Gloria Ferris

Early endorsements probably don’t mean much of anything any more now that the limits on individual contributions are obscene. One person having the ability to contribute $10,000 to one candidate is outrageous. Unfortunately, I see our government officials being those individuals who can raise the most money and then spend it to reach the most people. We are definitely becoming a state of Haves and Have Nots.

I would like to think that voters are still the most important part of the process, but that seems more and more unlikely when HB3 is on the table and electronic voting is all the rage without the safeguards needed. Funny, how on one hand we were told to embrace electronic voting to ease long lines at the polling places and make it easier for people to vote, but on the other hand, we are now facing increasingly longer lines with the advent of the photo ID phase of our voting lives. Unfortunately, every day I see more and more voters who feel disenfranchised. More and more people tell me that their vote doesn’t count. I have worked for years on voter registration campaigns and when it is all said and done the impact it has is usually nominal. People do not like to say “no” so they will spend the time to fill out the registration card, but when the day arrives to go to the polls other factors are set in motion. The litany of “my one vote won’t count”, ” what’s the point none of the politicians care about me” and “my life won’t change no matter who is in office” begins, and the new voter or the old tired voter decides not to go to the polls and wait in a long line to cast a vote that they feel does not matter anyway.

Until we have true campaign finance reform and integrity restored to our election process, our voter base will continue to erode and we will have less and less people deciding who will govern us. We all need to work as hard as we can to prove to voters that one vote can make a difference and each and every vote is important. Early endorsements have a way of squelching this dialogue and make our task more difficult. So I agree that early endorsements should be discouraged vehemently.

This is my response to what my friend, Jill wrote today on her blog, Writes Like She Talks. In the past, there was no endorsement of a primary candidate. Candidates “slugged it out” on the issues, and the voters of each party decided who should represent them in the general election. But then the expense of campaigning increased, but the dollars available to contribute didn’t increase. Hence, the decade of the early endorsement to try to save contribution dollars for the general election rather than having the party dollars divvied up among candidates of the same party rather than being used to defeat the other party. In an overwhelmingly registered Democrat area like the city of Cleveland, an early endorsement essentially can kill chances for any other candidate in that race receiving significant dollars. On a state level, the idea is basically the same: Tto put the dollars behind one single candidate so that the push can be for a win in November. The problem as I see it with early endorsements is that the political process is not allowed to work. The process should be that the VOTERS decide in the primary who will represent them in the general election.

Please attend an important community meeting:

January 10, 2005
Corpus Christi Church
5204 Northcliff Avenue
7:00 p.m.

As many of you already know, there is talk that the Old Brooklyn Neighborhood will be losing their Hook and Ladder #42 to redeployment or “browning out.” At first I heard that the hook and ladder would be reassigned to an east side station, and then I heard that the equipment would be taken out of service.

The above two scenarios raise a lot of questions, and that is why we all need to attend the meeting at Corpus Christi. We need to ask these questions. And, they need to be answered adequately before any changes are made with regard to the fire safety of our neighborhoods.

As I understand it, Station #42 presently has a ladder company whose responsibilities include–Forcible Entry, Inside Ventilation, Outside Ventilation, Search and Rescue, Ladder Placement and Roof Access, Salvage Operations, Overhaul, Checking for Fire Extension, and Emergency Medical Care. They also have an Attack Engine Company. The responsibilities include finding a water source, attaching a supply hose to the hydrant, pumping water from the hydrant, finding the seat of the fire, providing emergency medical care, and extinguishing the fire.

If the hook and ladder engine at Station #42 is redeployed or browned out, it makes no difference. The following will then be the capabilities of Station #42 on their own: finding a water source, attaching a supply hose to the hydrant, pumping water from the hydrant, finding the seat of the fire, provide Emergency Medical Care, and extinguishing the fire. Search and Rescue will not be part of the drill any more, for the men out of this station.

In other words, in the change, Station #42 is losing the following functions: “Forcible Entry, Inside Ventilation, Outside Ventilation, Search and Rescue, Ladder Placement and Roof Access, Salvage Operations, Overhaul, Checking for Fire Extension.” Seems like quite a lot.

The other arm, the Search and Rescue arm, of the fire-fighting process will need to come from a station farther away. Presumably, the Hook and Ladder Company stationed at Brooklyn Centre will be the backup. Many questions arise with that scenario. Station #20 here in Brooklyn Centre is a “first responder” and is called to respond to the freeway as well as many other life-and-death emergencies. Will this company be able to handle the additional duties added to them? Has the addition of Steelyard Commons been considered in the decision? If Station #20 is on a first responder call, who will respond to a fire in Old Brooklyn?

Fire trucks must arrive in 8 minutes as established by NFPA 1710 which is an Industry Standard issued by the National Fire Protection Association. NFPA is comprised of representatives from industry, manufacturers, fire officials, city planners, and the general public. Will this be possible when the hook and ladder truck may be coming from a station that is even farther away than Station #20?
The next closest station would be #4 at Lorain and 32nd. The other two #23 located at Madison and 98th and #13 located at Pershing and Broadway are certainly farther away than the 8 minutes called for in the national guidelines. Has the closing of the Fulton Road Bridge for two years been taken into consideration?

In 2003, Station 20 in Brooklyn Centre, responded to 1595 Emergency Responses including 124 Structure fires and 646 responses for Medical Assistance. In that same year, Station 42 responded to 1023 Emergency Reponses including 56 Structure fires and 462 responses for Medical assistance. What are the chances that Station #20 responsible for backing up Station #42 will be on another call and that one of the stations farther away will have to respond? Remember we don’t know what the statistics for those stations are.

I don’t know what the chances are, and actually I don’t care when the safety of my family, neighbors, and friends are in question. The only acceptable answer is that we do not rely on chance. We are talking about our safety here, folks. On the surface, when you only look at number of calls, usage, etc., statistically, it may appear reasonable to redeploy a piece of equipment to where it would be more used. On the surface, that would appear to be a reasonable, efficient use of services, but we are not talking numbers here, we are talking about human capital–people. And, since we are talking “people,” we should take into consideration the whole city. Before, we were told that the hook and ladder was needed on the east side because of more fire calls. Now, suddenly, it is no longer needed and it will be “browned out”. Are there suddenly fewer calls on the east side of Cleveland? I suddenly doubt it.

At the vigil held at Fire Station #42 on January 3rd, Councilman Cummins said that safety forces had been cut to the bare bones, and we could not stand for any more cuts. There you have it, folks, this discussion is not about “equipment” but “staffing requirements for the equipment”. I agree with Brian’s assessment. At the meeting this coming Tuesday, January 10th, we need to make sure that we do not allow city officials to make the discussion about statistics, equipment, and tax dollars. We must control the dialogue and the dialogue must be SAFETY and PEOPLE.

I’m going to try to be there early, around 6:30. We have a lot to talk about.