Westfield Fire Chief Eric Bishop
Reminder Publishing file photo
WESTFIELD — Although an outside firm recommended that the city hire an assistant fire chief and the chief requested funding for the position, the Westfield City Council still voted unanimously against it, though for different reasons.
“I really don’t think with him just getting this job that we need to create another job when he hasn’t even had the chance to warm up his seat,” said Councilor James Adams, referring to Fire Chief Eric Bishop, who was appointed to the position in late April.
At the council’s June 16 meeting, the body was making final adjustments to the fiscal year 2027 budget when it considered the $170,000 Bishop requested to fund the new position.
When Bishop made the request at a meeting of the council’s Finance Committee, not only did he ask for funding, but he also wanted the assistant chief position to be filled without qualifying through the civil service process.
For Adams, the $170,000 wasn’t enough to cover the salary and benefits needed to hire an assistant fire chief.
“If they take it from within, it won’t be [$170,000] because the firemen get 30% more for education, which is about $50,000 more. So, you’ve got to add $50,000 to [$170,000],” Adams said.
He was referring to a 10% to 15% bump in base pay for any firefighter who has completed a bachelor’s or master’s degree, which is typically required of candidates for captain or deputy chief positions.
Adams added that if the council were to fund the position, “you’ll never get rid of it … even if it doesn’t work out, good luck getting rid of it.”
He also referred to the analysis of the department’s operations by an outside consulting firm that recommended adding several new positions to the department, including an assistant chief.
“I sat here when they did the study, and this job was supposed to be from the outside. This job wasn’t supposed to be from the inside. This was a retired fire chief,” he said.
The assistant fire chief position is mentioned nine times in the analysis.
In one instance, it is recommended that the department encourage its firefighters to earn fire officer certification to meet the requirements for advancement to lieutenant, captain, deputy chief or assistant chief.
The analysis doesn’t mention whether the candidate for the position should come from inside or outside the department.
It recommended that the city “make it a priority to negotiate with the local bargaining unit for the purpose of establishing a non-union position of Assistant Fire Chief, delineating a clear number two position in the WFD, and to provide the Chief with another confidential management position to assist him with leading the Department. This position should be an executive management position that is also exempt from the firefighters’ and officers’ respective collective bargaining units.”
“The intent was you might need some help, but it wasn’t from the inside, because from the inside, that is a big number. So, I definitely will be a no,” he said, adding, “I think the chief and the men down there can figure out how to run a good department, and they probably won’t need this job.”
Councilor Bridget Matthews-Kane initially argued for the funding, citing an analysis that recommended one and noting that every department in the region has an assistant chief.
She also said that when Bishop requested the funding, he told the committee he considered it a “money-generating position for two reasons.”
She said the assistant would monitor ambulance rates to ensure they matched or were lower than those in surrounding communities so as not to lose ambulance runs to other fire departments.
Matthews-Kane said Bishop wanted the assistant to focus on writing grant applications for funding opportunities.
“I see cutting this as penny-wise and pound-foolish,” she said.
Adams challenged Matthews-Kane’s assertions.
He said, in speaking with Bishop, that the department had paid a grant writer $1,500 to secure a grant of $40,000 to $50,000, and that the ambulance rate had already been adjusted.
“On the two things you’ve said, it makes no sense,” Adams said.
Councilor William Onyski said Bishop was aware that more focus was needed on grant writing and that he recognized the ambulance rates were too low.
“So, every month, two months, six months, [he] puts it on his calendar, and he checks. And I think this money can come in without an assistant chief,” Onyski said.
Councilor Michael Burns agreed with Onyski and said he had already told Bishop he wouldn’t want to fund the position.
“I can’t, in good conscience, vote for $170,000. I don’t care what department it is — new job, old job — that we’re going to stick it on the taxpayers again,” he said, mentioning increases in trash, water and sewer rates over the past year.
Matthews-Kane said that during her conversations with Bishop, he said there was a fire-safety grant he wanted to apply for but couldn’t because he didn’t “have enough manpower to get all this done.”
“I think it’s a wise investment,” she said.
Councilor Kristen Mello was emphatic in her opposition.
“I am a no vote on any [hiring] until regular taxpaying citizens are not worried about how they’re going to make their ends meet. No new jobs,” she said.
Councilor Ralph Figy questioned the recommendations in the 180-page analysis conducted by Municipal Resources Inc.
“In my opinion, any study that solves a problem by adding personnel didn’t do a thorough job evaluating that department,” Figy said.
“[The department should] look at the command structure to see if they actually need all those deputy chiefs. I think they need to look from within to evolve that department to where it could be, so that I am against a new position at this point in time,” he added.
Councilor Cindy Harris said Bishop’s presentation at the Finance Committee meeting was “excellent” and that she liked that he was trying to change the atmosphere in the department.
“However, the information I’ve received, I am going to vote yes to cut [the proposed funding],” she said, adding that she would consider it again when the next fiscal year’s budget is being drafted.
Finance Committee Chair Daniel Knapik said he wasn’t necessarily against funding the position.
However, he said that because there are still ongoing negotiations with the department’s union to allow it to hire a non-Civil Service candidate, he didn’t think allocating the funding for a position that doesn’t technically exist was wise.
“I appreciate the argument, but I don’t support appropriations on something that’s not quite over the finish line yet,” Knapik said. “And I do agree, everybody’s comment, let’s give the chief some time.”
“I think we’ve all seen he’s done some interesting things since he’s taken over. Maybe he’ll come back. Maybe there’ll be a change of heart. I don’t know yet, but let’s give it some time [and] let the [union] negotiation get done, and see where we are in January, February, and we can take a look at it,” Knapik continued.
