Sedona Fire District Candidate Slate:
David Blauert, Joe Demme, and Phyllis Erick
“The biggest issue that we have is, if you take a look at the total program, the budget needs to be reviewed and assessed,” Joe Demme said. “We need to see ways to cut costs and manage a better fire department. There is a level of service that we need to keep. But, there are numerous issues that need to be addressed that won’t hurt services or access. There are overtime issues, some of the higher wages need a look, and there are issues regarding equipment that might be possible to delay by cutting capital spending.”
David Blauert added, “Common sense is at the head of the category.”
“It’s about accountability,” Phyllis Erick said.
“Overtime alone is budgeted at $1.3 million,” David Blauert interjected. “With proper management, we shouldn’t incur any overtime in the proposed budget. If I ran my business like this, I’d be out of business. Overtime should happen when necessary and not as a built-in entitlement. That is just ridiculous.”
“But it has been minimally cut since the new Fire Chief (Nazih M. Hazime) came on board,” Phyllis Erick added. “And there are expenses that the people are totally unaware of in the Fire District budget like the Call Center which is located here in Uptown. It is supported by the Sedona Fire District yet fifteen (15) communities use it, including the Sedona Police Department and pay nothing toward it. Some of the communities pay a small fee but the Sedona Fire District picks up all the wages for all the communities. And most people don’t know it exists.”
Among of the communities covered by the Sedona Fire District Call Center are Black Canyon and Pinewood and Blauert pointed out that “We don’t even know how much they pay; it hasn’t been audited.”
All three candidates are running as a slate and all three are frustrated by the lack of an independent audit; the Slate claims that the Sedona Fire Department conducts internal reviews of the financials, but has failed to conduct a “financial statements and process audit” by an independent agent for over ten years.
With a budget of $13.8 million, the three slate candidates believe a thorough audit is essential and merely good management of the public’s funds.
Blauert, Demme and Erick are requesting that a firm familiar with municipal accounting be brought in to audit the financials and processes, so that all parties have the necessary information to move forward and make good decisions.
The Slate points out that the Sedona Fire Board may claim that it has done audits, but internal reviews are not appropriate for a department of this size, particularly with the complication of the call center and the high levels of overtime, overtime which allows for many members of the Sedona Fire Department additional overtime of $600 per week with some employees earning more. “These are business practices that could be solved by a thorough audit,” they say in agreement.
Blauert also spoke of the fact that he has lived in Sedona for forty-nine years and during most of that time, the city of Sedona had a volunteer fire department that provided excellent service and was highly rated by insurance agencies, important to insurance pricing.
Blauert went on to say that the Sedona volunteer fire company maintained above-average safety standards and generated high levels of community spirit with Sedona citizen involvement.
“They (SFD) used to have a lot of women involved and they did a good job, women fire fighters and ambulance drivers. Currently there is not one woman involved in these jobs at the Sedona Fire Department,” said Blauert who wants to know why the situation has changed.
Another issue about which the three candidates expressed concern is that few Sedona firefighters actually live within the community. The Slate said that it has been estimated that if an ‘all call’ (an emergency that required all available hands) was sounded “only twenty percent (20%) of the Sedona fire department would show up because they live as far away as Scottsdale and often have second jobs” in spite of the fact that many emergency services agencies such as hospitals, police departments and other fire departments require employees to live close or in the communities they serve.
The slate reasoned this living requirement is in case of an emergency; travel time and travel difficulty are less if the emergency personnel live close by. The three candidates believe that “adding volunteers back to the fire department would help overcome this imbalance and create an in-town force for emergency preparedness.”
Phyllis Erick went on to say, “We need to approach the Chapel (fire station) on a cost and need basis. Without auditing, we just don’t have good information. The station as presented would cost $1.3 million in salaries alone. I tried to get a copy of the report so we could look it over in depth but was told it would cost me $167.”
“We can’t get a handle of these proposals because the numbers keep changing,” Joe Demme added. “Each time it is presented, the numbers are different. That is shown in the minutes.”
The three candidates state that they want to run the Sedona Fire District efficiently and with accountability. It is their belief that the public has a right to honest information and to know that their money is being spent wisely.
Blauert, Demme and Erick said that until the detailed financial information they have been seeking is received, it is difficult to make precise recommendations. The intention of the slate is to base all decisions on real financial knowledge and information and coupled with a community that works together, sensible “common sense” solutions will be attainable.
Article written by Joni Dahlstrom, sedonaeye.com Staff Writer JoniD@eSedona.net
sedonaeye.com and Sedona Times Publishing LLC c2010 (formerly Sedona Verde Valley Times Inc.)
Here we go again! These three candidates have a similar tone in their voice and in their campaign slate for the governing board that is all to familiar. I believe it is similar to that of Donald Harr’s and Charles Christensen’s during the 2008 race and look how that worked out for our community. As a matter of fact, I also believe that some members of this slate are closely tied to the above mentioned individuals who have done nothing but stir up controversy and display hidden agendas during their short term on the governing board.
Honestly, I am very tired of seeing and hearing about the smoking gun that Sedona Fire is hiding, when in fact these professional firefighters do nothing but strive to provide a good service to our community while risking life and limb to protect our lives and property on a daily basis.
I hope that our community becomes educated to the legitimate issues surrounding the district and the FACTS that accompany them this time and make an educated decision come November. Please don’t be fooled by the rhetoric and rumors that will undoubtedly be spread in the coming weeks leading up to the election. I have found the Sedona Fire District’s website to be a great asset in reviewing past minutes regarding board meetings and a great tool during fact finding missions. After last election, I know to go straight to the source to get information and not to believe the rumors and mistruths being spread such as those displayed in this article.
Additionally, I hope that the Sedona Times will not follow the Red Rock News and become biased towards one side or the other. This is the reason I read the Times versus the RRN and appreciated the objectivity this publication offers. I understand Mr. Christensen and the owner of the RRN are close friends and this may possibly be the reason for the negative position the RRN takes against our public safety officials. As sad as it appears, it seems a very common tactic in smaller communities where media outlets are limited and positions may be swayed by a few articles and press releases. Please get the FACTS and let’s get past this!
The level and amount of misinformation presented by this “slate” is disturbing and flat out wrong. This simple truth has been stated time and again. SFD is not a business! It is a tax based government agency that by definition will operate in the red. Please see this article from the Sedona Times web site.
https://sedonaeye.com/response-to-mr-robert-s-wood-opinion-piece-in-the-sedona-times-entitled-“sedona-fire-department-expenditure-controversy”/
SFD has an independent, professional auditing firm do its annual audit per Arizona state statue. Two members of this “slate” have repeatedly asked for Pricewaterhouse to specifically do this audit. For what reason I do not know why, but there is one problem with this. Pricewaterhouse does NOT do fire district audits. They never have and never will. SFD uses an audit firm that complies with a Arizona state law and uses a competitive bidding process to choose the auditing firm.
The issue of the communication center has been discussed at length at multiple
board meetings. All costs are share amongst the respective communities based on call volume. Sedona PD has its own 911 call center and does not use SFD in any way. To have a prospective fire board candidate suggest otherwise is appalling. Mrs. Erick knows this but continues to disregard all facts presented at board meetings in favor of her own fabricated ideas.
The issue of firefighters living outside Sedona city limits is a sad truth. A starting firefighter at SFD starts $13.71 per hour. A paramedic with two years of intensive schooling would start at $15.74. With the median home price in Sedona starting at $350,000 no starting firefighter could begin to afford a home here. Official salaries can be found here.
http://www.sedonafire.org/PDF/FY%202010%20Pay%20Schedule%20V3.pdf
Please also know that two of these three strongly support privatizing the SFD ambulance service. The community as a whole has totally rejected this idea as made clear by articles like the following.
https://sedonaeye.com/open-letter-to-the-sedona-fire-districts-governing-board/
Please choose carefully this election season. Some candidates seem to have a very particular agenda and your safety is not one of them.
Please look at this link to see how the residents of Sedona feel about privatizing their ambulance services. Two of the candidates above are in complete favor of it and are in favor of putting our lives in jeopardy when we need 9-1-1. Please don’t vote for these fools, as we cannot afford to put a price tag on our family and friend’s safety. Thank you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-kFauJwC4c
The amount on our property tax bills for the SFD is ridiculous! And firefighter’s cushy salaries, benefits and costs make up the majority of operating expenses. All need to be trimmed.
Privatization is not the only answer. I hope whoever is elected to serve on the fire board will consider pay reductions and serious changes in the retirement-health program.
Dear republican women’s group member,
Do you remember when you were little and if you got hurt or something scary happened you would call for your mommy or daddy? Remember how they would come running and make everything better for you. I remember those days. Wouldn’t it be nice if as an adult you had someone you could call to make things all better in the event of an emergency? Oh, wait you do… its called the fire department! YEH! Please don’t belittle or anger the people you count on to take care of you. Please don’t be so cheap as to deny someone a livable wage. If you don’t like paying high taxes maybe you should’t live in a $399,634 house.
Donald Harr and Charles Christensen were voted in BECAUSE of the ridiculous SFD budget. Then they were vilified for doing the job they were elected to do. I believe they have done a good job in trying to reign in the SFD’s years of over spending and mismanagement. So now we have a Slate that will do the same and we need that kind of representation. These individuals are not out to “hang” the SFD but to oversee the budget for all of us. It is LUDICROUS that, A Burak states in a previous email that, “SFD is not a business! It is a tax based government agency that by definition will operate in the red.” That is just the tip of the problem, SFD is a government agency that works for us and should be run like a business. To quote Ronald Reagan, “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.” It is about time the Board current and future receives the support of its citizens for doing the job they are elected to do – oversee this agency for the benefit of all the residents.
In response to the recent Sedona Times on-line article entitled the “Sedona Fire District Candidate Slate Offers Positions”, I must address some of the issues on behalf of the Sedona Fire District (SFD). This is not written as a “pro” or “con” of these candidates, but against the very damaging misinformation the article contained against SFD and our service to this community.
The “call center” to which the article refers is our Regional Communications Center (9-1-1 Dispatch), which SFD operates so someone will answer the phone when 9-1-1 is called. The article states that 15 communities use the Center and pay nothing; when, in fact, the 10 outside jurisdictions for which we dispatch pay for more than 50% of the costs of operating the Center. The regionalization of this function is modeled all over the country and is more cost effective for all participating jurisdictions than each agency building, running, and maintaining their own stand alone 9-1-1 dispatch center and communication infrastructure (tower sites, microwave links, etc.). If, as stated, most people “don’t know it exists”, it is certainly not because SFD is trying to hide it as some extravagant David Blaine magic trick; the Center is part of SFD’s budget which is a public document; it has its own page on our website; the building out of which it has operated for more than 25 years, is on Forest Road in Uptown and clearly marked “Dispatch Center.”
Candidate Phyllis Erick said the Sedona Police Department uses it, which is untrue; they have their own dispatch center. We do not dispatch 9-1-1 calls for Sedona Police Department or any police agencies – only Fire and Emergency Medical Services. Additionally, Candidate David Blauert states that Black Canyon City and Pinewood are dispatched by SFD and “We don’t even know how much they pay; it hasn’t been audited.” The figures, both revenue and expenditures, are audited annually (further explained below), and the revenue from the users is all part of our public budget documents – documents so clearly and thoroughly presented that SFD received a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 document from the Government Finance Officers’ Association of the United States and Canada. SFD is the only fire district in the State of Arizona to ever achieve this designation for its budget documents.
Candidate Joe Demme asserts that SFD has only conducted “internal reviews of the financials”, but has failed to conduct an independent financial audit for over ten years. This is completely false and ridiculous. SFD has an independent external audit done every twelve months, as required by Arizona State Statutes. In fact, the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 audit and audit results were presented by the audit firm (Miller, Allen from Phoenix) at a Public Fire Board meeting several months ago. Further, Mr. Demme made this same allegation at a Fire Board meeting in April, and was provided copies of the annual independent financial audit for those ten years, and yet, he still maintains this assertion to the Sedona Times – knowing it is incorrect.
The article states that Candidates Blauert, Demme and Erick are requesting a firm familiar with municipal accounting be brought in to audit SFD’s financials and processes; again, per State law, this is done every fall for the previous fiscal year ending June 30th. This year, Walker and Armstrong, also a large Phoenix firm, was selected through a Request for Proposals process and will perform the 2009-2010 fiscal year audit. None of the independent audit firms used by SFD have ever found any material inconsistencies in financial recordkeeping, any violations of proper internal controls, or any financial malfeasance of any kind – whatsoever.
Mr. Blauert states that overtime is budgeted at $1.3 million; this is false; the SFD overtime budget is $775,000, not $1.3 million, and if looking at any agency that provides a 24 hour/7 days a week/365 days per year operation with mandatory minimum staffing requirements, such as police departments, sheriff offices, hospitals, etc., they will ALL have significant overtime budgets. If these candidates want the same service hours as from their local bank, and be limited to calling 9-1-1, Monday through Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., then, overtime for firefighters and 9-1-1 dispatchers could be considerably reduced. However, for a 24/7/365 operation, when employees need to take vacation, sick leave, training, etc., those positions and those shifts must be filled.
If SFD falls below certain minimum staffing thresholds and cannot render services because we do not have the personnel, then the organization would open itself to significant liability – both from the citizens who may lose lives or property, and from our employees whose safety is compromised by not having enough personnel to do their jobs in accordance with a myriad of laws and national response standards. SFD could also eliminate almost all of the overtime by hiring a dozen or more personnel to serve as fill-ins for vacations and other leave. However, that would cost more than the overtime, with the additional training, taxes, benefits, insurances, and the equipment and personal protective gear which is needed for each additional employee. SFD overtime is paid for when it is needed, but additional personnel would be paid on a full time schedule whether another employees calls in sick that day or not. There is a certain cost/benefit of using overtime versus hiring more staff. That is why public service agencies systematically choose to use overtime staffing in lieu of hiring more personnel. Mr. Blauert’s statement “with proper management, we shouldn’t incur any overtime in the proposed budget” is ludicrous. All fire departments and districts utilizing professional firefighters in the state of Arizona, or anywhere for that matter, incur overtime.
These candidates also made an issue of the fact that many SFD employees do not live within the District boundaries. It is true that 62% of SFD’s employees do not live within the District, and this figure is not atypical for this area. In an article published by the Sedona Red Rock News in February of this year, according to a 2008 Arizona Department of Commerce report, 67% of all people working within Sedona commute from other communities. The simple fact is most blue collar /middle-class workers cannot afford to live in Sedona and, therefore, choose to live outside of the area and commute to and from work. Further, many public safety agencies USED TO mandate residency within its jurisdiction or within a reasonable radius outside of the jurisdiction; however, most have lifted this requirement as a result of lawsuits from labor groups alleging that an employer mandating where someone lives and raises their family is unconstitutional.
Fire Chief Nazih Hazime and I would be happy to discuss any of these issues in further detail with anyone seeking facts and clarification of this misinformation at 928-282-6800.
Karen Daines
Business Director, Sedona Fire District
928-282-6800 (Office)
Kdaines@sedonafire.org
Based on the response provided by Karen Daines, it’s obvious that David Blauert, Joe Demme, and Phyllis Erick either don’t seem to have a grasp of the information they need to know as candidates running for the vacant seats on the SFD board, or they are purposely misleading the voters with providing false, erroneous information meant to slam all of the SFD staff and their hard work. I am hopeful that the voters of the Sedona Fire District will look beyond this charade and elect individuals who check out the veracity of their facts before they speak and have the integrity that has been lacking from the majority of the present board.
Have you noticed that whenever a taxpaying citizen questions anything the Sedona Fire District (SFD) does that individual is immediately subject to a ferocious personal attack by Karen Daines?
Aren’t we all getting a little sick and tired of being told by SFD Business Director Daines that we’re just too damn dumb to understand how our taxpayer money is being spent?
According to Daines, she is the only source of “the facts.”
Anyone who disagrees with her is guilty of spreading “very damaging misinformation,” being “ludicrous” and making “completely false and ridiculous” statements.
Is this the kind of attitude we should tolerate from a public employee who works for us? Demonizing the very people who pay her salary?
All over the country, taxpayers are questioning why fire districts and police departments have gotten so expensive. In many cases, they have become the most expensive annual budget item taxpayers face.
Don’t we have a right to question our own fire district’s expenditures – and even disagree with their figures – without being labeled a bunch of idiots by someone like Daines?
Why is she so threatened by these three candidates for the SFD board?
Right after telling us she is not “pro” or “con” these candidates, she proceeds to give us all the reasons she can think of not to vote for them. Is this an attempt by a public employee to influence the outcome of an election?
If she is truly confident that SFD is doing everything properly she should welcome their interest instead of responding with sarcasm and insults.
At the very least, she should behave like the professional we expect and deserve.
As a taxpaying citizen of this district I appreciate when someone takes the time out to explain what some individuals had previously misstated , misrapresented and provided wrong information to the public. I would expect that someone with the SFD, who has the true facts would set the record straight and who would be in a better position to do that than the SFD Business Director, Karen Daines? Her job to be the SOURCE of the”facts.” As far as I am concerned, that’s part of her job and it looks like she takes it very seriously. I am sure that it must be very frustrating for her having to constantly respond to all of these continuous periodic baseless statements and charges by a group of misinformed individuals. She is left with no other choice but to set the record straight. Otherwise, the alternative is not to respond at all and let the citizenry believe the lies that are being spread about the staff and the district. That’s TOTALLY unacceptable! Are you saying that the information she has provided is incorrect and false? If so, I strongly suggest the YOU provide the facts, figures and your sources so that we know who is right. Or are you perhaps really angered by the fact that she is trying to set the record straight, so that the voters in the SFD district have the TRUE facts instead of innuendos.
As a taxpaying citizens we have the right to know the truth about some of the misinformation that’s being disseminated. If you ask me, the above candidates are indeed guilty of spreading “very damaging misinformation,” being “ludicrous” and making “completely false and ridiculous” statements. Why don’t they meet with Chief Hazime or Karen Daines to get the information directly from them, instead of making incorrect statements to the public with nothing to back them up?
The time has come for the taxpaying citizens in this districts to get the TRUE facts and we do expect the professionals who are hired by the SFD to explain it to us. In conclusion, I feel that the Business Director DOES behave like the professional we expect and deserve by setting the record straight.
Mr. Dible, REALLY, should the professionals that we pay to do their jobs just be silent? Should they not speak out and tell the truth? Yes, of course, we, the taxpayers of this district, have the right to question the fire department’s expenditures. And they keep answering. But, what can Ms. Daines answers be that you would accept? What do you not understand about the facts, about the independent financial audits, about the expenses, about the needs of the community? You say she is “demonizing” citizens. Ha! You are “demonizing” OUR fire department.
The “Slate of Hate” you support do know the facts. They have spoken to Karen Daines. They have spoken to Chief Hazime. But they do not believe anything they are shown or told. You want to know why? BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANT THE TRUTH. It doesn’t fit in their Agenda.
After reading the comments in this blog and the ones following SFD Business Director Karen Daines’ Dear Editor “Response to SFD Candidate Slate,” I decided to post one more response of my own.
By way of background, I’ve been actively involved in elections ever since high school – and that was a long time ago.
During my many years of volunteer participation, I’ve walked precincts, manned phone trees, helped design advertising campaigns, organized fundraisers and even been campaign manager and treasurer for a number of candidates. I’ll probably be back at it again in 2012.
I believe every American should participate in the political process and am continually disappointed when we have such low voter turnouts. The citizens in Afghanistan risked their lives to go vote last week and we can’t seem to get our people off the couch.
I’ve never missed a vote – even when I was overseas I voted by absentee ballot. Not bragging, just pointing out that I take this stuff seriously.
Sometimes the results of your participation don’t turn out the way you expected. Yes, I did support and participate in the Christensen and Harr campaign in 2008. And no, I am not happy with the way things turned out. Sometimes the folks you trust and believe in just let you down. It happens.
As far as SFD Business Director Karen Daines goes, I have two areas of concern.
First, I find her demeanor as a public employee unacceptable. As the old saying goes, “You can disagree without being disagreeable.” She simply doesn’t have to use language that is patronizing, condescending and dismissive when addressing taxpaying members of the public – both at SFD Board meetings and it print. She can make her points without the invective. And posting her Internet letter, criticizing three candidates for office, during an election campaign? As a public employee, should she be doing this?
Secondly, I do believe there are legitimate disagreements and unanswered questions regarding SFD financials. Part of being a public agency is accepting the fact that taxpayers are allowed to ask questions about their money – and even go to outside sources to check the figures they are given. As President Reagan famously said, “Trust but verify.”
As an example, let’s look at SFD’s ambulance service. (And no, none of the three candidates she attacked are in favor of privatizing SFD’s ambulance service. The public spoke loud and clear last summer and that’s a dead issue.)
Annual reports filed with the Arizona Department of Health Services show that SFD’s ambulance service generates large, consistent losses while SFD is reporting to us its ambulance service creates substantial revenue. I believe taxpayers are entitled to an explanation.
Now I know as soon as I hit the SEND key, it will probably generate more comments – including personal attacks from the name callers, hate mongers and basement dwellers out there and that’s okay. We live in a democracy and everyone has a right to speak out.
But the nastiness and bile does have a negative impact on our political process.
A question I have been asked many times over the years is: “Why can’t we get better candidates to run for office?” And my answer is that they don’t want to put up with abuse we inflict on anyone who decides to throw his or her hat in the ring.
Looks like this election campaign for the SFD Board of Governors is starting to prove my point.
Selective Memory?
It is very interesting to note that at yesterday’s Candidate Forum, sponsored by the League of Women Voters, SFD Governing Board candidate Joe Demme categorically denied ever supporting privatization of EMS services. Yet, when you look at page six of the minutes of the SFD regular board meeting of April 28, 2010 http://www.sedonafire.org/PDF/Minutes/2010/4-28-10%20Board%20Minutes.pdf you clearly see the following :
Joe Demme, Sedona: “I just have a comment and a couple of questions. First of all, I’m in favor of the privatization of EMS service. “ Has candidate Demme conveniently forgotten his previous statement, since there has been such a massive public outcry against such privatization? Is it wise for us to even consider electing an individual with such selective memory? Haven’t we had enough of such caliber of individuals on the SFD Board for the past two years? It is time for us, the electorate, to bring about change and put Integrity back on the SFD Board!
I saw this entry by chance as I looked at various past articles. Why didn’t this show up as a Recent Comment on the front of your site? Does a reader have to search to find recent posts? Is breastfeeding more important to your readers than an election that will impact the wellbeing of the taxpayers for the next four years? Since we have 8 people running to fill 3 vacancies(actually 4, if you include Don Harr’s resignation) we, as the voters, need to know as much as we can about all of the various candidates. Since we can’t rely on the Red Rock News to be unbiased, you are our only source of information. Please don’t let us down!
Tom Longo says:
September 28, 2010 at 3:42 pm
Selective Memory?
It is very interesting to note that at yesterday’s Candidate Forum, sponsored by the League of Women Voters, SFD Governing Board candidate Joe Demme categorically denied ever supporting privatization of EMS services. Yet, when you look at page six of the minutes of the SFD regular board meeting of April 28, 2010 http://www.sedonafire.org/PDF/Minutes/2010/4-28-10%20Board%20Minutes.pdf you clearly see the following :
Joe Demme, Sedona: “I just have a comment and a couple of questions. First of all, I’m in favor of the privatization of EMS service. “ Has candidate Demme conveniently forgotten his previous statement, since there has been such a massive public outcry against such privatization? Is it wise for us to even consider electing an individual with such selective memory? Haven’t we had enough of such caliber of individuals on the SFD Board for the past two years? It is time for us, the electorate, to bring about change and put Integrity back on the SFD Board!
Last night, Fire District Chief Hazime hosted a “Chief’s Chat “at Station 3 in the VOC. That meeting was intended for the taxpayers to ask the Chief pertinent questions of interest that would help them understand what happens in the fire district and why. Instead, it was immediately taken over by the rantings and ravings of Mr. Lowell Johnson and his slate against the Chief and his staff.
Their attitude seemed to be one of “don’t confuse me facts, my mind is already made up.” Several people in the audience, disgusted by their behavior, left. When some people in the audience tried to get them to act sensibly, they were told to be quiet. That was a real sign of democracy in action, wasn’t it?
Mr. Johnson’s slate must feel very desperate to resort to this type of tactic in order to persuade the taxpayers to vote for them. It’s obvious to many of us within the District that this seems to be the only alternative left to someone used to having his way on everything, including manipulating people around. When his slate resorts to stealing campaign signs from the opposition, (verbally) attacking the Chief and his professional staff, preventing others from speaking out at a community meeting, it gives the rest of us a very good idea of the type of slate they represent!
On page 3A of today’s OTHER paper, Dave Blauert, commenting about the SFD fire association, is quoted as saying ” The union has destroyed this country.” A large number of employees within our district are members of a variety of unions(hospital workers, supermarket employees, teachers, police, sheriff deputies, fire, etc). What would they be earning if it weren’t for the unions watching out for their wages and benefits? Have we all forgotten why they began in the first place? Doesn’t Mr. Blauert remember his days starting out in the construction industry? Since when is it a crime to be a union member and get decent comparable wages and benefits? . I suggest that those of us in this District who are members of any union think twice before seriously considering voting for such a slate.
Blauert is not the guy for the fire board.
In my experience regarding his own properties he has put in place unresponsive managers and if a problem arises he gets rid of the one bringing the problem to his attention maintaining a lackluster status quo.
When we diail 911, WE NEED RESPONSE! Also responsibility. I don’t think this is Blauerts forte.
I ran into a Firefighter from the Verde Valley that is also a member of the local firefighter’s association and began discussing this upcoming election. When the name David Baluert came up, he remember that name. He stated that in the late 1990’s and into the early 2000’s David Baluert used to let the Union meet in his building on Stutz Bearcat. He may have even been heard saying he would let the firefighters use his facility in hopes of receiving their vote some day.
Yet another display of character that lacks Integrity in my eyes. It almost sounds like Charles Christensen who asked for firefighter votes and in turn would hand out raises across the board. Obviously these guys knew better and that’s why they did not support him in 2008 and I would venture to guess that’s why they are not supporting David Baluert in 2010!
In one of his earlier postings, Mr. Craig Dible stated “During my many years of volunteer participation, I’ve walked precincts, manned phone trees, helped design advertising campaigns, organized fundraisers and even been campaign manager and treasurer for a number of candidates. I’ll probably be back at it again in 2012.” Well, it looks like Mr. Dible , is not waiting till 2012 to get involved in the campaign for Blauert, Demme and Erick.
In fact, he is very actively involved and, yet he does it behind the scenes like he did in the 2008 election of Don Harr and Charles Christensen.. To use his own expression in his posting, he is indeed a prime example of a “basement dweller”.
Having designed many advertising campaigns, he has chosen the path to make unfounded allegations meant to put the opposition in a defensive mode. These allegations against the SFD and it’s operations are meant with a great deal of resistance from him when staff takes the time to clarify and explain the true facts. He expects no response what-so-ever from any of the staff members to the misinformation that’s being provided in articles written to disseminate his slate’s propaganda. He just expects staff to sit by and shake their heads affirmatively to whatever he and his slate offer as facts.
I am sorry Mr. Dible, but as a taxpayer of this District, I EXPECT staff to clarify and explain their side of the story. That’s why I and the majority of the taxpayers in this District are paying for their salary. Whatever they say or write may not be necessarily to your liking, but those individuals who are entrusted with fiduciary responsibility within the SFD, have the DUTY, RESPONSIBILITY and OBLIGATION to set the record straight. We, the taxpayers have the right. to know THE facts not YOUR slate’s facts and have the right to hear it directly from the source instead of three totally unprepared and uninformed candidates. In fact someone made a comment after one of candidate forums “Can they all even read and write?” Your strategy is to deflect the electorate’s attention away from his slate and focus instead on misinformation. One just wonders what else you have upyour sleeve between now and November 2nd, I am sure that it is going to be more of the negative campaign you have formulated for your slate in an attempt to win this election. It worked in 2008 and it will definitely not work this time. This time the silent majority will make their feelings known at the polls!
I know some of the employee’s on the Sedona Fire Dept. I heard a couple of days ago they were all giving” HIGH FIVES” to each other at the Fire station when they ran their ad in the newspaper defending their wages. This makes me SICK!!!!!
Who do they think they are!
They have been over-Charging us for years!
You work for us…..Remember that Sedona Fire Dept.
The Sedona Fire Dept. is just another word for CARTEL!
The Sedona Fire Dept. are scared! They know they have been over-charging Sedonans on their taxes. Thats why they hare putting up a big stink against Sedonans. They know they are out of line and have been getting away with this for years. Its a shame! I glad for people like Mr. Johnson who stick up for the people!
Keep up the good work Mr. Johnson and other Sedonans!!!!!!!!!
Why are the Sedona fire fighters hiding under a union?
AHHHHHHH ! I know why, so they can over charge Sedonans.
If by “sticking up for the people” you mean disrupting the democratic process I think you are a little off the rails. All the other items in your post make no sense. Please go sell crazy somewhere else we’re all full up here.
This item was posted over a month ago and it’s still a very timely comment in light of some items on the Agenda in today’s regular SFD Board Meeting that I will summarize after the comments. “Alice Hickey says:
September 15, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Mr. Dible, REALLY, should the professionals that we pay to do their jobs just be silent? Should they not speak out and tell the truth? Yes, of course, we, the taxpayers of this district, have the right to question the fire department’s expenditures. And they keep answering. But, what can Ms. Daines answers be that you would accept? What do you not understand about the facts, about the independent financial audits, about the expenses, about the needs of the community? You say she is “demonizing” citizens. Ha! You are “demonizing” OUR fire department.
The “Slate of Hate” you support do know the facts. They have spoken to Karen Daines. They have spoken to Chief Hazime. But they do not believe anything they are shown or told. You want to know why? BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANT THE TRUTH. It doesn’t fit in their Agenda.”
Now let’s get to the part that ties in with the above comment by Alice Hickey. First item, brought up by “independent” SFD Board candidate Bert Berkshire who questioned the full page ad placed in the RRN by Chief Hazime. The Chief clearly explained that there was a need for District staff to clarify the facts in the half page ad run in the RRN by the Demme, Blauert, Erick slate that provided some erroneous information dealing with salaries. Since the RRN refused to run his article under the Guest Perspective column, the Chief found himself with no other choice but place the SFD ad in the RRN. It was obvious to all that Mr. Berkshire placed this item on the agenda to please the Demme, Blauert, Erick slate. As pointed out very eloquently by one of the speakers, Gene Chandler, perhaps his true motive was to show his solidarity with that group, so that he could be appointed by them to replace Don Harr’s vacancy in case they got elected. The other speaker, Joan Shannon, made an excellent point by saying that she and her neighbors were happy to see the ad because it clarified the information they saw in the original half page RRN ad. Her presentation reflected the feelings of the majority of the readers who need to know the true facts about the various issues being brought by a slate of candidates whose sole purpose is to plant seeds of doubt and mistrust about the SFD and it’s staff.
This brings me to the second item on the agenda with political implications. Charles Christensen placed an item on the agenda that alleged that by merely providing the facts about certain misinformation disseminated by some of the candidates, “certain SFD employees possibly violated the Hatch Act” http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/a/hatch_act.htm .. Passed in 1939, the Hatch Act restricts the political activity of executive branch employees of the federal government, District of Columbia government, and some state and local employees who work in connection with federally funded programs. Of course, we all know that these complaints, most probably placed by Mr. Craig Dible, are meant to divert the attention away from his weak candidates and focus instead on the SFD. When these complaints are finally investigated weeks from now, it will be well after the election.
The contention is that when certain SFD employees, when clarifying articles or blogs in some of the local electronic media (such as the one quoted above), were actually violating the law. As stated so well by Alice Hickey “should the professionals that we pay to do their jobs just be silent? Should they not speak out and tell the truth?”
Is the Demme, Blauert, Erick slate so desperate that they want the electorate to hear and see only what they decide is helpful to their cause? Is this what they expect to do if they were ever to get elected? Are these actions of individuals with integrity? Are these the sort of individuals who should get your vote and trust to represent you as SFD Governing Board members?
In a posting I made under this topic on October 22, 2010 , I commented, speaking of Mr. Craig Dible “Your strategy is to deflect the electorate’s attention away from his slate and focus instead on misinformation. One just wonders what else you have up your sleeve between now and November 2nd, I am sure that it is going to be more of the negative campaign you have formulated for your slate in an attempt to win this election.
My comments above are a clear indication that Mr. Craig and his slate have, unfortunately, proven that my earlier posting was not off target.
Interesting to note that the ad placed on page 3 of tonight’s RRN is from Herman L. Slater (a barber in town and a tenant of SFD candidate Blauert) is Mr. Blauert’s Campaign Chairman. He is listed on the Statement of Organization filed with Yavapai County Elections..
http://www.co.yavapai.az.us/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=58006