Guest Column - Fire Department issues, Rest of the Story, Part II

Rural Fire District president defends department

Letter follows city's decision not to appoint Fire Chief Sickels

Posted

Editor,

Let me begin by emphasizing that my following thoughts and comments in no way reflect upon, or refer to, the new mayor and new council members. They in every way refer to the “old” council members and city administration, including the city clerk.

I am sincerely beginning to fear that the goal of the “city” is to so frustrate and discourage the members of our wonderful fire and ambulance departments, that enough of them will quit that the city can easily step in and take over. In my understanding, it has already started. At a meeting I attended, Tuesday evening, Jan. 11, it was stated that the department is averaging the loss of one member of the department per month. I did not ask how many months this has been going on.

This morning (Friday, Jan. 14), I received a phone call from one member of the council. I will refer back to the main focus of that call later. In that call it was stated that what the city wants is complete control of the fire department so they can run it like they do the other city departments.

And again, the Rural (Fire District) would have absolutely NO representation for decisions made and how the rural tax money is spent.

I think I am fairly accurate in stating that the rural folks have paid on the average around $60,000 annually to the city for the fire truck replacement fund, the ambulance service and operating expenses of the fire department.

Rural taxpayers giving fair share

A few years ago, it was agreed that both rural would contribute $17,000 per year to the fire truck replacement fund and $20,000 to the operation of the ambulance. The city is supposed match those funds. I take for granted they have, which might be a mistake.

Then the city is SUPPOSED to bill us on a monthly basis for operating expenses. In years past (not including last year) that has usually amounted to between $20,000 and $25,000. If the city does not tell us what those monthly expenses are, we have no way of knowing what is owed.

So, the rural taxpayers are paying around $60,000 every year and, as I have said before, we have NO vote concerning how that money is spent. To me that is a huge problem and injustice and needs to be corrected!

I will emphasize again that rural folks CANNOT vote for city officials! I don’t know if the council members understand that or not, or just don’t care. The rural “board” does have two representatives on the Ambulance Board, as does the city.

This board USED to make the decisions concerning the operation of the ambulance and it seemed to work quite well. No more. Decisions made by that board are ignored by the council and city administrators and they do what they want. More on that later too.

Defending the chief

In last week’s edition of the Index (Jan. 13), the three council members raked Chief (Kirt) Sickels over the coals for his “lack of leadership” and not following city guidelines.

I don’t know how they can accurately evaluate his leadership and the work of the volunteers of our department. I think they basically listen to what the city administrators tell them. I asked four officers of the fire department how many times the members of the council have visited the fire station and talked to the members about the operation of the department, what is needed, their thoughts, concerns, etc. Want to guess their response? ZERO.

It was mentioned that in the past 2-3 years they have attended MAYBE 1-2 meetings. They get invited to all the special functions the Fire Department holds and the council members have not attended any of them.

They complain about Chief Sickels. Who else is complaining? I haven’t heard any members in the community complaining about the department. In fact, it is just the opposite! Nothing but praise, kind words, and gratitude for the selfless efforts of those men and women who protect us every day.

I also haven’t heard members of the department complain about Chief Sickels either. To show their trust in the man, they again elected him as their chief by a unanimous vote in December. That is five years in a row.

Prior to that, he had held the position of secretary/treasurer for a few years. The members of the department must be satisfied with the job he is doing!

So, the people of the community are more than satisfied and the department members seem to be quite satisfied. However, the city “leaders” say he is doing a bad job. Who has the better view to observe and evaluate his performance? People who he stands with and risks his life with all the time in all kinds of situations, or city officials who admit they don’t know what goes on in the daily operation of the department and don’t seem to be very interested in finding out?

So, this idea begs the point – who are the members of the city council actually representing? It would seem that from the results of the past election it was quite evident the community was not happy with what the council and past mayor had been doing.

The ex-mayor (Robert Hartman) was even quoted in the Index that he felt the reason he lost the election was because of the problems with the fire department. I think that is a very safe bet. The community backs our fire and ambulance departments.

So, I ask again, who are the “old” council members representing? A “special minority” that has some sort of ax to grind? Or is it “themselves” for their feeling of power and control?

Chief Sickels has been harassed and frustrated for many months. It started with the then, interim city manager (Elizabeth Hansen). She started reprimanding him for all sorts of things.

I am not saying that he is perfect by any means. However, I have seen some of those things and it was quite evident she was “out to get him.” One that really sticks out in my mind occurred about a. year ago.

He had been summoned for a meeting with city manager. He did not attend and he was “written up” for insubordination. Know why he wasn’t there? He was out fighting Harold Kline’s house fire! And if I remember correctly, it was a bitterly cold day. That is the kind of class the city manager showed towards Chief Sickels.

More examples

And speaking of class, I need to mention a couple of other examples. These involve a council member and the city clerk. A couple of months ago the city clerk (Lee Geertz) wrote in an email in response to “demands and complaints” from Chief Sickels, “I’m here yet again having to miss my family obligations, my volunteer commitments and make work deadlines.” All I can say is, HOW DARE SHE! She sits in a comfortable chair in a comfortable office and complains about time missed, TO THE MEMBERS OF OUR VOLUNTEER DEPARTMENT??!!

Here is a quote from an email from Chief Sickels,” but the city gets 25 volunteers that at a minimum freely gives OVER 2,200 hours a year providing service to this community. That is 25 “employees” for basically nothing.”

Every time they (first responders) respond to a call, they are risking their lives in, terrible conditions, seeing and dealing with terrible things, missing times with their families at all hours of the day and night, and she complains? Again, I say – HOW DARE SHE!

Another example of the class that council members demonstrate was another email sent by a council member. This person was, again showing a lack of knowledge of the operation the department and voicing doubt about how it was being run and disparaging leadership.

She essentially compared her appreciation of the fire department to other departments in the city that allows her to “flush her excrement down the toilet.” Her words. What class. What high praise she has for the people that protect her life and property.

Inexcusable treatment

Then there is the inexcusable treatment of Chief Sickels at the City Council Meeting last week (Jan. 4). The new mayor (Katie McCullough) had invited him, and members of the department, to the meeting for him to be installed. My understanding is the mayor had asked him to stand to be installed when the city clerk interrupted and said it had to be voted on.

Immediately, a motion was presented, and the three “old” council members (Diane Beranek, Jose Zacarius and Cara McFerren) voted against him. So, there he was, standing to be installed and he is humiliated.

I feel VERY, VERY strongly that this was all decided upon ahead of time by the four individuals involved. What a cold, classless, rotten thing to do to an individual who has given so much to this community. To say they should be deeply ashamed doesn’t even come close to describing my feelings.

Wanting control

So, it is these individuals who want to control the fire and ambulance departments. I had mentioned that I felt they were trying to make things difficult to make members quit.

Let me share two more examples. Back in the fall, a big deal was made about the city “approving” the hiring of a paramedic. It was not really emphasized that this position was only filling about one-third of the hours that were needed/requested.

After the council’s approval, that job posting, interviewing and hiring was not done. After enough badgering to get the city to start this procedure (hence the “demands and complaints from the chief) it was finally posted about three weeks ago after a delay of 2-3 months.

The department was supposed to compose a job description, which they did. What was used as a basis of the job description was that used by the Johnson County Ambulance Service which was revised to reflect a rural service instead of a large city’s service.

However, this time the clerk informed the department, she would consider what they presented, but basically said she was making up her own.

So, she more or less trashed what the department had presented and made her own. Included in that, were two new requirements.

One was that the person had to live within 20 miles of West Liberty. AND it seems none of the other departments in the city have this requirement. In fact, I have been told the City Manager, when he was hired lived in Iowa City (and has since moved to West Branch), the police chief lives in the Cedar Rapids area, and the head of the electrical department lives in the Quad Cities!

The other new requirement the clerk added on her own was that the applicant had to have a Fire Fighter I certification and a few other certifications that are not necessary for the position.

So why were these new requirements added? By doing so, greatly limits the number of applicants available and makes it much more difficult in the hiring of a much, needed paramedic. Is this equal treatment? It sure doesn’t seem like it to me. Or is it for the purpose of making it harder to hire one? I will leave that up to you. The volunteers of our department are getting exhausted trying to fill in the best they can with the things they are certified to do for the paramedics that are needed and aren’t there

A paramedic has still not been hired. With the first posting, I understand, there were three applicants. Two of them were unqualified, in that they were not even certified! So, the job has to be posted again, because there has to be more than one qualified applicant, even though that applicant has been a member of our ambulance team for the past two years. Again, these are the city’s rules and the city decides who to hire – not the Ambulance Board, as in years past. And a reminder, the Ambulance Board consists of members from the city council, rural trustees and fire department.

A major “complaint” the council voiced about hiring the needed para-medics was the cost. That only seems to concern them when they want it too.

Here is another example of the city over extending their authority. The city is taking money from the ambulance funds, without the approval of the Ambulance Board, to pay for the tuition and mileage for an individual to attend school to get a paramedic certification. And, if I understand correctly, there is no guarantee that this individual will be hired, or has to work for the department for a certain period of time. It seems the city just does what they want.

Back to the phone call

Now back to the phone call I mentioned in the beginning. I received this call Friday (Jan. 14) morning from one of the “old” council members. This was a follow-up to a text that was sent.

In the call, the council member pushed the rural board to mediate with the city. And this person asked “as a show of good faith” that we drop our law suit. I stated that we were quite interested in trying to mediate and end this, mess, but we were not going to do it with the council members.

I repeated concerns about how the council had lied, deceived and misrepresented things before, and we had no reason to believe, nor trust them now. We wanted it done legally, with the proper procedures being taken and this council member should talk to Attorney (William) Tharp (representing the local Rural Fire District and West Liberty Fire and Ambulance Department).

I also informed this member that I thought it was ridiculous that this individual thought we should drop our lawsuit as a show of good faith. I told this person the city should give the rural board some concessions. This person then made what I would call a veiled threat.

Can’t trust city government

I must include the latest example of why the rural folks cannot trust the government of West Liberty. They were attempting to get the rural taxpayers to pay half of their legal fees! We caught them, called them on it and they have begun to slowly reimburse that money.

The city was also taking money out of the ambulance funds to pay the other part of the legal fees. I don’t know if that is still going on. It was. Word to the taxpayers in West Liberty – be on guard.

I hope and pray that a third edition of this “story” is not needed, but I guess only time will tell. Bill Tharp told me he has talked to other attorneys about our situation and he says none of them have ever heard of a anything like this.

The council mentions a “rogue fire department. I think we are dealing with a power hungry, controlling, vindicative set of individuals, so I guess stay tuned.

Dick Brand

President, Rural Fire District

PLEASE CHECK OUT THIS WEEK'S INDEX FOR EVEN ANOTHER LETTER CONCERNING THIS ISSUE!

Comments