Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tim Wood on July 24, 2009 at 8:25pm

The chief definatly has the loyalty of his crew. Wonder how the next board meeting goes with the mayor. Seems he is on the hot seat now!!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fireyladd - Retired Chief Sharp on July 24, 2009 at 11:46pm

Chief, this is a sad affair at best. I have been through two situations similar to this here in Brookings with past Mayors and Chiefs. It never goes well and the community suffers the worst because of the whole thing. Solidarity of the Department volunteers is a necessary move to show the community and its leaders that they meen business and that thy support their Chief. However, the volunteers going to the next board meeting and expressing their displeasure and support for the department rather then resigning would be my leadership as Chief or fired Chief. Years back I saw our Department go from 56 volunteers to about 15 over night because of the same issue between the Mayor and Fire Chief. The members quit not so much because of the Chief being fired as much as being pissed because of how the Mayor handled it. It is true that the Mayor has the authority to make such a decision. However, consideration must be made over the safety and welfare of the community. A grudge or personal squabble is ludicrous.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on July 25, 2009 at 11:56am

It's ugly for the community when they are faced with the potential that someone WON'T come if they need help.
Under our old "regime", I almost cashed out and resigned and several others said that they would as well as a show of support.
Once I explained to them that fire departments exist, not for us, but for the community and we didn't sign up to get pissed off and quit; we signed on to help our friends and neighbors, cooler heads prevailed and another course of action was taken that was successful and improved our fire district in ways that we never anticipated.
When mass resignations are tendered, it is no longer about our community.
And that is butt ugly. Resentments can last for a decade.
IMHO.
Art

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on July 25, 2009 at 3:38pm

Coming from a Fire Protection District myself, (paid, not volunteer), I fail to see where the Mayor fits into the Chain of Command. A Fire Protection District is governed by it's own Board of Trustees, not by the Village Board. As far as I know, the Fire Chief can tell the Mayor to go pound sand if he wants too, since the Fire Chief is appointed by the Fire District's Board of Trustees. Am I wrong?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on July 25, 2009 at 4:29pm

WP:
I would hope that the chief had some officers who would also play crucial roles on the fireground.
I would not be so foolish as to believe that I was the only one capable of running a incident.
In fact, I made certain that from me on down was provided the necessary leadership training to allow for a smooth transfer of command, so to speak.
I think it's commendable that his firefighters and most likely many in the village think very highly of their chief. The mayor even said that he was knowledgeable, but just couldn't take orders.
Maybe I'm goofy, but I would have liked to have seen someone step up during the interim, until this could be sorted out.
I have a feeling that the ex-chief will be the "new" chief, if the villagers have anything to say about it.
But I still say that the chief also has legal recourse.
I think that the Mayor was simply wanting the chief to be a figurehead.
Good discussion.
TCSS.
Art

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on July 25, 2009 at 4:33pm

You are correct as far as how a fire protection district works, Brian.
When I was chief, I didn't have to tell the mayor to pound sand.
I told the trustees to do it a time or two.
You could just feel the love between us!:-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by FETC on July 25, 2009 at 8:47pm

The underlying problem is the two men have a history; personally and professionally.

This is the second attempt Wilkey has made to have Thackrey removed as the fire department chief. In January 2008 during a regular village board meeting, Wilkey tried to remove Thackrey, citing his performance as fire chief and his representation of himself within the community. However, Wilkey’s claims were lessened by earlier discussions at that meeting, which brought to light a personal disagreement between the two men regarding public parking and their private businesses. The parking issue between Wilkey and Thackrey have resulted in a number of heated village board meetings with accusations being made by both men.

They appointed another person to fill a vacant seat on the board and he resigned immediately, and he admts the Mayor will not cite why he wants the Fire Chief gone. "Because it is his right as appointed Mayor"

The is small town bullshit politics at it's best. The mayor needs to be removed from his seat for being an idiot. If he doesn't realize he opened a pandoras box of how not to treat a person who works for free, and the rapid onslaught of exiting good-people "volunteers" from his uneducated, and mismanaged approach to interpersonal dynamics of the town staff, then that goes to show everyone that he was the most popular village idiot at time of election.

Maybe he always wanted to be a fireman when he was a kid, just hope he knows how to pump a fire engine when the community in which voted for him needs a fire department response for a fire.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on July 25, 2009 at 10:11pm

Something very similar to this happened a couple of years ago in Riverton, IL.
A popular chief was removed by the board of trustees and they had a mass resignation. About half of the department resigned; the other half stayed.
The new chief was brought in.
Last I knew the voters were looking into electing their board rather than having them appointed. I believe the referendum passed.
I don't completely disagree with the action of the firefighters in Belle Rive. I said that this is an ugly side of public service.
I also said that I wish that they had used other measures.
But I don't think anyone will disagree that, in the end, the community suffers and the fire department has to work again to gain the public's trust.
Agreed?
TCSS.
Art

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on July 25, 2009 at 11:07pm

Thanks Art. I just can't understand then how the Mayor thinks he can remove the Fire Chief.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by lutan1 on July 26, 2009 at 2:09am

“Mr. Thackrey seems to be doing a good job, and I know he’s qualified,” Mauser said. “I don’t understand why [the mayor] wants to get rid of him. I asked at the meeting why he wanted to replace him, and he said he didn’t have to give a reason, it was his right.

And there lies a problem- when a decision as big as this can be made and no one appears to be accountable for it, then what hope have you got?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on July 26, 2009 at 5:48pm

WP:
I think the villagers with pitchforks drawn are going to storm the mayor's castle, demand his head and re-instate the fire chief.
A mayor who makes decisions like he did in this case has no more business being mayor than I have to be a marriage counselor.
Or something like that.
TCSS.
Art

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on July 27, 2009 at 9:45am

I honestly don't know what is goofier.
In Florida, the mayor has evidence of his fire chief using fire department assets for personal use and keeps his on as chief. See discussion http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/chief-thief-taxpayer-....
Yet, in Illinois, we let a mayor simply take a chief out because of a personal feud over parking spaces.
Only in America.
Art

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page