There is more than just a tinge of irony here. After all, the CalPERS (California Public Employees’ Retirement System) regulations were supposed to prevent double-dipping into the pension well, whereby retired public employees, particularly public safety employees, who retired at the age of 50 could effectively have a second career where they got CalPERS pension credits.
In this case, the city of Davis finally found their man – with the skills and ingenuity to not only audit the department but stand up to what was once the most powerful union in the city and still remains quite dangerous. But the new CalPERS regulations are putting reform efforts in jeopardy by forcing the interim chief to leave before his task has been completed.
Scott Kenley was hired to write that audit, which found a way forward for the city – a way forward that does not appear to sacrifice public safety while reducing personnel.
There were probably other moves to be made, truth be told – the city could simply have hired a new fire chief. Perhaps there was still a way to have a third interim fire chief from within the state, and there was certainly a way to hire one from outside the state.
All of this carried risk. Look no further than the first interim fire chief, Bill Weisgerber. There he was, last month, arguing that he thought the idea of four on an engine was luxury until he came to Davis and saw the reality on the ground.
By the time the Vanguard interviewed Mr. Weisgerber in the summer of 2011, he clearly opposed the idea of three on an engine.
He told the Vanguard, “The idea of going from 4-person to 3-person engine companies is seemingly a ‘cost-savings’ strategy.”
He continues, “However, the issue is more accurately one of how many firefighters are needed to respond in time for both the rapid treatment of life-threatening medical emergencies (before permanent or fatal harm occurs) and the control and extinguishment of fires (at the earliest stages, before small fires become large).”
Chief Weisgerber argued that required 15 fire personnel. But the city believes they can get this, through the boundary drop and increased cooperation with UC Davis.
And so now the city manager, facing the loss of Scott Kenley at the end of the month, faced a critical dilemma. How does he complete the reforms that Scott Kenley set forward without risking bringing in another outside hire?
The idea of a public safety department, led by the Police Chief Landy Black, attempts to divide the tasks. The fire operations are now handled aptly by the division chiefs, but Landy Black and his assistant chief, Steve Pierce, are now responsible for overseeing the administrative aspects of these critical changes.
It is far from an unprecedented idea, but there are certainly risks involved.
Make no mistake here, though, this move is clearly about containing the influence of the firefighters union. The union once dominated city hall. They used their numbers and political influence to help bankroll elections of city council members.
Over a five-election stretch ending in 2008, the firefighters were able to elect 7 of their 9 endorsed candidates (including several twice). This influence enabled them to secure four fire personnel on an engine, 3% at 50, and large salary increases over the period.
It also enabled them to thwart efforts at reform. The council by a 3-2 vote decided they should not read the full fire report authored by Ombudsman Bob Aaronson in late 2008. The union pushed the council in the 2009 MOUs to make only modest changes.
But things began to change in the 2010 election, when neither Joe Krovoza nor Rochelle Swanson received fire support in their successful council elections. The same thing happened in 2012. Suddenly the firefighters were without the type of access and influence they once had.
Still, the December 18 council meeting showed the council and city manager what even a weakened union president without the support of his chief could do – the pressure they could put on council with their numbers and their insistence.
Clearly, the city manager believed he could not risk an outside hire at this critical time, that could potentially be co-opted by the firefighters’ union. Scott Kenley was intentionally picked because of his independence. That was part of his background that undoubtedly attracted Mr. Pinkerton’s attention.
The reality is that the hire of Scott Kenley was a home run for the city manager. Not only was he a man that the union could not get to, but he proved to be extremely competent at performing an audit of the department and crafting a credible alternative plan.
Whether intentional or not, placing the fire department in the hands of the police really can only be interpreted as a slap in the face to a proud and often arrogant department. The idea that the police are the ones being run with the type of professionalism that the fire department is in great need of emulating should not go unnoticed.
The fire department has been given repeatedly high evaluations in terms of the public service levels it provides, but in some ways those public service levels belie the relatively easy job they have, with only a handful of major fires every year.
The discrepency between the amount of fire service provided and the number of medical calls has prompted some to call for reform, wondering why the city cannot find a better model than four personnel lugging all of the fire departments’ equipment and infrastructure to every call, whether it is a medical call or a working structure fire.
More importantly, below that surface are huge problems within the department itself. Some of these problems were manifested in the Grand Jury report that showed a group of firefighters engaging in boorish public behavior of drunkenness and starting bar fights. Other examples depicted union cronyism and favoritism at its worst.
The union president himself was promoted to the rank of captain, despite being objectively less qualified than other applicants.
We are now at four years since the release of the Aaronson report. Few reforms have been implemented and morale remains a tremendous problem within the department. In the interim chief’s account to the Vanguard, it becomes clear that morale remains a critical issue. Writes Chief Kenley, “It has been stated by members of the Department that morale is extremely low.”
While once at a meeting such as the December 18, 2012 meeting we would have seen all firefighters show up, now a mere 15 firefighters showed up and apparently some only because they feared retribution.
It was six years ago that Chief Landy Black was hired by the city to run a police department that was besieged with similar problems of low morale and flagging public confidence. Chief Black was able to help turn that department around.
Now the city faces a similar problem with fire. It is a department in need of strong professional leadership. And so it becomes a great honor to the work of Chief Black that he has been selected to help the city in this effort.
The police officers in the city, who have long played second fiddle to fire in terms of influence and in terms of pay, can take solace in the fact that their department and its leadership has been entrusted to preside over fire.
In his comments to the Vanguard, Chief Black said all of the right things. Whether this was his choice or it was thrust upon him, we cannot say for sure. But at least for right now, knowing this is a temporary assignment, he deserved credit for putting on a brave face and hoping for the best.
And when it comes down to it, the city manager clearly trusts that neither Landy Black nor Steve Pierce can be co-opted by the fire union.
For the firefighters’ union, this is just another step in the tightening of the loop. On January 22, there will be a roundtable discussion that moves us closer to the boundary drop and personnel changes that the union has been fighting.
By the end of this year, it is our hope that the city can finally hire a strong outside chief to restore the fire department in the city of Davis to the type of professionalism to which we are accustomed.
Sometimes strong leadership requires that we look outside the box and attempt to find a solution that will work, even if that solution entails a bit of risk.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
“what was once the most powerful union in the city and still remains quite dangerous”
Dangerous? Are you afraid of finding ahorses head in your bed or something?
LOL! The Don will get you! (and I am not talking about Don Shore!)
There is absolutely no reason that we cannot manage with one competent chief and one administration function covering both police and fire. They are both public safety and comprised of mostly sworn employees.
Next step is to get to three person crews, and eliminate the requirement that fire trucks have to role with every medical call.
Final step is to get the pension to 2.5 @ 57, reduce the health insurance opt-out payment, and require a greater employee share of healthcare costs.
This stuff is not rocket science.
Sorry… “Don Shor”
“Dangerous? Are you afraid of finding ahorses head in your bed or something?”
as i understand, they have already tried to get his wife fired from her jobs and boycotted a grocery store, is there a particular reason that you think he shouldn’t at least consider that possibility?
toad: didn’t you want praise for pinkerton – is this not enough for you? you still have to whine?
I have now been informed that the round table will not be on January 22. Apparently not all of the council was available. Perhaps it will be January 29.
Not really enough. I don’t see much praise for Pinkerton here. Certainly he deserves more than a headline. Maybe some supporting text.
I don’t see why you think its whining to point out the use of the word dangerous? I think its an odd use of the word when describing firefighters. I always thought public safety officers were the good guys.
you always thought that public safety officers were the good guys? really? no one hit with excessive force or murder charges? never any of them corrupt?
dangerous? how about dangerous to the long term fiscal safety of this community? how about dangerous to public because of corruption and nepotism? many public safety offers are indeed good guys, but not all of them, some are quite corrupt and petty and i have read enough to believe that bobby weist is one of them.
JB: [i]”There is absolutely no reason that we cannot manage with one competent chief and one administration function covering both police and fire. They are both public safety and comprised of mostly sworn employees.”[/i]
You may be right. Certainly the last few years have shown that one fire chief can direct both the DFD and UCDFD. However, I think we need to see how well it goes with Landy Black running both the DPD and the DFD at once. If it works out, then perhaps that is the best model. But there may be problems that will arise in time.
JB: [i]”Next step is to get to three person crews …”[/i]
That is coming. No one deserves more credit than Chief Scott Kenley for leading us in that direction, unless you count a local columnist who started calling for this 6 years ago.
JB: [i]”… and eliminate the requirement that fire trucks have to role with every medical call.”[/i]
Chief Kenley’s reform program will slightly modify this. While the fire trucks will have 3 men each, another 2 firefighters will be assigned to the rescue truck, based at the downtown station. That vehicle will primarily respond to 911 medical calls.
However, in the outlying areas, fire trucks will still be used. It is fine with me to use firefighters, who are trained EMTs, to respond to medical calls. They often arrive faster than the ambulances. What I would prefer, however, would be to send the firefighters to medical calls in a civilian vehicle, leaving one member of the 3-man team back at the station, in case a fire call comes in while they are out. The third firefighter could then meet the others at a fire in the fire truck. The two on the medical call could drive their civilian vehicle to the fire.
Chief Kenley told me he does not favor breaking up fire crews like that. He may have a good reason for his thinking. (That was not clear to me when he told me he opposed my idea.) However, perhaps with a leader like Landy Black in place, my reform idea will get a new hearing.
JB: [i]”Final step is to get the pension to 2.5 @ 57, reduce the health insurance opt-out payment, and require a greater employee share of healthcare costs.”[/i]
Slowly, these are all happening.
JB: [i]”This stuff is not rocket science.”[/i]
Perhaps not. But apparently [b]voting for the Baseball Hall of Fame is ([url]http://lexicondaily.blogspot.com/2013/01/baseball-hall-of-fame-elects-no-players.html[/url])[/b].
i would still like to see reforming how we respond to medical.
The real danger in this move is that the firefighters will, feeling under attack, attempt to run Steve Pierce over. Pierce is a real piece of work, but he has never had to deal with anyone like Bobby Weist.
Mr. Toad: you have no idea just how dangerous Bobby Weist is. I know first hand.
Maybe not but you know who is worse than the cops and the firefighters? The people who would run the world if there were no cops or firefighters.
So we have to accept the Mark Furman’s of the world because there are bad guys far worse?
Firefighting can be adequately handled by volunteers and part-time personnel for a town the size of Davis. That is not the case for law enforcement.
Basically, building codes, community planning and development and technologies have all improved to decrease the risk and difficulty for preventing and fighting fires.
However, at the same time, the need for crime fighting and law enforcement has increased.
I know the cops aren’t perfect and we should try to keep them honest but yes there are bad guys and if there were no cops the whole world would be like Lord of the Flies.
I thought the crime rate in davis was relatively steady. nevertheless, i largely agree with you.
toad: i am really not following your argument. you basically have conceded my point – the cops and firefighters are not perfect, we should try to keep them honest, at the same time there are bad guys and fires that need to be addressed. but the fact that there are bad guys and fires does not excuse bad behavior by those entrusted with public safety. so i have no clue what you are trying to say, because no one here denied your point that we need cops and firefighters.
GI, I don’t know the answer to that question about the crime rate in Davis. I know that many Davis cops have commented that Davis has more crime than locals want to admit, and also the types of crimial activity they deal with has changed. For example, cyber crimes, sex crimes and drug crimes have been escalating. However, it would be good to know an answer to your question. Even if the crime rate has been stable, fire incidents have declined significantly.
Jeff:
This is the report I did last April that showed crime steady if not falling…
link ([url]http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5235:Police-chief-gives-crime-report-to-council&catid=54:law-enforcement&Itemid=87[/url])
Landy told the council at the last meeting that they frequently see spikes and then declines in types of crime but nothing he believes suggests crime is increasing.
As a whole Davis gets a lot of property crimes and relatively few violent crimes.
JB: [i]”Firefighting can be adequately handled by volunteers and part-time personnel for a town the size of Davis.”[/i]
[b]State law makes a volunteer FD unworkable ([url]http://www.cafsti.org/imageuploads/Media-60.pdf[/url])[/b]. 10 years ago, one of the fire union’s lackeys, a woman named Sen. Gloria Romero, helped the CPF push through a law known as SB 1207. It effectively has killed off all volunteer fire departments in our state.
[img]http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/files/2010/05/Gloria-Romero.jpg[/img]
SB 1207 requires a volunteer firefighter to have all of the same EMT, OSHA, and other fire-fighting training that a professional firefighter is required to have in California, including regularly updated training. I think it also requires them to pass mandatory physicals and other fitness tests.
Who would want to put in a year or two of training and then not get paid for their work?
In my opinion, regardless of state law, Davis ought to have a professional fire department, staffed mostly* with fully trained professional firefighters/emergency medical technicians. I have no problem with paying Davis firefighters reasonable compensation (which would be less than we are now paying in total comp).
The very reason Davis became incorporated in 1917 was because our community wanted a civic answer to the problem of periodic, but devastating fires. One of the worst ones happened in 1916, burning down a good portion of downtown, including some of the hotels which lined G Street back then.
By incorporating, Davis was able to raise taxes locally, which in turn paid for a new public water infrastructure and a fire department which could fight fires with some of that water.
*If there are folks who want to go through a long and extensive and probably expensive training process and not get paid, I have no problem having our city hire them to serve an auxiliary role with the Davis Fire Department, especially in cases of structure fires. I would imagine such volunteers would be very helpful to the professional crews in doing things like hooking up the water hoses and checking the perimeter of a fire for dry brush or other things which might be flammable. Unfortunately, I highly doubt there are many people who would want such unpaid jobs, given the training requirements.
Firefighters do not NEED all this certification. There are volunteer fire departments in CA, are there not?
I think we could pay 50% the pay and benefits and have a line stretching around the block with qualified candidates.
[i]”Firefighters do not NEED all this certification.”[/i]
By state law, they do.
[i]”There are volunteer fire departments in CA, are there not?”[/i]
I imagine there are a few. One can still be a volunteer firefighter in California. State law does not prohibit that. It’s just that SB1207 requires full fire and EMT training for volunteers. So I would imagine far fewer people can or would be able to volunteer.
[i]”I think we could pay 50% the pay and benefits and have a line stretching around the block with qualified candidates.”[/i]
I suspect that is right.
What would be interesting when a firefighting job opens would be to have an auction for total compensation. For example, reduce the pool of applicants to the 20 people who have the best skills for the job. And then let those 20 applicants submit a total comp bid, much like a developer does with subcontractors who want to work on his construction project. The qualified applicant who submits the lowest bid gets the job. (Never mind that state law also makes hiring labor by auction illegal, too.)
What you suggest is basically what we do in private industry. We interview, pick the best candidate and ask “what are your salary requirements” and then negotiate based on market.
Jeff and Rich…a question. Would either of you sign up to be volunteer firefighters? If not, why not?
FWIW, the West Plainfield Fire Department has two full-time career Firefighter/EMTs, one part-time career Firefighter/EMT, seven officers and sixteen volunteer firefighters. More info here: http://www.wpfd.net/
“I have no problem with paying Davis firefighters reasonable compensation (which would be less than we are now paying in total comp). “
The problem of course is deciding what is reasonable. What would you consider reasonable?
From Wikipedia: “Romero leads the California chapter of Democrats for Education Reform, an interest group funded by Wall Street hedge fund managers who support charter schools. In the 2012 election, she is campaigning for California’s Prop. 32 that would bar unions from withholding money from worker paychecks to finance political activities.”
Romero has a lousy resume from top to bottom.
{i]”Jeff and Rich…a question. Would either of you sign up to be volunteer firefighters? If not, why not?”[/i]
No. I’m too old (48) to start. My time is too valuable. And if I put in more than a year’s worth of training, I would want to be paid.
[i]”FWIW, the West Plainfield Fire Department has two full-time career Firefighter/EMTs, one part-time career Firefighter/EMT, seven officers and [b]sixteen volunteer firefighters.”[/b]
Some minority of people who are attracted to volunteer to fight fires do so because they have a crazed urge to be around fires. These sorts are like the pedophiles who volunteer to take little boys on camping trips.
Some years ago, Yolo County experienced just that with an arsonist who was a volunteer firefighter in the Capay Valley. From the October 30, 2008 Davis Enterprise: [quote]WOODLAND — As a volunteer firefighter for 18 years, Robert Eric Eason responded to numerous emergencies in the Capay Valley, from fires to medical calls to water rescues.
On Wednesday, a Yolo County jury convicted Eason of setting some of the wildland fires that he’d helped to extinguish.
After just over a day of deliberations, the seven-man, five-woman jury found Eason guilty of 14 felonies, including 12 counts of arson of forestland and two counts of possessing or manufacturing an incendiary device.
But they declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked on four remaining arson charges, prompting Yolo Superior Court Judge Stephen Mock to declare a mistrial on those counts.
“We are grateful for this verdict,” Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig said at a news conference later that day. “This was a dangerous man who was responsible for extensive damage throughout the valley, and endangered lives and livestock.”
Cal Fire spokeswoman Janet Upton, whose agency investigated the fires, called the case “one of the most complex that Cal Fire has ever undertaken,” involving 70 officers and costing $2 million over a three-year period. [/quote]
Here is what he did: [quote] The blazes Eason was convicted of setting scorched between 1,600 and 2,000 acres of wildlands, Upton said. One of the blazes, near County Road 82B near Capay, led to the deaths of about 200 sheep.
A longtime Guinda resident, Eason was accused of setting fires in 2005 and 2006 using a mosquito coil — an insect-repelling device that smolders when burned — affixed to a paper match.
Authorities alleged that Eason would toss the lit devices from his car window into the dry Capay Valley grasslands, which ignited after the matches flared. The coils took up to four hours to burn, providing Eason with plenty of time to establish alibis, investigators said. [/quote]
Here is how they caught him: [quote] Eason became the focus of Cal Fire investigators in July 2006, when surveillance cameras installed along Highway 16 caught images of his blue Ford Tempo traveling in and out of the Rumsey canyon shortly before two fires broke out in that area.
Days later, investigators secretly installed a GPS tracking device on Eason’s car. Over the next 64 days, the device showed the car driving by the scenes of nine roadside fires minutes to hours before they began.
There was no camera or GPS evidence tying Eason to four 2005 fires, though investigators found part of a mosquito coil and match at one point of origin. The jury deadlocked on the counts stemming from those incidents.
On the day of Eason’s Oct. 12, 2006, arrest, investigators found fragments of mosquito coils, matches and fishing line in Eason’s home trash can as well as his car.
Eason took the stand in his own defense during the trial, saying he happened to drive by the fire scenes while going about his daily routines. As for the coils found in his trash, Eason said he was curious about their fire-starting capabilities and experimented with them at home. [/quote] It’s funny how these regular fires all stopped after he was arrested: [quote] No suspicious roadside fires have occurred in the valley since Eason’s arrest, Upton said at Wednesday’s news conference.
Prosecuting attorney Garrett Hamilton said his office will explore whether to retry Eason on the 2005 charges. [/quote]
[i]”The problem of course is deciding what is reasonable. What would you consider reasonable?”[/i]
From an economic perspective, the “reasonable” amount of total comp would be enough so that, when a job opens and you list it, you attract more than a couple of qualified candidates to fill the opening and choose the one, best person. As many have pointed out, when firefighter positions in our area open, they normally will attract hundreds of qualified applicants for each possible job. Those long lines of applicants suggest the pay is not being set on an economic basis.
From a city-worker perspective, the “reasonable” amount would be an hourly pay (in total comp) roughly equal to what police officers make. As it is, on a yearly basis, firefighters make about $20,000 more (I am not sure of the exact difference), and on an hourly basis a sworn firefighter makes perhaps twice what sworn cops make.*
From a public employee in Davis perspective, the “reasonable” amount would be about what an average school teacher makes in total comp, which is about 40% of what we pay firefighters in total comp. Both are important jobs. One requires a college degree and a year’s advanced training for a teacher credential and regular additional training. The other requires no college education, but a lot of training and skills and it comes with physical dangers when fighting fires.
Which would I choose? The economic model. But I can understand why there is an argument for the other perspectives.
—————————–
*It depends on how you count their hours. They are on 24-hour duty cycles, 10 days each month. But they don’t really “work” the whole time they are on duty. They probably don’t work half that time. If you discount the hours they are paid to sleep, cook, shop, eat meals, watch TV, and only count the hours they are training, maintaining equipment, working to prevent fires, responding to medical calls and fighting fires, they work far, far less than police officers do.
jrberg: I am nursing a bad knee right now… lacking cartilage. Other than that I am healthy enough. Honestly though, I don’t think I would volunteer at this point in my life if it required working and sleeping in the station. But I would be open to completing training, and being on-call for scheduled days of the year.
My thinking is that we could have part-time semi-volunteers. People that need part time work at $20 per hour without benefits. Healthy and strong college students would love it.
“Romero leads the California chapter of Democrats for Education Reform, an interest group funded by Wall Street hedge fund managers who support charter schools. In the 2012 election, she is campaigning for California’s Prop. 32 that would bar unions from withholding money from worker paychecks to finance political activities.”
Now there’s a Democrat that’s worth voting for.
Why couldn’t we have shifts like nursing. 2 shifts a day, maybe 12 hr but would work 36 hrs a week.
I asked Kenley that question and his response that it would require hiring additional firefighters to cover the shifts.
When i was young and beautiful I was a member of the Telegraph Ridge Volunteer Fire Department. I received training from CDF, other departments and the local community college. i even put out some fires and responded to some emergency medical calls.
I think most of the volunteer firefighters are interested in protecting their communities while still having funds for roads, parks and other services.
We formed TRVFD because we didn’t have any CalFire people close enough to help in time. We went through a LAFCO process, defined our district and passed a parcel tax. We did what the state did recently and put in a parcel tax, by supermajority vote, on rural properties to pay for fire protection. If you ask me the resistance throughout rural California to paying for fire protection is absurd. We were ahead of our times.
We formed TRVFD because we didn’t have any CalFire people close enough to help in time. We went through a LAFCO process, defined our district and passed a parcel tax by super majority vote. We did same thing the state did recently when it put in a parcel tax on rural properties to pay for fire protection. If you ask me the resistance throughout rural California to paying for fire protection is absurd. We were ahead of our times.
The rewrite makes more sense.
[i]”Why couldn’t we have shifts like nursing. 2 shifts a day, maybe 12 hr but would work 36 hrs a week.”[/i]
Unless you have firefighters doing more non-firefighter jobs than they are now doing*, I don’t see what the benefit of 12 hour shifts would be.
In a given 24-hour period, there are going to be X-number of fire calls and Y-number of medical calls. In addition to that, firefighters need to train and to maintain equipment. That is about 5-6 hours of work on a slow day and 10-12 on a busy day. The rest of the time is taken up shopping, cooking, eating, sleeping and shooting the breeze.
So if you split the 24-hour period in two, shift A on average [u]works[/u] 4 or 5 hours; and then shift B does the same in its 12-hour work day.
Where is the benefit from doing that?
———————–
*I don’t know how practical it would be to require firefighters to take on more, non-fire responsibilities. If they were not on duty 24 hours, but instead 12, they would not have to sleep at the firehouse. Would you have them become auto mechanics to fill in the extra hours, where, say, they would service and repair the city’s police cars and other vehicles in between calls? Would you have them filling pot holes? Would you have them trimming bushes, mowing lawns and emptying greenbelt trash cans?