State audit criticizes MFD on spending Commissioners defend costs as part of volunteers’ training by Carolyn James

Members of the Massapequa Fire Department’s Rescue Company #3 and Engine Company #5 issued a scathing reprimand last month to the Board of Fire Commissioners saying they were "disgusted and outraged" by the findings of a recent New York State audit. The audit, completed in June, showed the Commissioners had spent more money on new construction than was authorized by the public, and that the Commissioner’s had gone on conventions, racking up thousands of dollars in bills for first-class hotels, "extravagant" meals and travel, including travel expenses for family members.

"The clear violation of the local finance law as pointed out by the Comptroller, as well as other conduct... must be brought to the public’s attention," said Charles Ruppert, Captain and co-chair of the Company. "These are serious issues raised by the state audit that show an arrogance on the part of the Commissioners, and a disregard for the public’s money."

In response, Michael Hanna, Chairman of the Board, said the statements by the Company spokesman represents the sentiments of a handful of the members who have a longstanding dispute with the district’s leadership.

"There are five or six individuals who are very boisterous and intimidating of the other members," said Hanna, adding that Ruppert, specifically, is a close friend of a volunteer who was suspended by the Department’s Fire Chief and then sued the district after the Board of Fire Commissioners upheld the suspension. "This is the work of a few malcontents.

The auditors report showed that during the period of January 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999, fire district records reported expenditures totaling $245,485 were made for conferences and fire training. That included training for all of the district’s Commissioner’s as well as the department’s 240 members.

In reporting on conferences attended by Commissioners, specifically, the auditors said that:

•hotel, airfare and car rental charges appeared higher than necessary;

•meal costs were either extravagant or included costs for unauthorized persons;

•hotel and car rental charges and meal expenses were incurred on days in which the conferences were not held;

•meal receipt stubs were not supported by itemized bills showing the composition of the costs;

•bills or receipts to support airfare and certain car rental charges to show that the services paid for were actually received were not presented and an overpayment was made to a travel agency for prepayment of hotel costs at a conference.

In one instance involving a conference in Orlando, Florida, February 18-22, 1998, the five Commissioners stayed at a hotel at a theme park, although the conference was held at a different hotel in the Orlando area. The per-night room charge at the hotel where the conference was being held was $117, while the per-night room charge at the hotel in the theme park was $409. The total savings to the district, had the Commissioner’s stayed at the conference hotel, would have been $8,690.

In addition, each of the five Commissioners who attended the conference rented a car ranging in cost from $407 to $468.

"We question the necessity for each commissioner to need his own car to attend the conference," the auditor said, adding that in one instance one of the Commissioner’s car rental bill of $407 was for eight days, and the vehicle was picked up in Gainesville four days prior to the conference."

In a letter of response to the state, Commissioner Hanna said that the board believes the monies expended for the conferences were actual and necessary as defined by the law.

"With regard to the expenses incurred on the day prior to and day after the convention or seminar, the board was operating under a long-standing unwritten rule that allowed for a day of travel the day before and the day after a convention or seminar," said Hanna. "This policy was based on information provided by representatives of the Comptroller’s Office at seminars and conventions by the State Association of Fire Districts."

Despite that, Hanna said that while the board does