I have been waiting patiently since June 24th for a response to this email:

Subject: The vintage KW and the Chevy fire trucks

Chief Church,

Can you give me some dates and events in the last few years where the vintage KW that is at station 65 and the vintage Chevy that is at station 66 were last used for appearances in public, say maybe for a market, community event or school function?  And the name of the driver for those trucks?

I recall seeing the Chevy at an event or two, but never the KW.

Please refresh my memory.

Jerry Galland

 

But, since I was not expecting one, waiting further seems pointless.

But let’s consider the circumstances, created by the chief himself.

It was made a big deal of at the meeting a week ago how Jerry got it all wrong when he reported the housing of personal owned fire trucks at the fire stations. Amid vocal assent from the members of the board, it was declared Jerry should have simply asked the chief for clarification about these trucks before reporting the information. Then it could, according to the chief, be ‘correct’ and everyone would know no wrong doing or misconduct was afoot.

So, in light of the suggestion, and in an effort to report accurate information, that evening Jerry sent Chief Al Church the above email asking for dates the KW, which Chief Church says is owned by the district, (but, as reported here, has been identified as actually being personally owned by a district employee), had been in a parade or at a school, or for that matter at any public appearance representing the fire district.

 

I also asked who would have driven it, since the owner, not the district, is the only one who has the keys and, lacking permission for regular firefighters to drive or even move it, has caused severe inconvenience when station personnel are attending to normal station duties.

 

A week has passed. The chief has been in the office. He has been at various social events. But answer the question he wanted the citizen to ask him personally?

 

Crickets.

 

A week passed and not a word from the chief. So much for asking at the source for accurate information.

 

Apparently, even with the grandstanding and fanfare, he has nothing to rebut my accurate reporting.

 

At the meeting, the chief also stated both antique fire apparatus were owned by the district, that they were stored inside with district approval and that all the appropriate permissions had been followed, and that any liability would be covered by the umbrella policy for the district.

What a convoluted and conflicting statement. If they were indeed fully owned by the district, why would there need to be extraneous district approval or redundant appropriate permissions for the vehicles to be inside the station? Unless, as reported here, accurately, I will add, we do not hold title to the vehicles.

 

In which case, the chief flatly lied to the commissioners. And the public.

 

He wouldn’t do that would he?

 

Even for a friend?

 

 

Comments are closed.

This site is hosted by: HostGator