department in the city. The cause of action belongs to the city, and that is who must take action to collect it.

[NYC_SKP]

121. Comparisons of this situation to Emergency Rooms are filled with Fail.

This was about property protection (or denial of it).

This was not about personal health or safety.

Dude's car, dude's house, dude's collection of 45rpm records, all the same.

Sadly, however, pets were involved (but the law sees these, too, as mere property).

Nonetheless, comparisons to Emergency Room treatment fail at the outset.

Good day.

:P

[TwilightGardener]

123. Your post is FAIL. Fire is not always controllable, and always a public safety threat.

And when firefighters refuse to respond to a scene because they spend time determining who paid what, someone might be in that house that no one knows about.

[hayu_lol]

129. Twilight, the fire department was there for the next door neighbor...

who WAS a subscriber. When the fire crossed the property line, the fire crew put out the fire saving THEIR subscriber.

As for allowing the pets to burn, have seen several posts today that said that the owner did not rescue his pets because guns and ammo were in the trailer and might go off. Hmmm, if true, he didn't mind risking the crews lifes now did he. I have not verified that the posts I saw here on DU were accurate. The number of pets is also up for grabs: one post elsewhere says 3 cats and 1 dog. Another says 2 dogs 1 cat...and so it goes. Journalists suck most of the time when they don't get the facts.

edited to change one tense.

[NYC_SKP]

134. Nah, they were on top of preventing it from spreading and there was no threat to human life.

Sorry to have to disagree.

In some different situation in which they don't know if the structure is occupied or not, we have an entirely different scenario.

But this case does not seem to fit that description.

:hi:

[cynatnite]

130. It's a fucking protection racket...

They're no better than the mob that people are forced to pay protection money to.

Keep defending this. Glenn Beck would be proud. :puke:

[hayu_lol]

131. cynatnite, The mob? Surely you jest.

Fulton KY is a city who taxed itself to provide fire and emergency service. South Fulton TN is a small city which taxed itself to provide fire and emergency service to the town of S Fulton. As a courtesy, they have handled fires in the rural area outside the city limits for years without compensation.

The subscriber service is up to each individual who can choose to pay or not pay. To have service or NOT have service.

Town of Union City up the road 11 miles or so has a fully tax-funded fire department. They DO NOT FIGHT FIRES IN THE RURAL AREA beyond the city limits.

Obion County has no firefighting crew or equipment. They have low taxes instead. They rely on the people of S Fulton who taxed themselves to provide fire service for their city. The Obion County commissioners made the choice between raising a fee on electric bills for fire service or to go the taxless choice: fire subscription service offered by S Fulton FD.

Glen Beck would be proud of you.