So what? You're telling me that there's NO fat in the budget of the fire department? You're telling me that it is the ONE organization that cannot shave some inefficiencies off? You're telling me that it is currently at OPTIMUM staffing and that the only thing that can be improved adding staff?

Now I don't advocate cutting firefighters, really that was just a fiscal conservative spouting off about government agencies being bloated and inefficient as a rule. The fire department, as a government agency, isn't immune to that rule. Here's the reality, our economy is shot and local tax rolls have shrunk. Therefore, government has to cut something. If firefighters don't want to have staff cut, then something else has to give. Everyone has to make concessions to fit within the new reality.

So you're telling me that Firefighters and other public safety people can't be cut… well then, that's ok, give an alternative. Something's got to give. Milwaukee firefighters (through Milwaukee Co. Paramedics) already have a hold of EMS. I'm not sure about Grand Rapids, but this isn't about them or their departments. This is my statement that there has to be a change to make the fire departments more efficient. You're the experts, find the solution and bring it to the table.

As a government agency, you're responsible to the taxpayers, be responsible to them. It's not about you. Like every level of government, it's about your service. The politicians that you vilify are elected and will be voted out if they can't find the answer. Firefighters aren't directly responsible to the taxpayers through elections, but you are directly responsible to them inasmuch as you have a job working with the equipment, living in the stations, and being paid by the money that they own. “Jamming Meetings” to demand that no jobs are cut is dramatic… but it doesn't fix the underlying problem.

The money's not there, something's got to give. So, do you have another answer?