There is another Fire meeting tomorrow night at Round Elementary at 5:30. The career chief will give his views as to how the fire and rescue apparatus of Manassas should operate.
I don’t know what will happen (agenda wise) after the presentation but I am of the opinion that this has gone on long enough. We need to make a few modifications and then we need to get this wrapped up. At some point, it needs to be let loose to operate and see what shakes out. I don’t know of a single soul who believes we haven’t given this due consideration. It’s been a year…..
January 21, 2010 at 7:34 am
When will council decide if you want a overall organization that gives all three parties a voice versus having a Chief run the system and the Chief has final say on all matters other than what gets appealed to the Appeals Committee? Draft 2 (and Draft 1 before it) creates a Public Safety Committee that (unlike PWC’s strong and democratic Fire and Rescue Assocation) is essentially useless.
January 21, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Andy, I’ll be at the meeting tonight and my 12 pages of comments have beend sent to the Clerk’s office via e-mail asking Andrea to forward them or if not enough time, paper copies. Also sent it to Chief Wood and asked him to forward to Volunteer Chiefs.
The comments look at a whole lot of the issues from both sides with lots of details for pros and cons. You’ll find I too wacked the way the PSC operates and advocate for a Chiefs Council with the FRD Chief “providing primary leadership for a symbiotic System of three entities”.
Hey, I did warn ya two weeks ago I was coming in with lots of comments 🙂 However it boils out, I still think you did a hellava job trying to pull this together and moderate it all!
January 21, 2010 at 12:58 pm
It is not appropriate to compare the City to PWC. The City is one fire station and one rescue staion. The city hired the Chief because he was the most qualified. It is time we let him do the job he was hired to do. I will say it again, I respect the volunteers and do not advocate them leaving, but their agenda is quite clear and it is not what is best for the citizens of Manassas, it is their tradition. The whole notion that if the City doesn’t give them what they want they might all pack up and leave is silly. I am sorry to say but many of them are previous members of other departments and were asked to leave. Manassas is the only one that will have them. There are at least two with DWI’s on their record. While they are not driving FD equipment, it shows questionable character. The bottom line is the volunteers are needed in Manassas, but if they decide to pack up and leave the current carreer staff can handle the calls for a period of time until it is reorganized. There are always young men and women who would want to be a part of the proud tradition. There just aren’t enough to run the department on a long term basis by themselves. I like the fact that if the carer chief is in charge he answers directly to the City unlike the volunteer chief who may change from year to year depending on the most popular person in the department.
January 22, 2010 at 9:09 am
@Raymond:
I wanted to shake your hand last night after reading your 12 pages but I had to run home right after for a sick baby. Excellent write-up. With the rush to Monday night I just hope its not too late as a lot of your points were excellent and align with my thoughts but you expressed them much more eloquently than can I.
January 22, 2010 at 9:15 am
I’d agree. Raymond is the man. An incredibly thorough reading of the ordinance and a comprehensive set of comments. I managed to work my way through most of it and will noodle any changes that might be in order.
It’s always great to see citizens working at the level Raymond did on this. It makes guys like me work harder to keep up…:)
January 22, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Andy, I do owe you an apology – I really should have whacked that draft to death prior to this, but when I heard the Volunteers got a lawyer, I figured maybe a lot of it would get caught. Should have known better…LOL!
By the way, just an observation – with all the concerns through the months of the volunteers leaving, the sad fact is we lost two career this month over all the fur flying. I just put this in the category of “interesting paradox” since that is the nicest way I can put it.
As for the 12-pages of tome, thanks for the nice comments. I thought this morning if I loose the debate for having a Chiefs Council (or Fire Board or whatever name) and you stick with the Public Safety Committee concept that is strickly the Fire&Rescue, instead of creating a TRUE Public Safety Committe, I’ll let it lay until after Budget is over.
Then I’ll come back with maybe 15 or 20 pages as to why a full TRUE PSC should exist just to keep Councilman Wolfe up at night reading it 🙂
January 22, 2010 at 3:50 pm
The name of the thing should be changed in any event….:)
January 22, 2010 at 4:52 pm
Andy, I heard about your prepared statement that you read last night. Councilman Way was heading in the right direction before you torpedoed him. You are setting the stage for a complete collapse of an already fragile system. We will lose Chief Wood, and then no Fire Chief of any caliber will want to come to a system where he/she will be held responsible but have little to no authority, and be subject to a completley dysfunctional system of policy implementation. It’s a shame that you and other members of Council are caving to special interest. You indicated that this subject has been given “due consideration” You haven’t “considered” anything I have said to you. Rather you have dismissed it all. The only thing you have demonstrated is that you have no clue as to how an effective, contemporary volunteer/career system should run. I am embarrassed to be associated with this City with regard to public safety. As a citizen, I am fearful that my elected officials put their re-election hopes ahead of the public’s safety and well being. Congratulations…
January 22, 2010 at 6:03 pm
JP:
First of all, I’ve edited our post. If you have something to say to Wolfe, cowboy up and give him a call. His number is on the website.
Second: If you think I did anything last night for re-election, you haven’t been paying attention. There is no electoral upside in this debate.
Third: I’ve considered input from everyone who has offered it.
January 22, 2010 at 8:03 pm
@Raymond,
I’m reading through the 28 pages of Draft 3 I just received and I see nothing of your commentary incorporated. 🙁
January 22, 2010 at 8:53 pm
Dude. I just got it last night…AT The MEETING. Give me just a little bit of leeway. I do still have to earn enough to feed my family and pay the mortgage….
January 22, 2010 at 9:00 pm
Sorry Andy…wasn’t intended as a dig at you or Council or Staff.
January 22, 2010 at 9:37 pm
no worries…:)
January 23, 2010 at 1:37 am
Andy, it’s interesting that you suggest that “I should cowboy up” That’s exactly what I have been waiting for you to do with the MVFC. The majority of your actions and edicts have only catered to that narcissistic group. You indicate that you have “considered input from everyone who has offered it.” Yet you have only entertained and implemented what the MVFC wants. I did not see the GMVRS showing up with lawyers to dispute the ordinance. In the process you and others have neglected the interests of the career staff. In essence, you have denied them their identity. That’s why they continue to leave the City to work in more progressive, professional departments. I know of 6 employees that left to work for Fairfax City. Why work for a City who’s elected body doesn’t give a crap about them. That does nothing but erode the quality of fire and EMS services to the citizens you purport to represent. I know you are not ignorant, how can you not see this??? Please dispute me here and provide examples of how you have fostered an environment where their opinion matters and they would want to continue to work for the City.
January 23, 2010 at 8:22 am
JPFire, thank you very much, I have been trying to say it for awhile. This is what happens when you have civilians making decisions for sworn/public saftey employees. Council has put the citizen’s safety at risk for a few volunteers, many of which don’t even live in the City. And I am tired of hearing how the levy will go up if the volunteers leave. I will pay a few hundred dollars a year for quality FD service. The volunteers aren’t going anywhere no matter the decision. Many can’y go anywhere else because they have been kicked out of several PWC volunteer houses or have some type of criminal record. Councilman Harrover, that is a fact, ask the volunteer chief to do background checks on all volunteers, you will be surprised what is returned to you.
January 23, 2010 at 11:53 am
The fire company volunteers have served the city for more than a hundred years, saving us alot of money and doing so with the interest of the community at heart. But those included voluteer leaders like Mr Jimmy Robinson who recently completed 65 years of service to the fire company. Or like Mr House who has served for decades as chief and president of the fire company before being pushed to the curb as punishment for being too friendly with the new fire and rescue department. Gone too are the days of Mr Lesseck who showed real leadership.
The current fire company leaders have demonstrated nothing in the form of leadership. Rather, they have fought any effort by the fire and rescue department to improve our protection. Have they supported any action of the career chief? No, plain and simple.
The new ordinance is a joke. It removes the career fire chief’s ability to make any policy without a mandatory vote by the volunteers unless there is an immediate threat to safety. Not just policies about big projects, but even regulations about emergency scene actions. Councilman Way spoke against this. He was right. However the new ordinance has taken away the career chief’s ability to enact any policy.
The new ordinance, requires the career fire chief to split the volunteer votes in order to gain a policies approval. How does that create harmony amoung an already uncooperative group? Mr Beverage says the ordinance may require five or more months to get a single policy adopted. Any policy can be appealed to a committee that can vote down our city manager decision. Is this best for us? Nowhere is this done, not even Prince William, even though the fire company says our ordinance is like theirs.
Why does the ordinance allow the volunteers to turn their back on approved policies that have made it through this absurd process the opportunity to ignore them up to three times? The fire company’s refusal to comply with the current ordinance that they helped create is exactly how we got ourselves into this state in the first place. And to suggest that the city council will resolve any conflicts is ridiculous. Again, look at us now. As Mr Harrover says, its been a year.
Mr Beverage’s letter to the city council spoke to a number of IRS rules. The bottom line is that the volunteer fire company is 100% funded by the city. They are no longer the group that raises their own money. They are spending the city’s money. Yet they continue to behave like a secret cult. Their leadership recently told the company fixing the broken tower truck not to share any information with the career fire chief or his staff, even though the city’s dollars are paying for the repair. Is this good for for the city?
Im told the ordinance committee members, under the direct influence of the mayor have had independant meetings with the fire company and rescue squad. Was the career fire department there? FOIA says that the gathering of a majority of a committee members, in this case only 2 council members represents a city meeting. So, why were these meetings not annouced or recorded?
The new ordinance has many holes in it. It will only divide our volunteers and career more. Why dont we do the right thing and bring in someone from outside the city who can objectively evaluate our needs and develop a workable solution. Its been a year, but it is not too late to do the right thing.
January 23, 2010 at 2:10 pm
“Why don’t we do the right thing and bring in someone from outside the city who can objectively evaluate our needs and develop a workable solution?”
I was going to say, “Isn’t that what the new fire chief was hired to do?” but if I were him I’d be throwing up my hands at this point.
I have a suggestion. George Mason University has an excellent Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution based out of the Arlington campus, but the institute has a “Camp David” type place called Point of View out at Belmont Bay in Prince William County. That place was donated to the University for being a base for resolving situations exactly like this one.
Why not see if you can use that peaceful place for a weekend two-day session with objective facilitators from ICAR to bring together all the people involved in this and work on this?
I’m sure GMU/ICAR would jump at the chance to help. This would bring in the objective facilitators, and put everyone in an objective place outside the city as well.
January 23, 2010 at 2:13 pm
Here’s a link to the facility:
http://icar.gmu.edu/pov/docs/ICAR_Point_of_View_5rev.pdf
January 23, 2010 at 2:28 pm
Cindy and concerned, thank you for voicing your opinions. It seems as if you don’t support the volunteers the Council doesn’t want to hear from you. Concerned, you bring up something I have been wondering about for a long time. How do two councilmemebrs and the mayor meet with the board of the MVFC at the firehouse and not advertise a public meeting? When City residents tried to attend that meeting they were turned away by the volunteers. Even if they met all aspects of state law for meetings, the impression and appearance is they were doing things behind closed doors. This whole process has been a sham from the start and I am not even sure why we are paying for a chief. I for one am tired of giving money to an organization that has no oversight from the City. Concerned, you are correct, todays leadership in the MVFC couldn’t hold a candle to the leadership of the past. Most of these people have their own agenda and have fought this the whole way and they created the whole issue by not staffing the fire house. They took on the responsibilty of protecting this community and failed and the City took the correct action of providing career staff 24/7. Now the Council is letting us down. On top of that, the main person behind the MVFC is the Mayor who is a life member of the Company, again it may not be illegal, but it sure stinks of conflict of interst. Let the Chief do his job and run the Department, it is why we hired him. I have tried to keep my posts clean, but the memebrs of the MVFC let us down, and now they acting like a bunch of babies.
January 23, 2010 at 2:52 pm
WOW! Mr. Beverage, you finally have opened some citizen’s eyes, thank you! Now if only the council is listening tink….tink….tink…. you guys out there! Just kidding Mr. Harrover, you have had a lot to soak in over all this time and after all, this was all new to you. If you hadn’t created this blog who knows where we would be. A lot of lobbying has gone on, at least by those who could. Sometimes you can be drown by it. But as many have said there is still time for our government to do this right.
I only fear this ordinance is a speeding train ready for vote, if goes forward with the changes made, I believe it will derail very quickly.
January 23, 2010 at 4:42 pm
Why not treat the volunteers as equal partners in writing sop’s etc?
January 23, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Flogger, because it doesn’t work in a public safety environment. Just ask any well known successful fire chief. This may work in an office environment, it doesn’t work when people’s lives are at stake. On top of that, the volunteers have proven time and time again they do not want to work with the chief. He asked to speak with them on a numerous occassions and they refuse. He is not even allowed to attend their board meetings. The career staff is made to feel they are guests in the fire house that you and I pay for. Yes, we pay for it. They either got their money from the city council of from donations from citizens. On top of that, they don’t pay taxes on the land, so that comes out of our pockets. I hate to be picky, but they have created this situation. They should have thought about this situation when they left me, you and our families unprotected on numerous occassions. They can doctor the records any way they like, but the fact remains on several occassions the only person there to run calls was the chief or some other lone soul. It is not a matter of if, but when is someone going to get hurt or killed by this situation. I want to ensure everyone I am not a memeber of the MVFC or a career staff. However, I am a fire fighter in a NOVA FD.
January 23, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Andy- I’m reading your blog for the first time. I appreciate the fact that you have guts enough to take the initiative and listen to what the citizens have to say, as well as respond to their comments. While our opinions differ on what the final product should look like, I have utmost respect for the work you have done, the time you put in, and the fact that you are open to comment and criticism. To the many people speaking out in support of the career department, I thank you. I have publicly shared many of the same opinions and concerns. It simply helps to hear them from multiple sources and unbiased ones at that. I assure you the career staff of the city have no desire to see the volunteers of this department disappear. We have nothing to gain from that. We simply want to provide a vehicle for the safest and most efficient service delivery to the citizens we all chose to serve. We hired a well qualified, highly professional Chief, with years of experience working in a combined system, to lead this Department. We should enact policy which allows him to do so. Again, I thank you.
January 23, 2010 at 7:54 pm
ManCity Res, you are incorrect about one thing. The fire company’s leadership did invite the career fire chief to meet with their board of directors just before the January 4th city council meeting. That allowed them to speak about their improved communications at the January 4th meeting when the career fire chief wasnt even recognized. One invitation in a year occurring just before the meeting. Convenient, dont you think? Im told the career chief is still forbidden to attend the fire company’s line officers and general membership meetings. Can someone tell us why?
Mr Harrover, what happened? For months you spoke of the merits of a hybird (sp?) system that assured the volunteers a voice and vote for all central issues, but gave the career chief authority only over daily operations and establishment of policies. To assure he didnt hurt the volunteers, a very complicated appeals system was built into the ordinance. There was also assurance that a combined budget would occur to oversee the city’s money being spent, though not three years. Why three years, anyway? In either case, these were last parts of the ordinance, designed to assure accounability and safetythat the volunteers didnt like. The ordinance committee had given in to all of the other volunteer requests.
On January 2, two days before the ordinace committee and the city council held a work session to discuss the plan, part of the ordinance committee met secretly with the fire and rescue volunteer leadership at our rescue building. The career leadership was not allowed to attend. Improved communications? Equal input? Really?
Mr Harrover, following the secret meeting you were very quick to amend the ordinace. You even had the amendment pre-typed. Why did you abandon the positions you said were in our best interest after so many months? What could have been said in this single meeting that caused you to change so drastically? Was it because these were the only two concessions requested by the volunteers that you had not already built into the ordinace? Did the mayor, a life member of the fire company, order you to do this?
January 23, 2010 at 10:34 pm
Cindy, I actually dropped your name several times the other night at the meeting at Round to career & volunteer alike. A moderator at meetings would have been handy, and ICAR is a great bunch of folks; however, you are a KNOWN person who is doing a bang-up job in our City working with the Neighborhood Study Circles et al.
I am looking at this Round 3 Draft and comparing it – don’t worry, Andy, I won’t come back with 12 pages of critique. I am still absorbing the meeting at Round Elementary the other night. That meeting does have a sticking point I have yet to figure out – Mr. Wolfe’s suggestion.
The Appeals Board was set up with the City Manager and two other members who have training/experience with F&R…although any member who has experience with EMS in any form should qualify. I agreed with the “Concept of Three” as by Management Control Standards, there would be two citizens to act as a balance to the delegated authority from the City Council to the Manager. Good design…simple…meets standards.
Now, proposed by Mr. Wolfe and accepted is to pull that up to Manager plus 4 citizens…and no explanation as to why. I mentioned this to my son – the budding legal mind (that tuition to GMU is paying off!) who says it sounds like Mr. Wolfe’s idea is to have two Fire citizens, two Rescue citizens. Citizens = those who have training/experience.
Ok, what gives? Took a clean Committee which would work and expanded it? Makes me ponder too if expanding to for is my son correct – a little stacking of the deck? Also, and my harping point through those 12 pages, is if Mr. Hughes is not allowed to do his job as the City Manager….and accepted the “Committee of Three”…why now are we taking it to four?
This raises questions as to how the Council is viewing the integrity of that Committee. Since the citizens will be vetted by the Council Personnel Committee (as in all Boards/Committees/Commissions) prior to appointment; and subject to every six months having their performance reviewed (I know – a report card is turned in to the City Clerk on my service to two boards), then why need of four?
Let’s take the integrity issue one step further – and I’ll say this when the opportunity arises at a public forum – those two citizens should in no way have any prior relationship (membership) with the volunteer companies or served on career staff within the City. That goes further to say there should not be even a family relationship to anyone within our F&R System. Then you have integrity at least on one level.
January 23, 2010 at 11:45 pm
Are those involved in the decision-making in Manassas using the National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg as a resource — success stories from other jurisdictions that have gone through this process of change? Could someone from Emmitsburg be called in to mediate the process?
January 24, 2010 at 8:45 am
Cindy, et.al.: I have talked to no fewer than 30 Chiefs, Deputies and fire fighters from across the country in a quest to get this done right. No two are exactly alike.
After talking to all of these people and thinking about it a lot, the theme that emerges to me is that you could vacillate endlessly about the details but what matters more than anything are the good intentions of all involved. If all parties involved are not forthright then the rules and the structure don’t matter. If you read many of the statements above, you might be concerned about the intent of those who are going to participate..
I AM NOT concerned in the least. I believe with all my heart that the men and women in our system are committed and will deliver in spades when the day comes.