||| BY MIA KARTIGANER , SPECIAL TO theORCASONIAN |||
There are some curious and valid questions being put forth by this community out of concern for the well-being of everyone at the Orcas Island Fire Department. Until they are answered I hope the OIFR Management and Board will treat the staff that are speaking out with the same regard as the law affords Whistleblowers.
Though the Vote of No Confidence (VoNC) regarding Chief Williams was made public in September. Union members say the discussion leading up to signing the VoNC had been going on for at least two years. When the board declined to acknowledge the Union’s letter they felt the need to go public.
In trying to understand the foundation of the Union’s concerns about the Chief’s competency, I went back to 2016 when the then commission of three created a search committee for the purpose of hiring a new Chief.
The commissioners at the time were Wes Heinmiller, Barbara Bedell and Jim Coffin. They created a list of criteria for the committee to focus on.
The search committee found that Scott Williams, acting as interim chief at the time, met none of the criteria. After an extensive search the committee found two candidates. The board insisted on including Williams as a third. The most qualified candidate was seeking the position in part to fulfill the 2-3 more years required to gain his Washington State pension before retiring. He suggested that the board hire him as chief, with Williams as assistant chief, so that he could mentor him and prepare Williams to take the position.The board declined.
As the search committee prepared to recommend restarting the search, Wes Heinmiller called a Special Meeting for the purpose of announcing the hire of Scott Williams as Chief. Amanda Montague, who had recently been appointed to the board to replace Jim Coffin, was chosen by Heinmiller and Bedell over Jim Helminski, Tim Fuller, Pierrette Guimond, Steve Vierthaler and John Dann to fill Coffin’s spot. Montague herself says she doesn’t understand why she was selected, given the choices. It was immediately clear to her, however, that hiring Williams for the Chief position was a forgone conclusion.
In my interviews with present commissioners it was openly acknowledged that Chief Williams was in need of training at the time of his hire. I asked Wes Heinmiller what specific training the Chief has gotten since then and he said he couldn’t speak to that. Commissioner Fuller, in the presence of Lin McNulty, theOrcasonian editor and again later in a two-hour phone call, said that the Chief needs to work on communication, clarity of expectations and follow up.
The industry standard for anyone to rise above the position of Battalion Chief is that they have a BA in Fire Sciences, Public Administration or some equivalent. Rather than require that Williams pursue a focused degree, the commissioners have offered counseling and mentorship they feel their own backgrounds qualify them to give.
In the Minutes from the August 16, 2021 Board of Fire Commissioners Meeting, the Chief’s Report included discussion of hiring Per Diem employees. He said that the Union had been obstructing the process and reaching out to the candidates to dissuade them from the position(s). Please read.
When “Commissioner Christmas expressed feeling disturbed by this and requested clarification, wanting to know why the Union doesn’t want per diem and why they are telling applicants not to complete the process” the “Chief shared that he doesn’t want to get too far into this conversation at this time.”
This would have been the time to mention that he had not gone through the agreed upon process contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, CBA. The Union is meant to be included in the screening of the per diem applicants in order to interview, evaluate and work with them.
The two main sticking points that extended the CBA negotiation process by at least six months were the Union’s request for minimum staffing for safety (having an FF/EMT and a FF/Medic on shift at all times) and management wanting to be able to cover FF/EMT shifts with volunteers. The Union wanted minimum requirements in place for any volunteer coverage of a staff FF/EMT shift. They asked that volunteers be in good standing with at least twenty calls a month, as well as having EMT, Firefighter One and engine operator credentials.
The Union’s concerns have been focused on safety, quality of care and service. The contract requires mutually agreed upon per diems and volunteer coverage. Unfortunately the narrative of Union obstruction has persisted. For almost two years the OIFR web page’s top banner:
The policy has been to keep non-essential non-responders out of the building in order to limit exposure to the people who we rely on to answer emergency calls. Understandable. And yet, the Orcas Island Health Care District Superintendent, along with Island Hospital administrators, were going in and out of the building to hold meetings, sometimes in the small non-public conference room, once holding an interview in the private kitchen space for the staff.
The duty responders were never introduced or acknowledged. They were never given any notice that there would be non-departmental people in the building who may or may not be masked. In a text from then Administrative Director Jim Schuh to the chief on September 10, (gained through a public records request) “What all does Anne need set up for the 1:00 OHCD meeting?” “It was not unusual to hear the sound of the keypad code being input and to look up and see that Anne Presson was in the building.” In addition to being the OIHCD Superintendent at the time, she is also the partner of Chief Williams.
It is these sorts of inconsistencies and lack of communication that the “disgruntled” (as named in the OIFR flyer that we all got in our mail and hopefully read prior to recycling them) employee(s) are responding to.
On the upside, the new Assistant Chief Holly van Schaick has been a nice addition to the District.
Tune in for more, very soon.
Mia, one correction which only illustrates the irony of events..
When the two runner up Chief candidates were interviewed, one stood head and shoulders above all applicants.
When #1 realized the situation before any candidate was even chosen, he made an observation.. Its clear that a local candidate is being preferred.. I would like to suggest a different approach, which was hiring an Assistant Chief to help Mentor the potential new Chief. ( this speaks to the incredible HR experience)
I want to give depth to what was being offered.. this Acting Fire Chief also had the Training Contract for North Bend, (Washington States Training Grounds) His firm has been there training Firefighters for the State of Washington.
Which included Orcas, Lopez and Sanjian.
His interest.. he was retiring out of his current Chief position because of District mergers. Which is happening more and more as recourses Diminish. He’s need, three more years continued in a Fire District. He’s training company is (for hire) which was not covered by the Left 2 retirement plan. .
The hiring committee couldn’t believe the incredible opportunity for the district. You get the person you supposedly want with stellar assistance of years of top notch Professional support, at a huge discount!
The Commission stated.. we are not interviewing for a Assistant Chief.
As the Superintendent referred to in this obviously biased piece I would like to clarify points made that suggest my presence in the Firehall was regular and/or inappropriate. I can probably count the number of times I was in the building on one, maybe two times. In every case, there were business reasons for my presence, largely as it was during a time when we were building the new clinic with Island Hospital, and EMS played a key role. Islanders should recall that a large part of the reason for seeking alternatives to UW were the after=hours coverage and lack of coordination with EMS. For that reason, the Island Hospital CEO and I felt it was important to include OIFR in the process as we designed the after-hours model. When the CEO was onsite, we met to further the relationship, as well as demonstrate to the community a commitment to partnership. I can also say that perhaps other than being in the Firehouse kitchen to get coffee, I never held a meeting there.
I am personally offended and dismayed at the lack of balanced reporting with anything having to do with OIFR. I offered to be interviewed by the reporter and she declined, suggesting I had no relevance to this situation. I then find it irresponsible that she deems it appropriate to refer to me and make accusations without proper background. Again, taking one side as fact and using this as another reason to disparage the administration of OIFR. There is the tone of always assuming negative intent and impropriety, as opposed to getting ALL of the facts by talking to ALL parties to be able to arrive at a truly balanced perspective.
If the community wants to question people’s qualifications for work, I suggest you look around you. Why look at one leader and leave all of the others out of the mix. In fact, I am probably one of the few who actually does have the education and experience to make some valuable contributions yet there is no willingness to engage. In the end, that is partly why I made the difficult decision to leave my role. The behaviours that are pervasive in this situation aren’t looking to improve they are looking to tear down. Many want to be Chief, and that is what is motivating them..not what is best for this community. The individuals that continue this campaign of negativity and disparagement are not trying to improve. This is NOT how you go about it and I ask you, once again, to look in the mirror and think about your part in this dysfunction before casting stones.
I sincerely hope that Lin will post my comment as people need to understand what is truly going on here. I put my heart and soul into my position, and worked 24/7 during my entire tenure to help ensure the long-term sustainability of health care on Orcas, and throughout the County. There are tremendous challenges that lie ahead, and having people continue to distract the focus is dangerous and self serving. Ultimately, I was recruited back to a role that allows me to make a different in the national health are landscape. I can only hope that perhaps what I am sharing will resonate with the silent majority on Orcas and activate you to help bring about an end to this campaign against one of your most valued resources. I compel you to please pay attention and look at the motivations and actions of everyone involved.
To excerpt from above:
“The commissioners at the time were Wes Heinmiller, Barbara Bedell and Jim Coffin. They created a list of criteria for the committee to focus on.
The search committee found that Scott Williams, acting as interim chief at the time, met none of the criteria. After an extensive search the committee found two candidates. The board insisted on including Williams as a third….
As the search committee prepared to recommend restarting the search, Wes Heinmiller called a Special Meeting for the purpose of announcing the hire of Scott Williams as Chief. …
In my interviews with present commissioners it was openly acknowledged that Chief Williams was in need of training at the time of his hire. I asked Wes Heinmiller what specific training the Chief has gotten since then and he said he couldn’t speak to that.”
Seems clear that Wes Heinmiller could and should speak (publicly at this point) to a whole series of decisions he made or oversaw, alone, and/or with others around this. And in the meantime, it also seems clear that our Chief is not and never was qualified for the position he holds. Bizarre.
Shouldn’t we, the (taxpaying) community, expect integrity and transparency in these matters?
Anne,
I’m sure this community is very appreciative of your service. I declined to interview you because of your bias. I have stuck to the facts here.
My only motivation in looking into the struggles at OIFR is my concern for this community and those who serve us. That alone will continue to guide my ongoing investigation. Looking into the organizational issues at OIFR is the right of every shareholder.
Mia – I respectfully suggest that you did not capture the “facts”. You’re reporting third hand information without giving everyone the benefit of responding. Either you’re calling me a liar or you’d have to admit any reference to my activities is not factual if I was not given the courtesy of responding to the information that was reported to you about me.
Mia’s article made me more confused–and more worried–about the situation at OIFR. I suspect I’m far from the only one here on Orcas with the same misgivings.
I would like to close my saying that I agree the community needs to know EVERYTHING. I also take great offense to the suggestion that I am biased; therefore, I cannot contribute to this discussion. For two years I have taken the high road and watched in horror the things that have played out. I believe I have demonstrated extreme restraint, because leaders don’t tear organizations and people down in the public arena for their own personal gain. My decision did nothing positive for me or those who I care about, quite the opposite. Yet I behaved in a professional and responsible manner, and I cannot say the same for most in this situation.
When I first read this article last night, I was too upset about it to write a comment and I hope by now I have calmed down enough to write clearly. I expected and hope for truly an investigative, factual reporting piece as I have been very confused about what is really happening. As I would assume any journalist or writer knows, the way you end a piece has the most power. At the end of this piece I am left with Anne Presson getting into the fire hall due to her being “the partner “of the fire chief. In my opinion this is about as yellow journalism as you can get, belongs more in the National Enquirer. I get it, and agree, that those in the fire hall would have appreciated being forewarned. However, the article takes it into a real cheap shot, and sexist/misogynist to boot. As to Anne Presson being “biased”– I imagine anyone Mia interviewed also had their own views, which constitutes bias. Don’t journalists try to talk to “all sides” and leave it to the reader to determine for themselves what they think? Finally, since this seems like a cheap shot at Anne, I have to say in my very biased opinion, based on knowing her, she is incredibly professional, not ego driven, and can be counted on to relate facts and be objective, and often at great cost to herself. I am glad that she is speaking up for herself in her comments. For myself, the best explanation I have heard about what is going on in the fire hall is from when I asked someone who worked here years ago and remains in touch with folks, what they thought was going on, if they felt like saying anything. to me They paused for a moment, and then said “personality conflicts.” I agree with Bob Distler’s comment– the article left me more confused as well as upset on Anne’s behalf.
I have followed and attended so many meetings over more than 15 years under different Boards and Fire Chiefs,
We had all kind of issues over the years.
But the most important issues is “ How is the response ?
Chief Williams has worked hard with his team !
Until some people wanted his job ?
Anne, you are correct in that I should have given you an opportunity to refute the claim that you had been in the building more than once or twice. But this article is not about you, not about your accomplishments or qualifications. It’s also not about people wanting the chief’s job. (Suggesting that underscores the lack of concern and respect for what these people are experiencing) I was trying to illustrate some of what is at the foundation of the Vote of No Confidence. It’s about people who want a stable, consistent, capable and qualified leader who interacts with them and includes them in processes that directly affect them.
Well Mia thank you for for making me giggle tonight. Your last two sentences are about as far from the truth as they can possible get.
I agree Leith. In order to assess whether accusations and/or perceptions by one party are accurate, the responsible thing to do is capture input from all sides and other key stakeholders. Obviously each side in a situation has their perspective, and those who also engage with the parties in the regular course of business can provide valuable insights that allow a truly unbiased assessment of where the truth lies, which is often in the middle. Throughout this process there has never been what I would deem a fair and unbiased assessment. As I’ve said before, every leader has things to work on and improve upon, and I’ve heard the Commissioners and Administration all recognize they have, and are, working on those areas I have yet to hear others take any responsibility for their part in the situation, nor demonstrate a willingness to work together in a truly cooperative manner. It’s very difficult to come together and establish trust, as many have stressed is needed, when one party decides to take to social media with damaging and unsubstantiated claims that go well beyond the issues on the table.
I completely agree, Mia, that this is not about me. That said, I believe I am uniquely qualified to provide some valuable insights. It appears you have taken feedback from others that DO have a bias and accept that as fact. I just ask that you consider speaking with other leaders in the County who could provide you with some insights into areas of this that would be important to understand. This hasn’t felt like a reporting of information, rather casting judgement which is not completely well informed nor appropriate. If that was truly the goal of this role, I would suggest bringing in a management consulting firm to assess the root cause of what is going on and productive remedies….this is not the way to go about it.
I appreciate everyone’s willingness to listen to my personal opinions on this subject and hope to be seen as observations coming from someone who truly does care about this department and the community. It is offensive to think that my contributions would be dismissed as simply biased comments coming from the Chief’s girlfriend. Anyone who knows me knows that I would not weigh in on something so important and emotionally charged if I didn’t think I had something valuable to contribute. That said, this is my last attempt to bring in an additional perspective. I realize this will not resonate with those who continue this campaign against OIFR, and it has been very damaging to my personal well-being. I don’t disagree that there is a lot to repair within the department; however, I strongly disagree with the way in which this is being handled. I can only hope that perhaps something I’ve said will resonate with the majority of islanders who, understandably, want to stay on the sidelines.
Thanks for this article, Mia. i look forward to the next installment. I have no independent knowledge of the dispute(s) at OIFR. Until your article, everything I read about it seemed to be vague innuendo, leaving me wondering what it was all about. Your article commented on specific issues:
• Chief Williams alleged lack of qualifications
• The board’s apparent desire to hire him rather than a more qualified candidate
• The chief’s alleged failure to comply with the union contract
• The alleged use of the firehouse for meetings in violation of OIFR’s stated policy regarding the pandemic.
I notice that none of the comments characterizing your article as one-sided or unfair attempt to disprove any of the first 3 allegations , at least not with any evidence. Although the fourth point is a somewhat peripheral issue, Anne Presson’s statement that she was in the firehouse no more than “once or twice,” and that she was there for legitimate purposes, should have been included in the article, as you said in your second comment about it.
Thanks again for delviing into the actual issues in this dispute.