When two individuals get married, they probably have as much affection, respect and admiration for each as they possibly can muster. This time of unqualified good will traditionally is referred to as the “honeymoon period,” and continues for varying lengths of time.

Just how long should a honeymoon last? In some cases it doesn't last for very long, but in most cases it continues until the point in time when the two parties engaged in the matrimonial commitment begin to see things they dislike about each other.

Nowhere does the honeymoon scenario play out in a more dramatic way than within the annual budget battle experienced by most fire departments. There is a whole bunch of things that many fire departments wish they had and actually feel they deserve to have them, but they don't. You might have been hired to get them. What you discover at some point after your hiring is that these needed items never been able to muster an adequate amount of public support, which is why your department lacks them.

This is where the honeymoon ends. You quickly discover fact that the budget process usually isn't simply a case of sitting down and making a list of those things you want. It also includes delivering them. This is a part of the budgeting process to which many chiefs completely fail to pay attention: the long and somewhat arduous task of understanding why you need something in the first place. This understanding is the key to justifying the needed items and negotiating for their approval. And if you can't justify it and you can't negotiate for it, then there is a high degree of probability that the only way you're going to get those items is if there is an excess of funds or — far less likely — if somebody is just feeling downright benevolent towards the fire department.

Unfortunately the fire service has gotten a bad rap in the budget battle because we tend to justify our requests by playing up the consequences that might occur at the time of a fire. City managers and mayors often characterized this as “the burning baby speech,” so called because it is designed to elicit an emotional response, or to embarrass the other party into making an investment solely to avoid public criticism. It's a fine tactic when it works. But when it doesn't work, the short- and long-term consequences can be devastating.

There's a better way of building the case for a decision that is going to cost the taxpayers hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars. It starts with developing a better understanding of how city managers, mayors and their constituents think. When a community looks at a fire truck, it sees a very, very expensive piece of equipment, and it doesn't understand why, if that piece of equipment worked fine last year, it won't work just as well next year and the year after that. There literally are thousands of fire trucks sitting in fire stations across the country that ought to be replaced, but the justification for doing so has been obscured by the fact that the entire emphasis has been placed on how much it costs to replace the apparatus, instead of on why it is there in the first place.

Building a case, then, means to stop thinking about the obvious and start describing the potential for liability. For example, if a fire truck reaches a certain condition of serviceability it begins to increase the liability to a community. Should a fire truck begin to break down more frequently than it has in the past, the possibility increases that it will need to be taken out of service more often, an undesirable, if not unacceptable, outcome. The justification for replacement then becomes a matter of public policy rather than an emotional reaction. This is a more winnable argument.

Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. When the latter occurs, fire chiefs face a crucial crossroad. If you can't get everything you want, then the name of the game is to try to get as much of something that builds toward the end goal. For example, if you don't have all the money to replace a fire truck in one year, you might want to look at getting an amortization program started. And, if you are able to succeed at that, then the next step could be to look at alternative funding schemes, such as a leasing program. I call this the “what if” syndrome. If you make a decision today, what will its consequences be 10 years from now?

The ability to answer such questions is predicated on having a long range plan in mind as you pursue any acquisition. Nothing beats having a sense of where you are, how you got there and — most importantly — where you're heading, and why.

With more than 40 years in the fire service, Ronny J. Coleman has served as fire chief in Fullerton and San Clemente, Calif., and was the fire marshal of the state of California from 1992 to 1999. He is a certified fire chief and a master instructor in the California Fire Service Training and Education System. A Fellow of the Institution of Fire Engineers, he has an associate's degree in fire science, a bachelor's degree in political science and a master's degree in vocational education.