In late October, signs began appearing at Richmond fire stations warning that the stations were closing on November 1. A letter from the IAFF Local 188 was also being distributed (click here).

The activity by Local 188 was in response to an effort by the City to waive a provision in the current Local 188 MOU that set minimum staffing levels for fire stations. According to the MOU, the City may waive the minimum staffing requirement if a fiscal emergency occurs. A declaration of fiscal emergency was adopted by the City Council several months ago.

The City is looking everywhere for opportunities to fill the holes in our unbalanced budget, including staffing of fire stations. In order to even consider staffing changes, the City has to go through tedious and time-consuming negotiations with Local 188. Those negotiations began with a letter proposal addressed to Local 188 dated October 8, 2020.

The City’s proposal included reducing staffing of Station 64 by one company and reducing a second company with rolling “brownouts.” The sole effect would be to save money by reducing overtime; no layoffs or reductions in the number of firefighters was anticipated.

Local 188 responded by claiming the reduction would:

• Cause response time delays.
• Cause delays in responding to fires on the third floor and above?
• Result in an increased number of homes and businesses being completely burned?
• Significantly affect residents and businesses.

I asked Chief Sheppard to respond, and this is what he wrote:

Question: Will there be response time delays, and if so, how much?

Answer: We expect to meet all mandated response times and that there will be no reduction in overall response to fight a fire. The existing deployment system is designed for engine companies to respond to other companies' districts. This happens regularly. If the City's staffing proposal is implemented, this will occur more frequently. The City's proposal empowers the Fire Department to rotate the engine company brown out as necessary, in part, to mitigate this issue.

Furthermore, ambulance services in the City are provided by a private company. The City's proposal has no impact on that company, and ambulance response times should therefore be unchanged. Structure fires already require multiple companies to respond. The first unit to respond to a fire in a district with a browned-out company may be delayed, but all the necessary companies' overall response to fight a fire should be the same.

Question: Will RFD be delayed in responding to fires on the third floor and above?

Answer: There are currently two crews of three members for six personnel staffing Station 64. This station houses two different fire apparatus, one Engine and one Truck, with a designated crew assigned to each apparatus. The City has proposed that one crew staff the station and respond with the appropriate apparatus to each emergency call in a "cross-staffing" model. This staffing model has been in use for more than 15 years at Station 68 (in Richmond) and has been efficiently meeting the community's needs. We are actively working with all bargaining groups to identify cost savings to address what began as a $30 Million deficit in the City of Richmond FY20-21 budget. Approximately $20 Million is an on-going structural deficit. The City of Richmond is interested in hearing alternative proposals from the Union (Richmond Professional Firefighters Association, Local 188) about achieving cost savings. However, we have not received any other alternative ideas from the Union at this time.

Question: Will the cuts "result in an increased number of homes and businesses being completely burned?"

Answer: No

Question: Will residents and businesses be "significantly affected" by the proposed cuts?

Answer: No

The negotiations are still in progress, and no staffing changes have been made.