Elk Creek Fire Pension Discussion, Split from Wetdown Ceremony

Reverend Revelant wrote:

GreatGran wrote: The taxpayers pay for the pensions.

McLaughlin, he is the only new Chief I know who came on board.

Tough apples RR. Not violating TOS. I am a private citizen who has lived and volunteered for decades. Thanks for playing!

But you want Engineer to violate the TOS.

Fire Chief Never Received Lower North Fork Burn Plan
7NEWS Investigating Issues First Responders Faced Beyond The Fire

Bottom line, "If I’d had the unit map that showed me where I was trying to get into, if I’d had the communication plans for it so we would'’ve had a common channel that they could’ve talked to us on, if we had the larger area map that showed us where it was in relation to the neighborhoods, then yes; those pieces would'’ve made that response quite a bit more effective," said McLaughlin.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/fi ... -burn-plan

Read the whole article.

Well, I guess that answers that. thanks for the info.

Quite the contrary RR, that is why I asked if he was representing ECFD. If he is a public figure giving information then a name would be appropriate. If he is a private individual then I wouldn't want him to violate TOS. You made too many assumptions.

I read the whole article. What is your point? Yep the Chief was new and yep he didn't know squat about locations and apparently couldn't rely on any of his own firefighters to tell where to turn. And apparently couldn't ask for directions from anyone including North Fork FD even when he was communicating with others, we heard him and instead wandered up and down Foxton Road ad nauseum and wouldn't let any of his other firefighters in other trucks climb the mountain where they spotted smoke. Yes lots of problems with communication and maps but he had contact with others and could ask for directions. But I forget he is a man and men don't ask for directions. That's a funny in case you don't see the humor. I knew on the map what location they were giving. Apparently his map skills aren't very good. Lat and Long must not mean anything to him either. Basic elementary skills. But hey lets blame the outdated maps. They must not have Lat and Long on them. He was out of his league, he was out of his jurisdiction, he was just plain inept. Sad that he has to be our new Chief. Yeppers, everything is improving.

Reverend Revelant wrote:

GreatGran wrote: The taxpayers pay for the pensions.

McLaughlin, he is the only new Chief I know who came on board.

Tough apples RR. Not violating TOS. I am a private citizen who has lived and volunteered for decades. Thanks for playing!

But you want Engineer to violate the TOS.

Fire Chief Never Received Lower North Fork Burn Plan
7NEWS Investigating Issues First Responders Faced Beyond The Fire

Bottom line, "If I’d had the unit map that showed me where I was trying to get into, if I’d had the communication plans for it so we would'’ve had a common channel that they could’ve talked to us on, if we had the larger area map that showed us where it was in relation to the neighborhoods, then yes; those pieces would'’ve made that response quite a bit more effective," said McLaughlin.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/fi ... -burn-plan

Read the whole article.

Where did I ever say that I knew what the Chiefs thoughts were? I never said that you did so you are the one who is wrong not me. You are a master at deception aren't you? Have a great evening.

Engineer2207 wrote:

GreatGran wrote: Thanks engineer. I don't know where the community tab is. As long as you aren't representing ECFD then I don't need a name. Just wanted to know whether to give your comments any credibility since you act so authoritatively.

Sorry but you are wrong. The chief is responsible for his own jurisdiction. He does not intercede in any others unless he has permission. I'd like to see him pull that stunt in NY City. Probably why the Fire Chief has a boat load of problems. And yes you can't speak to what his thoughts were. You got that right.

And where is the condescencion you speak of? It seems to me that you have done nothing but bait. Have a great evening!

The community tab is at the top of the page. And I'm not worried if you think I'm credible.

I never said that the Chief wasn't responsible for his jurisdiction. There's nothing wrong with being proactive when a fire is threatening said jurisdiction. I seriously doubt that he would do that in NYC. Let's keep it apples-to-apples. You don't know what Chief McLaughlin's thought's were either, so I guess we're both wrong. What are the problems that you speak of? I'm asking again in earnest.

When I say condescending, I say that as I have asked you multiple times to provide factual arguments instead of conjecture, yet you haven't provided any. Calling the PIO's actions despicable without proof is an example of you being condescending. It is also not baiting when all I am asking for is a credible argument.

Final note. In reference to your other post, here is the information that you requested.

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/DO ... 1594523153

You posted that I was right in not knowing what his thoughts were, yet here you are acting like you knew what they were by your continually condescending posts that everyone but you can see. I applaud the Chief for not being cavalier by sending the firefighters into that fire without a proper size-up. As far as your lat/long argument, depending on which maps the Chief had, the coordinates could have been off depending on what datum was being used (WGS 84 vs. NAD). I have not deceived anyone. I have stated facts along with my opinions along with the Rev, yet you can't back up anything that you have posted. I have asked many times, politely for you to provide us with information, but I am done. It is clear to me that you are a bitter ex-jolly volley that is angry that their once beloved department stepped up the "game," and you couldn't hack it. They probably went with the most qualified instead of the most popular and that hurt your feelings. Now, you have to make yourself feel better by trying to belittle those who call you out on your B.S. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but the Rev, SC, and others are right about you. I am through responding to your posts with any kind of intellect, as you only want to hate. I'll just have to call you out from time to time. Peace out.

Engineer is correct.

I was there about 3:00 pm that afternoon. I was at the Reynolds Park parking lot (the first one on Foxton, the lot that is now paved) and I spoke to the Forest Service crew that had set up command at the lot. They told me that they were in the process of determining "a proper size-up" of the situation. It was initially the USFS command.

I went further down Foxton to the Platte, turned around at the Platte, came back up Foxton to just above the hairpin turn (the turn that looks out over the canyon) and there was an Elk Creek crew and truck parked on the SE side of the road, in a wooded dirt road (I don't know where that road went). I spoke to them and received the same answer to my questions. They were in the process of waiting for the USFS to properly "size-up" the situation.

As I headed back up Foxton there were numerous USFS, Elk Creek and SO vehicles headed down toward the Platte. I went back home. I heard all the scanner traffic. They were staging and setting up command posts and coordinating between at least 4 different agencies.

I live right off Foxton. If the winds were blowing in a different direction, that fire would have come up over the ridge and run right up the Foxton meadow within hours. I would have been burned out by evening. I was in a "need to know" mode and I made sure I knew what was going on. I had a digital trunking scanner on and a analog scanner tuned solely on Elk Creek. I heard the traffic.

No one was going to just willy-nilly rush over the ridge with a bunch of shovels and grit and start fighting a fire without the proper amount of information, without the proper amount of crews and without a proper plan of attack.

***

I've interviewed about a dozen people in regards to Elk Creek, for numerous articles I have written about Elk Creek, wild fires and related issues. Here's my opinion. There is a disgruntled group of ex Elk Creek volunteers who are going to let old battles with the department cloud EVERYTHING they think and feel about the current department.

As far as this group is concerned there is NOTHING Elk Creek can do correctly.

I did a 2500 word article on Elk Creek and the 4a mill levy request. I gave people like GreatGran the opportunity to tell me what is wrong with Elk Creek. I was looking for verifiable "dirt" on the department. Heck, I'm a journalist, that's the kind of material I want for a balanced and informative article.

I found nothing. Nothing but a bunch of hurt feelings about what went on in the past between Elk Creek and some volunteers. I found ONE person who agreed to go on the record and attempt to document his perceived problems with Elk Creek.

I spent 3 hours with that person, and he spent 75 percent of my time in the interview telling me about his "battle" with taxes. State taxes, land taxes, you name a tax and he had reams and reams of papers and articles about his problems with taxes.

When it came right down to Elk Creek, all I was hearing was about a department that had issues in the past, a new Chief that had decided to clean up the mess and a group of people who were letting their PERSONAL feelings get in the way of what needed to be done.

I had 3-4 people talk, talk, talk to me on the phone, yet when I went to meet them, they stiffed me, or they wouldn't go on the record with their concerns and complaints.

And it's been 5 months since that article on Elk Creek and 4a was published and I have not had ONE person contact me or my editor to challenge anything that appeared in the article. If someone was lying to me, if there was incorrect information in that article, to this day no one has come forward to correct me.

I'm still (and always) open to hearing from anyone who has problems with Elk Creek, problems with any of our public agencies. If you have something, if you think the public needs to know something, everyone knows where to find me.

But GreatGran, your excessive sniping and griping, and all opinion without backing up your opinion with any documentation, comes across as sour grapes, and nothing more. I gave you the chance to go on the record but you declined.

And that's a standing offer. If anyone reading this ever has something they think that the general public needs to know, then contact me. I get paid for writing and I'm always looking for news that effects this community (this Conifer to Bailey slice of Jeffco and Park County).

All you have to do is provide the proof.

FYI...

Elk Creek Fire Chief Bill McLaughlin and North Fork Fire Chief Curt Rogers told dispatchers within minutes after reaching the March 26 wildfire, 6 miles south of Conifer, that they were already thinking of evacuation.

"We'll be hitting some trigger points pretty soon here," Rogers told a Jefferson County sheriff's dispatcher at 2:38 p.m. that day. "I'm sure we'll be having some evacuations pretty quick."

Two minutes later, at another location, McLaughlin called dispatch.

"I think we're going to need to re-tone (call in reinforcements). We need to start looking at evacuating to Reynolds and potentially further up," McLaughlin said at 2:40 p.m. According to audio recordings of emergency communications released this week, the dispatcher told McLaughlin that North Fork also was talking about evacuating.

But the Colorado State Forest Service, which had crews monitoring the site of a controlled burn the week before, was in command of the fire.

And it was not until the blaze leaped over a drainage area and began racing uphill, toward the Pleasant Park neighborhood, that the local fire districts were able to take control of the fire and immediately order evacuation.

State Forest Service officials have declined to comment, pending the outcome of a review by a panel convened by Gov. John Hickenlooper.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_20393943/e ... north-fork

Colo. Fire Chief Calls for Wildfire Response Overhaul

Elk Creek Fire Chief Bill McLaughlin spoke to the Lower North Fork Wildfire Commission members Wednesday about communication and mobilization problems he witnessed during the Lower North Fork Fire in March. McLaughlin also brought up issues with the High Park Wildfire in June when his firefighters were dispatched fight a small wildfire in Wyoming instead.

"We drove right past the High Park Fire despite the fact that at that time they were dispatching engines from California and Idaho to go to that fire. So, obviously we’ve got issues at how we get resources to major events in this state," said McLaughlin.

...

"When we left our house when it was burning, we didn’t see a lot of fire trucks coming because of the lack of coordination. We’re not blaming the fire department. There’s just a system in place that made it almost impossible for them to work," said Ellis.

http://www.firehouse.com/news/10763890/ ... e-overhaul

Volunteer firemen responding to the first reports of smoke couldn’t talk to the state crew because it used a different radio frequency. One fire chief had to drive along the winding roads in the pine-dotted region to find out what was going on at the controlled burn site, losing precious minutes to act.

...

Bill McLaughlin, chief of the Elk Creek Volunteer Fire Department, couldn’t talk to the forest service that Monday because it was on a different radio frequency.

“We didn’t know in advance which (radio) channel they were on,” McLaughlin said of the state forest service crew.

He wasted precious minutes driving to the controlled burn to find out what happened. The map he was using was 18 years old – new maps are too expensive – and it didn’t show newer homes that likely were in the line of fire.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/04/05/l ... -missteps/

Further reading

http://jeffco.us/sheriff/documents/reco ... claughlin/

And if you have an free afternoon

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CG ... 1622990524

Well thanks for taking what supports your argument. We were there RR. We live there. Better view than you had. And one neighbor took incredible amounts of video while another copied/documented all the scanner. The long and lat were accurate because we, several neighbors took them and called it in. And while ECFD was horsing around LNFF was scrambling up the ridge. They are the best prepared firefighters who know how to work together. IF ECFD would stop all its infighting and treat their ff with respect they wouldn't leave and go to surrounding fire departments. They lose good people. And many people in our area are thinking of doing like some of the Kuehster people did and change FD since we are right on the edge. We love our ridge views and our firefighters when they can work together and be a team. Something still lacking at the moment. We do hope for the best that things will improve in ECFD. Engineer based on his posts, innuendo and downright falsehoods sure doesn't meet the standards that ECFD should be striving for.

As for Davis posts, maybe he removed them/some? IDK I haven't checked. But another neighbor who is a former prosecutor documented all his posts, I will put in a call to her.

Bye Engineer! Have a great life!

Be careful, SC.

I'm sure with your last post, 'Ol GG is going to come back on you with her baseless rhetoric and complaints of her First Amendment Rights being infringed upon.

Wrong again SC. You need to talk to some of the residents off of Kuehster, one of whom you have featured from her Ted Talk and she will tell you the circumstances of their change. She and many others in that area. You need to live in the area to have some idea of what is going on and what the ECFD cluster**** as you call it is all about.

And thank you. As far as I know the issue has been addressed to the ECFD.

Just voicing my opinions on first hand observations as they have been unfolding. You can't get any better than that.

Thanks to all the civilians/neighbors who assisted with information!

ScienceChic wrote:
GreatGran, the claim that some residents of Kuehster Rd "opted out" of ECFPD's district has been brought up before , and shown to be inaccurate. Kuehster Rd is, and has been, in ICFD's district, no one changed districts who were involved in the LNFF.