Chopmist Hill Fire Department sues Town Council

SCITUATE - The Chopmist Hill Fire Department is suing the Town Council and town treasurer in Superior Court in a nine count civil suit that seeks to restore the organization to its firefighting and rescue duties.

The suit cites numerous council actions and comments by Council President Robert Budway that culminated in and resulted from the council's closing of the department's fire station which it rents from the town, on Sept. 22.

"They want to return to the fire station and do what Chopmist Hill firefighters want to be doing: fighting fires and providing rescue services," the organization's lawyer, John P. Breguet, told The Valley Breeze and Observer on Tuesday, Oct. 27.

The suit was filed in Superior Court on Oct. 22 and is scheduled for a hearing Nov. 10.

The suit alleges breach of lease, intentional interference with a potential contractual relationship, libel, slander, malicious prosecution, conversion and violation of state and federal law.

Town Solicitor David D'Agostino told The Valley Breeze & Observer Monday, "Obviously we'll vigorously defend the allegations. They are an interesting set of allegations."

D'Agostino said the town "has just been served the complaint and I'm not even sure all the council members have been served yet."

The council members are being sued as public officials and as private individuals.

The 13-page complaint asks for the following, that the town council be ordered to:

* Return the fire station premises to Chopmist Hill Fire Department, a private charter corporation that rents the building from the town.

* Return the equipment and fire trucks that it seized.

* Refrain from "interfering in any manner with the department's operations."

* Recognize and follow the terms of the lease.

* "Continue to fund (the department) in the same proportion as it in future years funds the three other fire districts in town."

* Should the council have "any actual evidence of alleged wrongdoing by any individual member of the department" that it give the department "the nature of the allegations and an opportunity to rebut, refute, explain, or otherwise defend itself before any adverse action is taken against the department as a whole."

* Minutes of all closed sessions in which the council discussed or voted on matters pertaining to the unionization effort be provided.

* Reimburse the Fire Department for its cost and attorneys fees.

* Find that Budway acted in bad faith and award punitive and compensatory damages to the organization.

The council in September closed the station, seized equipment and trucks and appointed a new chief after announcing that the Police Department was investigating reports that firefighters may have illegally taken water from hydrants in Johnston and then sold the water to residents using town-owned equipment.

At meetings and in press releases, Budway has asserted his and the council's preference for the volunteer fire department system that has existed in town for several decades. The town buys most of the equipment and vehicles for the four departments (North Scituate, Hope Jackson and Potterville, as well) and pays a stipend to emergency medical technicians for hours worked and to firefighters who respond to calls.

In 2008, several EMTs organized under the International Association of Fire Fighters and sought recognition as town employees.

The union filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board which found that the EMTs were not eligible for unionization under the federal labor relations act. The union subsequently filed a petition with the Rhode Island Labor Relations Board asking that EMTs who work 20 hours a week and whose work shifts are scheduled by the town be recognized as union members.

The union notified the town in August that it had withdrawn its petition listing the town as the employer of the Chopmist Hill EMTs.

The Chopmist Hill Fire Department recognized the union as the exclusive bargaining agent for the EMTs who work more than 20 hours a week on Sept. 14. The state board ruled in the union's favor on Sept. 21, according to the suit.

The suit contends that Budway and the council were motivated to remove the department and "confiscated" its equipment by "their personal objection to the department's agreement to recognize the union."

The suit also contends the "Scituate police investigation of alleged criminal misconduct by the department has been instigated and/or continued at the request of (the Town Council) based on their attempt to prevent the department from having unionized personnel."