Storms raging outside the Bristol Borough municipal building mimicked the tensions in the council as the vote for the fire company allocation motion neared.
Credit: Erich Martin
The council voted 5 to 1 to stop the motion, with one member abstaining, and another away on vacation.
Advertisements
The motion would have allocated borough funding to four of the five fire companies in town. Bristol Fire Co., Bristol Consolidated Fire Co., Goodwill Hose Co. and America Hose, Hook and Ladder would remain funded, but Bristol Volunteer Fire Co. Station 25 would be cut from receiving borough funding. Station 25 shares a building with America Hose, Hook and Ladder.
During public comment, a borough resident said, “I hope that no matter how the vote goes, [the council] just comes to a conclusion, for all of the firefighters in Bristol.”
The council has been wrestling with the issue of fire company allocation for many recent years, as told by a representative speaking from Bristol Fire Company 51. “This has been on ongoing issue for at least 15 years, that I know of,” he said.
Advertisements
One of the biggest issues to make itself apparent at the meeting was the fact that the council itself felt unprepared to vote on such an issue. “We’re making a decision, basically without knowing, except for some information,” said president of the council, Ralph DiGuiseppe. “No one on this council is in a good position,” he reasoned.
A representative from fire company 50 made a recommendation to remove the motion from the agenda, and form a committee for further investigation.
Advertisements
Public comment continued as members of different fire companies accused the process of being “decided by politics, not facts.”
Mayor Pat Sabatini rocketed back at President DiGuiseppe. “Don’t make this a political football, Ralph,” after accusations of turning the issue into a politicking game made its way around the council.
Chris Asplen, president of Asplen Associates LLC, the attorney representing fire companies 53 and 25 also spoke during public comment, all in opposition to the motion being presented at the council. Asplen noted that the mayor is supposed to present “responsible proposals,” and insisted “that this is the last thing that this is, a ‘responsible proposal.’”
Advertisements
Asplen continued, stirring emotions of those opposing him, arguing about the material the council had available to come to a conclusion. “There was no financial analysis of this. […] How could you possibly make a decision without a written report,” Asplen asked of DiGuiseppe and the rest of the council.
“There needs to be consolidation, and that is something we are trying to work on,” the mayor said, defending his position by explaining.
Advertisements
The vote to pass the motion was defeated, with a final vote of five “No’s” to one “yes.”
After the meeting concluded, Sabatini explained his personal feelings on the vote and what it could mean for the borough. “When push comes to shove, I need to make the decision, and I still believe I made the right one,” said Sabatini. “It is sad that the people think the mayor doesn’t have the right to do his own investigation.”
Advertisements
Two official documents from 2011 show Sabatini’s claim. One document, information for Bristol Borough, shows two separate presidents of the companies in question, while the tax returns for the same year show the same president for both fire houses.
“When the borough info is different from the IRS, that raises eyebrows,” concluded Sabatini.
