HomeMy WebLinkAboutStevenson greg newspaper article IJ no dateThe truth inside the Enfield Fire Department
I read with great interest Sat-
urday's "Darts & Laurels" in The
Journal. Enfield resident Ellen
Ricketson was quoted as stating
that, "In my opinion, there are
conflicting interests involved
because members of the fire
department are also members of
the taw council."
As a member and active par-
ticipant in both the Enfield Vol-
unteer Fire Company (EVFC)
and Town of Enfield govern-
ment, I would like to clarify sev-
eral points that have been made
dining this debate, some by Ms.
Ricketson.
The 2000 budget proposal
originally contained a request for
additional funding to help the
EVFC comply with deficiencies
cited during an August inspec-
tion of EVFC facilities and poli-
cies by the New York State
Department of Labor (NYS-
DOL), including $3,000 pro-
posed as so-called "stipends" to
offset actual expenses incurred
by some company officers.
Since this original budget
request, several modifications
have been made to the proposal.
First, funding requested to abate
deficiencies cited in the NYS-
DOL inspection were reduced
based on the number and type
of deficiencies cited by the NYS-
DOL. Also, the originally pro-
posed'stipend request was aban-
doned, as stated at the Nov. 3'
public hearing and reported in
The Ithaca Journal on Nov. 4.
Instead these funds are pro-
posed to be added to an existing
GREG SrEVEiWN/GUEsr COUMPUsr
A taxpaying town resident
who also happens to be a
G volunteer firefighter shouldn't
be forced to be silent on town
fiscal issues, regardless of the
nature of that issue.
administration line in the bud-
get, to provide reimbursement
for legitimate, documented
expenses incurred by any EVFC
member doing official company
business. Reimbursement of or
payment for properly docu-
mented expenses for legitimate
purposes is a fairly routine mat-
ter for town government, and
EVFC business shouldn't be any
different.
Although the subject of some
controversy, the stipend proposal
was added to simply reimburse
company personnel for legitimate
expenses which are not currently
funded or reimbursed. Nonethe-
less, the stipend is no longer part
of the 2000 EVFC budget.
Secondly, Ms. Ricketson
points out that because some
EVFC members are also mem-
bers of the Town Board, she
feels that this creates a conflict
of interest.
EVFC members are inherent-
ly service -minded individuals, as
are marry firefighters, and thus are
interested in and sometimes seek
to participate in public service
outside of the public safety field.
Their interest in local govern-
ment, within the limits of the law
shouldn't be punished. Perhaps
most importantly however, nearly
all EVFC members reside within
the Town of Enfield, are town
taxpayers, and accordingly have
as much right to express their
opinions as any other citizen.
A taxpaying town resident
who also happens to be a volun-
teer firefighter shouldn't be
forced to be silent on town fiscal
issues, regardless of the nature of
that issue. Rather their service
and contribution to the town
should be recognized, as their
work greatly reduces the amount
taxpayers would otherwise spend
on fire protection.
Based on the most recent legal
information provided to Town
Board members through the
Association of Towns of the State
of New York, members of a vol-
untary nonprofit corporation such
as the EVFC, are not in violation
of the conflicts of interest law as
long as they publicly disclose the
nature and extent of such interest
in writing.
Such written disclosure must
be, and in this case has been made
part of and set forth in the official
record of the proceedings of the
Town Board. Once such disclo-
sure has been made, no further
disclosures need be made by the
officer or employee with respect
to additional contracts with the
same party during the remainder
of the fiscal year.
Ms. Ricketson states that word
is not getting out about what is
going on in Enfield. For sure, fac-
tual information has definitely
been scarce. Unfortunately, at
least to this point, the word that
has gotten out has been terribly
maccunne. Ms. Ricketson's asser-
tions, and The Journal's printing
of such do nothing positive to
remedy that.
As an example, for about a
week or so prior to Election Day
1999, an anonymously written
document was distributed from
the "Valley Komer" store at the
intersection of Mecklenburg and
Halseyville Roads, which stated
among other things that the fire
company members were slated to
receive personal computers if the
EVFC budget proposal was
approved.
The fact is that the budget
contains a funding request in the
amount of $2,000 to fund the pur-
chase of a laptop computer for
the company. This computer will
be owned by the EVFC, and used
by members of the EVFC to do
company business, but the pur-
chase of additional computer
hardware is not planned for the
year 2000. No computers have
been or will be purchased by the
EVFC, except for those which are
or will be owned by the EVFC.
To suggest otherwise as fact with-
out prior confirmation is simply
irresponsible and clearly harmful.
The distribution of inaccurate
information relevant to the
EVFC budget by anyone, either
inadvertently or intentionally, can
only cloud the budget debate
process, and is unfair to all town
residents, especially those serving
on the Town Board and in the
EVFC.
Factual information relating to
the EVFC budget can always be
obtained by contacting the presi-
dent of the EVFC, and in fact
much of the EVFC's financial
information is presented publicly
to the Town Board quarterly as
per the agreement between the
EVFC and the town.
The EVFC has been required
to submit more financial and
other information to the Town
Board than any other contract
agency or business entity with
which the town conducts business.
That makes factual information
quite accessible to any town resi-
dent. Additionally, I am available
by mail or telephone at my resi-
dence, Enfield Tam Hall, or the
EVFC station, and personally at
any Town Board meeting.
Stevenson lives in the Town of