Interim Fire Chief Confirms Deception by Firefighters’ Union President

Interim Chief’s Account Shows Firefighters’ Union Had Ample Opportunity to Participate and Give Feedback but Chose Not To – On December 20, 2012, the Vanguard reported that the firefighters used deception as a means to block staffing changes that the union leadership clearly opposed.

As we reported at the time, the Davis City Council had already voted 4-1 that week to have a continued discussion on the proposed changes to fire staffing and boundary drops, as recommended by Interim Chief Scott Kenley.

Following the vote, Union President Bobby Weist got up and said, ” I just wanted to make sure, Council Member Lee brought it up, that we will be involved in this process. As of, up to, as of yet we have not been involved in any of the things that have gone on within our department. The Union’s been excluded from all of that there has not been one, one minute of discussion umm, with exception of a grievance. Uh, so I hope that we will be noticed when this is going to happen and we’re given ample time to–this is the holidays (laughs)–we’re given ample time to make it. “

In the exchange that follows, it appears that Joe Krovoza began to look like an attorney, cross-examining a witness.  “Except that there were sessions in the report that were unattended,” he said.

“There was one,” Mr. Weist started.

“There was one and a few people came,” the mayor continued.

“I was there,” Mr. Weist suddenly said.  “There was one and it was four days after you had gotten it.”

The mayor clarified, “So there was involvement.  You just said there was no involvement.”

“There was no involvement in the development of the report, correct,” Mr. Weist continued. “After you had seen the draft, just prior to it coming to council.”

Bobby Weist responded further, “I’m just asking. It was presented that we would be able to be there and I’m just asking that we’re noticed and that we’re allowed to be there.”

Joe Krovoza responded, “Yeah, I mean that’s exactly what we were saying earlier. Yeah, so, yes.”

The truth is that the interim chief had, on repeated occasions, attempted to get input from the rank and file firefighters and the union.  The firefighters repeatedly skipped meetings and avoided giving the chief input.

While this was confirmed for the Vanguard at the time, a number of people asked that the chief go on the record to confirm what the Vanguard reported.

Interim Chief Kenley gave a full account to the Vanguard on December 24, 2012.  In order to explain the process, he went into greater detail of what the audit involved and what he was trying to learn.

He told the Vanguard that the purpose of the audit was “to identify problems or significant weaknesses in the organization, thus providing management with a tool to address and repair the problem area(s).”  He indicated that this was the fifth such audit that he has performed for a fire agency in the past ten years.

“An audit is an outside assessment of an organization’s strengths and weaknesses as compared to accepted management practices and industry norms,” he explained.  This audit was someone different, however.  He told the Vanguard, “In the previous audits I have performed, I was hired from the outside.  With respect to the Davis Fire Department, I also am the Interim Fire Chief.”

“I started my analysis the first day I was hired.  Over the course of the five months it took to accomplish the task, I was also involved in developing and administering three tests, two for Division Chief and one for the rank of Captain,” he said.

As part of the internal testing process for Captain, Interim Chief Kenley interviewed eighteen of the departments’ firefighters.

He asked each candidate to respond to questions.

One question was, “It has been stated by members of the Department that morale is extremely low.  In your estimation, why is the morale low and how will you, in your role as a first-line supervisor, work towards increasing morale?”

The other, “Given the changes that have taken place in the Department with the creation of the Division Chief’s position, hiring of a full-time fire chief and the development of a strategic plan for City Council adoption, the department is at a crossroad.  What are the top five change areas you think the Department should focus on and why?”

He said the response to these questions then became the focus of individual interviews that were, at minimum, thirty minutes with some lasting nearly an hour.

He said, “Throughout the process, I had an open door policy whereby any member of the Department was free to discuss with me any subject.”

The audit was completed in draft form on October 26 and distributed to the City Council the next day, Saturday, October 27, 2012.  All of the captains and stations received the audit the following Monday.

He said, “I scheduled a staff meeting for Monday, November 5^th, with the Management Audit as the primary topic of discussion.  I received no comments from the members of the department from October 29^th to the meeting on November 5^th..”

Chief Kenley continued, “At the meeting on the 5^th, four captains attended the meeting, the Union President, Vice President and Secretary, and one newly promoted captain.  The meeting lasted ten minutes and when it came time to discuss the management audit, there were no comments from the members present.”

He added, “I stated that I would consider comments to the audit if submitted to me in writing prior to 5:00 pm on Wednesday, November 7^th, due to the fact that I needed to submit the Staff Report on Thursday, November 8^th.”

“I did not receive any comments, so the document went to City Council without comments from the union assuming tacit approval,” he said.

Based on this account, it becomes clear that the firefighters were not only involved in the process from the start, but they were given numerous opportunities to weigh in with their concerns and chose not to do so.

Chief Kenley gives further context to the mandatory meeting that the Vanguard wrote of, “The mandatory meeting you referenced in the last article occurred in December, after the Management Audit was presented to the City Council.  As a result of the poor attendance at the first staff meeting, I communicated to the department that subsequent officer meetings will require mandatory representation by each of the nine crews.”

He writes, “The December 10^th Officer’s meeting was widely attended by all but one captain and several acting captains.  However, there was minimal if any discussion of agenda topics by members other than the Division Chiefs.  The meeting lasted twenty to thirty minutes.”

Chief Kenley also notes that “the two division chiefs appointed on May 21, 2012 were integrally involved in the development of the Management Audit.”

He also interviewed the supervisors of the Davis Dispatch Center, and reviewed all of the previous studies conducted both internally and externally.

He concludes, “The audit process is meticulous in nature and I believe a thorough analysis of the Davis Fire Department.  At least ninety percent of the analysis is objective, supported by factual data and references to accepted industry norms.”

Based on this account by Interim Chief Scott Kenley, the Vanguard stands by the accuracy of our earlier reporting from December 20, 2012.

We believe the comments made by Union President Bobby Weist to be false, misleading, and intentionally deceptive.  We believe that the firefighters’ union had ample opportunity to weigh in on the report prior to Chief Kenley’s presentation to city council, and also prior to the December presentation in which the chief made policy recommendations, but chose not to for whatever reason.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Categories: