By KEVIN NEVERS

It became apparent as early as July that the Chesterton Fire Department was on pace in 2006 to break its record for annual calls. The only real question: by how much would the CFD break it?

The answer, as the Town Council learned at its meeting Monday night: by a lot.

Last year the CFD responded to 1,059 calls, shattering its old record of 878 set in 2005, an increase of slightly more than 20 percent. (In 2004 the CFD responded to 763 calls, in 2003 to 769).

Of those 1,059 calls, nine were structure fires, compared to 10 in 2006. Those structure fires caused a total of $909,300, compared to $833,970 in 2005.

Spikes in the frequency of several categories of call account for much of the overall increase. EMS assists—always and easily the most common call, with an average of more than one and a half a day—rose from 413 in 2005 to a whopping 605, an increase of better than 46 percent. Between 2005 and 2006, in contrast, the number of EMS assists rose by only 11 percent, from 373 to 413.

Mutual aid calls also rose, from 39 in 2005 to 73 in 2006, in increase of 87 percent. In contrast the CFD received mutual aid on only 20 occasions.

Calls to Westchester Township rose as well, from 58 in 2005 to 83 in 2006, an increase of 43 percent.

Calls to I-94 dropped, on the other hand, from 46 in 2005 to 31, a decrease of 32 percent.

Other categories of call in 2006:

•109 vehicle accidents (118 in 2005).

•70 automatic alarms (53 in 2005).

•25 carbon monoxide alarms (31 in 2005).

•25 hazardous material spills or natural gas leaks (15 in 2005).

•20 open burning complaints (21 in 2005).

•19 vehicle fires (17 in 2005).

•16 reports of electrical lines down (11 in 2005).

•30 good intent or police assists (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•12 smoke investigations (24 in 2005).

•Nine false alarms (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•Nine brush fires (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•Six odor investigations (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•Eight smoke scares (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•Five dumpster fires (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•Three compost fires (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•Two rubbish fires (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

•One chimney fire (three in n2005).

•One lawnmower fire (a category not specifically reported in 2005).

In 2006 the average reponse time until the first unit was on scene was 3.08 minutes compared to 3.01 minutes in 2005.

In 2006 CFD vehicles were driven and pumped a total of 43,576 miles in 2006 and consumed 2,786 gallons of gasoline and 2,537 gallons of diesel fuel, compared to 52,731 miles, 2980.4 gallons of gasoline, and 2,687 gallons of diesel fuel in 2005. So while the number of calls rose a great deal, the CFD actually put 17 percent fewer miles on its vehicles and used 6.5 percent fewer gallons of gas and 5.5 fewer gallons of diesel.

In 2006 CFD firefighters devoted 3,193 man-hours to emergency calls (3,030 in 2005); 3,755.5 man-hours to in-house training (2,878.5 in 2005); 1,638 to outside training (1,098 in 2005), and 242.4 man-hours to fire prevention programs (240.2 in 2005).

The Cost of Serving

Non-residents

For Member Mike Bannon, R-5th, Fire Chief Warren “Skip” Highwood‚s report revealed at least one thing: the CFD is spending quite a bit of time outside the corporate limits, not just in unincorporated Westchester Township—which does compensate the town for fire protection service—but also for instance on I-94, in both Westchester and Pine townships.”

“Chesterton taxpayers,” as Bannon put it, “are subsidizing those that don’t pay the freight.”

Is there any way, Bannon wondered to charge a fee to insurance companies? Is there any way to “recoup” the cost of the EMS assists, which account for something like 60 percent of the CFD total calls?

Bannon may have been thinking out loud but he clearly put out Highwood. “We’re here to assist the public,” Highwood noted.

“We give a lot more mutual aid than we get,” Bannon replied. “I just want to take care of our taxpayers first.”

A New Aerial

The cost of calls outside corporate limits is not solely an academic issue, at least not for Bannon, as Highwood has asked the council to approve the purchase of a new aerial, an expensive piece of equipment. To that end Highwood requested members on Monday to authorize him to apply for a U.S. Department of Homeland Security grant which would pay part of the cost.

Bannon has in principle questioned the need for a new aerial and has instructed Highwood to obtain quotes on the cost of re-conditioning the current one. Highwood said on Monday that two vendors have inspected it and are preparing their estimates now, but that a re-condition would probably cost a minium of $300,000.

What about the purchase of a secondhand aerial? Bannon pressed.

A secondhand aerial, Highwood replied, is one which another department doesn’t want any longer, likely for good reason.

In the end, quibbles aside, Bannon joined his colleagues in voting 5-0 to authorize Highwood to apply for the federal grant.

Posted 2/27/2007