Why not have a provision that would require local governments applying for federal grants to implement staffing levels similar to those outlined in NFPA 1710 and 1720 within a certain period of time after receiving grant monies? Wouldn't that increase the accountability of local governments in providing for the needs of their fire departments?

Those 65% of fire departments that currently don't have enough resources to meet established response-time guidelines would at least have a better chance of holding their local governments more accountable to meet those national guidelines. Besides using the FIRE Grants as leverage, how else could the federal government make local governments more accountable for compliance with nationally established guidelines? What would the local fire departments have to lose in having a stronger degree of accountability for their local governments?

Fire prevention, which I believe is still the most under-appreciated priority for us in the fire service, is where we could have the most significant impact in reducing our fire fatalities and loses. The federal government could have a provision in its fire loss management plan requirement that would encourage local governments applying for grants to adopt a residential fire sprinkler ordinance within a specified time frame following the receipt of grant monies. The ordinance also could require the installation of residential fire sprinkler system in all newly constructed houses.

Why not? What better way for us to take a significant step in reducing our fire fatalities? In the long run residential sprinklers could reduce our fire fatalities by 80% while decreasing our fire losses. Currently only 2% of U.S. homes are protected by residential fire sprinkler systems. If the federal government were to require sprinkler ordinances from those local governments submitting fire loss management plans, our batting average could be much better than the current 2%.

It has taken more than 20 years to install residential fire sprinklers in only 2% of the homes in our country. At this rate, without incentives from the federal government, we could be well into the next millennium before all the homes in our country are protected by residential fire sprinkler systems. I believe that if the local governments were at the receiving end of a federal grant for adopting a residential fire sprinkler ordinance, then they wouldn't capitulate as easily to the pressures from the home builders associations that oppose sprinkler systems.

Again, this isn't a new concept. Most of us know about Scottsdale and its 1984 residential fire sprinkler ordinance. Since then many more jurisdictions have adopted a residential fire sprinkler ordinance, and many more are currently pursuing such adoptions. Doesn't it make good sense for the federal government to encourage local governments to step up to the plate and follow the lead of the few progressive jurisdictions that have recognized the importance of fire sprinklers in reducing their fire fatalities? Of course, fire sprinklers save firefighter lives, too. What better way to use FIRE Grants than to save the lives of not only the citizens, but also our own brother and sisters?