As stated by our city manager. The key word in his statement is “we.” I can only assume this means him and our elected officials, and of course the accused Fire Chief. The city manager goes on to explain that the city admitted no wrongdoing, and that the decision to settle was based on financial reasons.
“The legal fees in the case exceeded what the fireman settled for, so it was simply more cost effective to pay the settlement than to continue in court.”
I’m not an attorney but it is my understanding that when you go to court the party that loses the case pays the legal fees for both parties. Also most insurance companies that I have had experiences with will not settle out of court if the defense has a solid case and in fact there was no wrongdoing. Since me and about 8,991 other citizens living in Rockingham were not behind closed doors at the November meeting and did not get to vote on the $30,000 out-of- pocket cost to the city, maybe the “we” that unanimously approved this expense should bare the cost. Also when June rolls around maybe our elected officials should consider this in the evaluation of the city manager and the fire chief and give them both a $5,000 salary increase. This comment does not imply that there was any wrongdoing by our city management, but stop making our elected officials look like they were in on this wrongdoing.
Ron York
Rockingham
we will call your campaign to fire Chuck by it`s new name
"CHUNK CHUCK"
Louis
Exactly how much money does the city need to lose because of Gardner’s temper before it’s enough? Do you realize this man is known outside of Richmond County for his temper or should I say lack of control? Let’s be real, if any normal, average person were to behave as Gardner has, they wouldn’t be employed any longer. This entire debacle reminds me more of the banking debacle each day; people keeping their jobs despite the mess they create for the rest of us.
One more thing, are you NUTS with this idea of having him answer to Crump? Hello, he already answers to Crump and that has really served us well thus far.
In all fairness he should be offered and instructed to seek some type of anger management help and not be allowed to make decisions affecting employees without first seeking approval from Mr. Crump.
If he were a teacher he would already be somewhat protected by tenure, a luxury that city employees do not enjoy.
Having had to deal with Chuck when he was a city inspector I know first hand that he is not at all user friendly and also very arrogant but he is also a long time employee of the city and deserves fair treatment.
I've never been a firefighter, volunteer or otherwise, so I can't speak from experience, but logic tells me these men must be able to trust the man in command totally. I don't know how it is possible given the actions of Gardner.
It baffles me how the city is not more upset about this; we probably won't hear the outrage until the taxes are increased to pay for this. Hopefully the people will remember the details of why this all happened when the time comes.
If these two get pay increases after this debacle it will be the same as all the bank CEO's getting bonuses for running a company into the ground at the cost of innocents.
I'm a firm believe that government can do right. They just choose not to.
The elected officials, are looking at the town as their own personal Monopoly board. Pass go, collect 200 dollars.