Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Fire Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Franklin Fire Department seeks new firefighters, district response model, vehicle replacements and training investments

2315061 · February 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Franklin Fire Department presented its FY‑26 budget and 15 program enhancement requests, including funding for three firefighters to trial a district response/captain model, reclassification of firefighters to engineers, a payroll specialist, Lexipol policy software, decontamination washer and vehicle/equipment replacements.

The Franklin Fire Department presented a multi‑part budget request to the Budget Finance Committee that combined personnel, training, facility and vehicle priorities tied to rising call volumes and the city’s geographic growth.

Chief Josh (Franklin Fire Department) and department leaders told the committee the department handled about 11,395 calls last year (a ~1% increase year over year) with an average response time of about 5 minutes, 37 seconds. Training and readiness numbers were emphasized: the department logged roughly 50,550 hours of training and reported 100% participation in state fire commission programs.

The department requested 15 program enhancements and multiple capital/vehicle items. Key personnel and program requests included: - Reclassify three firefighters to engineer to provide consistent apparatus operation and supervision (estimated one‑time personnel cost presented). - Add three firefighters for a one‑year trial to pilot moving shift captains onto district response vehicles; the district captain model is intended to reduce span‑of‑control issues, allow captains to supervise multiple stations, and avoid tying an entire company to a single incident. The department presented this as a one‑year trial with a reported total cost of $454,435 for the pilot year and said if the model is not retained those positions could be absorbed through attrition. - Administrative services captain and a dedicated training/instructor coordinator to address increased training workload and cross‑discipline rescue certifications as the department grew from five to eight stations. - Payroll specialist to handle complex shift/payroll interactions (department requested discussion about potential sharing of payroll duties with central payroll/HR staff). - Part‑time fire inspector to help with plan review and inspections and to reduce overtime for shift personnel covering inspections. - Annual health screening for retirees (offered for five years post‑retirement to maintain compliance with applicable guidance). - Lexipol policy management software for defensible, up‑to‑date standard operating guidelines and mobile access to policies; presenters suggested potential cross‑departmental value and asked to explore cost‑sharing. - Decontamination washer for Station 7 to meet NFPA cleaning standards and reduce hazardous exposure in turnout gear.

Capital and vehicle priorities described included an updated cascade/air fill system (to replace aging equipment that currently fills one bottle at a time), outfitting a mobile drone response vehicle, replacement of older brush units and a proposed air and light response vehicle to allow on‑scene compressor filling during large or prolonged incidents. The department projected additional staffing needs tied to future apparatus (for example, Tower 7 and 12 additional personnel within a five‑year outlook if new apparatus are added).

Presenters emphasized that emergency medical service (EMS) calls comprise about 65% of call volume and discussed options to manage growth in EMS demand, including a potential “fast car” response vehicle for some medical calls and coordination with nearby medical facilities to limit responses to higher‑priority incidents.

Committee members asked operational and cross‑departmental questions (for example, whether traffic or fleet engineering could assist with certain software purchases, whether other agencies use the range, and whether evidence‑tech work could be cross‑trained). Presenters said many items were requests to improve safety, training, and long‑term operational capacity and indicated some items could be shared or cost‑split with other departments.

No formal committee votes on fire enhancement requests were recorded; the items were presented for committee review as part of the annual budget process.