YORK CITY LIMITS
York resident, historian weighs in on Gamewell value
Tim Stonesifer
A discussion by officials about whether to silence for good York's Gamewell system brought plenty of debate at city hall his week, with officials weighing the value of the aging system.
But that talk brought resident comment, too.
That included a letter from one man who said city officials might want to think twice before taking those little boxes on the street corner offline for good.
Matthew Mummert, a city native and resident, and local communications historian, sent the following email, after getting word that the Gamewell system could be scrapped.
It's shown here unabridged.
"This is being written in response to an article which appeared in the York Daily Record. I am attempting to send this to Mayor Bracey, the five members of York City Council, Acting Fire Chief David Michaels and Deputy Fire Chief Gregory Halpin. As of this writing, this article can be located at:
https://www.ydr.com/local/ci_22673797/york-city-fire-boxes-be-extinguished-63?source=rss
The article as written implies that Acting Fire Chief David Michaels is going to request that you consider changing the City's ordinance which requires that certain high risk properties be connected to the City's municipal fire alarm system. If this is the case, I strongly recommend that you do NOT take this action at the present time. This is a major decision that is going to have ramifications to public safety for many years to come.
The City of York has a very valuable public safety asset in the form of its municipal fire alarm system. Throughout the City of York, there are numerous high risk properties that are connected directly to the fire department through this system. This includes schools, high rise buildings, factories, large apartment buildings, hotels, etc. When a fire alarm activates at any of these buildings that are connected to the municipal system, a fire alarm signal is transmitted DIRECTLY to all of York's fire stations and York County's communications center. There is no system in existence that can match the speed that the municipal system provides. Many of these same buildings are also connected to private fire alarm monitoring services. It is common for York City firefighters to respond to box alarms at buildings and be on the scene inspecting a building for problems BEFORE the alarm is received through York County Control from the alarm company. When an alarm transmits to a private alarm company, the private alarm company must receive the alarm, determine the location and proper emergency communications center to contact; then they must contact the 911 center which has to process the call, again determine location, proper fire departments to dispatch then dispatch them. This adds up to valuable time and valuable seconds lost. In this newspaper article, they quote both former York City Fire Chief Steven Buffington and former Hanover Borough Fire Commissioner James Roth as stating that the municipal fire alarm system was faster. Commissioner Roth is very adamant about this fact. I know that myself as he and I have discussed this issue multiple times in the past.
The article alluded to problems obtaining replacement parts for the fire alarm system and funding repairs to it. Parts for this system are readily available from Gamewell-FCI, Digitize and other manufacturers as well. Every single property in the City of York that is connected to the fire alarm system pays a connection fee of $350 per year. There is a slightly higher fee for a handful of boxes located outside of the City limits which are connected as well. Last I heard, this brings in a revenue stream of $84,000 per year in income to the fire department. There is no reason why this system cannot be maintained with an equipment and supplies budget of a fraction of that $84,000 per year. The work is performed by fire department and public works employees who also perform many other duties to the City's residents. If the fire alarm system is eventually removed from service, that master box connection fee that the fire department receives will become zero. Where is this cash-strapped city going to make up a loss of an $84,000 revenue stream?
The article mentions that all of the existing fire alarm boxes would eventually be removed. There is a problem here. Most of these boxes are located on private property mounted on privately owned buildings. Some of them are inside of buildings and some of them are even plastered into walls. The York County Judicial Center has a city fire alarm box on the back of the building which is flush mount into the brick wall. If I owned a building with a fire alarm box and city workers showed up on my property to remove a fire alarm box that I purchased and left the slightest mess behind, I would file a lawsuit against the City. As a taxpayer, I have serious liability concerns over this.
Chief Michaels, who is a very sincere man that I personally respect, mentions that the City would not leave anyone without working fire alarm protection. I believe the City underestimates the difficulty in removing all of the City's fire alarm boxes. The City has worked for years to convert most of its master fire alarm boxes from shunt type boxes (an obsolete type of connection) to more modern local energy boxes. Most places in the City have been upgraded but to this day there are some remaining shunt type systems in service. Now all of the places that have local energy type auxiliary systems will have to modify their fire alarm panels because the panels will show a constant trouble signal if the city boxes are just removed. Any building system that does not have an alarm company monitoring their system will need to get one. This includes York City Schools (funded by York City taxpayers). Even places that have alarm monitoring services will have issues. Some places might need to install second telephone lines or cellular connections for backup. Right now, the municipal box is the primary and the alarm company is the backup.
The article mentions cities that have removed their fire alarm systems specifically Philadelphia and Harrisburg. Philadelphia removed their system about 20 years ago. They made a mistake that is impossible to undo now. That's all I can say. Harrisburg is an interesting case. Harrisburg had a system of street corner fire alarm boxes but had very few properties connected to their system. The main ones were the Capital Complex and the hospitals and those places all have operators on duty in them at all times anyway. When they made the decision to remove their street corner fire alarm boxes about 20 years ago, the few master box connections were judged not enough to keep the whole system in place. When they shut it down, they never removed all of the municipal wiring. Because of this, the taxpayers of Harrisburg, which is even more cash strapped then York, still pay landing fees to the electric utility there for the fire alarm system that is no longer used. Now for every example of someone that made a particular move, there's always someone that did something different. The article mentions New York City. NYC still has a lot of operating fire alarm boxes. They never got rid of them. Off the top of my head I can name New York City, Boston, Buffalo, Chicago and San Francisco as major US cities that use municipal fire alarm systems. Some of these places no longer have street corner pull boxes but they do have major buildings connected to their municipal systems for the safety of their citizens.
In York, when buildings are renovated that meet certain criteria, they must be connected to the fire alarm system if they are not already connected. The current practice requires that the property owner purchase a new Gamewell M34-110 fire alarm box with a blank door which is then by custom given to the City. The City then maintains the box after it is connected. This Gamewell M34-110 fire alarm box is the only type currently approved for use and it must be brand new. Herein lies the problem which I believe Chief Michaels is alluding to, the high cost of making new fire alarm connections. These M34-110 boxes have skyrocketed in price. A contact told me the last such box he priced was almost $5000. There are other more affordable options and the City should be looking at allowing alternatives as Chief Michaels does have a very valid point in this regard.
Let's take a history lesson on the fire alarm system. The system dates back to the 1880s, 1883 from one account. The system started out as a system of street corner boxes, manual pull stations located on corners that would send a coded signal to the fire department when pulled. There were no fire alarm systems in buildings then. As the City grew, more street corner pull boxes were added. Then as building fire alarm systems started to come into being, some of them were connected to street corner boxes to protect the buildings directly. Through the years, more building connections were added. A big expansion took place in the late 1950s when all of the schools in York were connected following the Our Lady of Angels School fire in Chicago in which lack of an adequate fire alarm and a delayed alarm to the fire department were cited as major reasons for the deaths of 92 school children. York City has continued to add new master fire alarm boxes to protect buildings to the present day. Up until the 1970s, the standard method of connecting a building was to install a red fire alarm box with a pull handle outside somewhere in the immediate area. In the late 70s, the decision was made to start removing street corner fire alarm boxes where the City had problems with frequent false fire alarms. New installations were then done with fire alarm boxes with blank doors and often with fire alarm boxes installed inside of a building. The reason for the inside installations was because a different fire alarm box (non-weatherproof) could be used which was much cheaper for the property owner to install. About ten years ago, during the time of Chief David Love, the City revised its standards to require the M34-110 box be installed outside. This added $1000 to the cost of new installations right off the bat. The M34-110 is the most expensive box that Gamewell-FCI makes. In other words, the City is doing these installations the MOST EXPENSIVE WAY POSSIBLE. There are other more affordable alternatives. One would be to go back to inside boxes. Another would be to allow certified rebuilt boxes from approved vendors (such as NB Barber or RB Allen. A newer option would be the digital boxes that are available from Digitize or City Masterbox Company. These digital boxes are basically a circuit card that connects a private fire alarm system with the municipal system, that transmits the code over the municipal system. These are all options for reducing the cost to City property owners and even the City itself.
Another issue pertains to ownership. In York, the City claims ownership of all fire alarm boxes, even those purchased by private parties. It might be worth considering changing that. One option would be to effectively give all of the local energy masterboxes to the owners of the protected properties. The property owners would then be responsible for them. If they want to use a rebuilt box from a York City approved vendor, they can do so. If they want to use a digital masterbox that also does multiple zones (some properties have multiple city boxes), then they can do so. It would allow property owners to seek out more economical solutions. The City would then just be responsible for the backend, the wiring and so forth.
Then there is the issue of manual street corner fire alarm boxes. The City still maintains a number of these although in fewer numbers. While I do not advocate removing additional street corner boxes, removing them would eliminate the issue of false alarms from street corner boxes which are often cited as a problem with the municipal fire alarm system. The City could remove the last of its street corner boxes and keep the fire alarm boxes at all of the buildings and still eliminate the false alarms. If the remaining street corner alarm boxes were removed, the City could also discontinue paying Met-Ed for the fire alarm box lighting service. That is the fee the City pays for the little red lights that are on most street corner fire alarm boxes.
There is an option which some cities have done which is to move to radio operated boxes. In that setup, the municipality installs receiving equipment and then properties install fire alarm boxes that transmit a signal via radio. These systems are available from companies such as Digitize and SIGCOM. I do not advocate replacing the City's existing hardwired system with radio but I would rather have radio boxes then no boxes at all.
The article mentions the idea of selling the fire alarm boxes eventually. People do collect these things including myself. If you think you're sitting on a gold mine, sorry it isn't so. York doesn't really have much of anything that would bring high prices from collectors other then a few old things that should be kept in the local fire museum anyway. York doesn't have fancy cast iron fluted pedestals that command thousands of dollars restored or vintage 1800s boxes with gorgeous restoration jobs. The equipment that York has is pretty modern and has a low resale value. It would fetch pennies on the dollar. It's far more valuable in use protecting the citizens.
In short, I'm asking that you not remove the requirement for municipal fire alarm connections at the present time and that the City consider options for reducing the costs of operating the municipal fire alarm system both to taxpayers and fire alarm customers."