|Jeffrey Ferrin's response to discussion that arose at the Feb. 15 City Council meeting in response to his appointment to the Ambulance Review Board|
I will say that I am amazed that this is even happening. Especially since I have made this information available ever since I ran against Mayor Bianchi in his first bid to be mayor. The mayor took the time to discuss these matters with me then and even before the appointment. So if he was willing to take the time to look at these issues and found that they were not an issue I am hopeful that the councilors will as well.
I will say that I was a little but not totally surprised that Jonathan Lothrup would do what he did that is how he operates. I would be more encouraged if this councilor took the time to see all the evidence and not just what was published I however do encourage all the councilors to look at my civil service decisions and from that compose questions. From there my hopes would be that they then take a look at my complete document trail that supports that much of what was mentioned by the councilor were fabricated issues. Such as the conducting union business on city time. In one case I was off the clock and it was 4:15 PM and I was by myself. The second is when I was not even working that day and it was at 7:20 AM and I was speaking to one individual before his day started at 7:30. I have documents to support both. These are jut two examples Joe. The disciplinary mentions in the civil service decisions does not in any way explain both sides of an issue as mentioned. Councilor Lothrup mentioned having someone with character on that board and he was not sure I had the character needed as it is a very important board. He however did not at any time ask me any questions nor did he see the documents I have. Councilor Mazzeo was the only councilor to reach out to me prior to last nights meeting to ask questions. I have been an open book as an employee of the city and as a citizen who has stood before the council. I have always supported my remarks with facts. For example: One not mentioned in the civil service informational section is a 3 day suspension I had been given by Mr. Collingwood that was over turned when he had learned that the foremen whom he spoke to had lied to him and that I had been truthful. That cost the tax payer 3 days pay to me with no work performed as a result of that lie. It also does not show that no action was taken against that foremen for having lied. I have the documents from Mr. Collingwood to support it.
What I am hoping will happen here is that these councilors who are questioning my character will see that it took character to bring forward the illegal obtaining of public funds by the former water superintendent that was brought to the commissioners attention and the former mayors attention who never acted on the information provided. This man is no longer employed as a result. It took character to show and prove the violation of ethics laws and some other things by the former superintendent of highway who was demoted as a result of these things and others that he did including altering legal documents regarding my work related injury. This is very same man who submitted these disciplinary actions with the support of the commissioner in which he was never provided proof of any derogatory actions by me before disciplinary action was taken. It also is incorrect and a serious conflict of interest to have the very person who hands out disciplinary action also be the hearings officer. As is the case with Bruce Collingwood doing both. The character Jonathan speaks of does not mention how I pointed out the illegal transfer of $143,000 from the Peda fund to Berkshire Economic Development who went defunct shortly after being given the money for marketing of Peda. This character does not reflect how I was prepared to testify at trial against a former foremen who assaulted a fellow employee because it was the right thing to do. It does not reflect the fact that I was able to get the current acting Department of Public Services director and John Barrett to admit before the council that they had failed to follow procurement laws when seeking to purchase the asphalt recycler.
The character Jonathan referred to my not having does not mention how I stood before the ambulance committee on several occasions to discuss my reasoning's based on my experiences as a professional and a resident as to why it was important to share the 911 contract and how it provided for better EMS coverage for the residence of Pittsfield when they call 911 for the service. How it would prevent the stacking of calls when the providing service is unavailable beause they are tied up with other calls and transfers and we are unable to get a volunteer service to come in because they are unable to get a crew together. It does not reflect how I had talked about how that would be a chance to create jobs and a tax base that the former mayor was looking for. It does not reflect how I had spoken with the owner of Action prior to the 911 contract awarding and encouraged him to speak with Peda and the mayor about taking advantage of any TIFS and other incntives by putting up a permanent structure on the William Stanley Business Park when he asked me abut finding rentals on the East side of the city to which none were available. I explained that if he was serious about locating to Pittsfield this would show the commitment on his part. Peda has signed a tentative agreement to have Action build on that site..
I agree that I have been outspoken regarding many issues in the city and will continue to do so. However lets look at my back ground regarding my EMS experiences. I started at the age of 16 in 1984 when I became a junior volunteer FF. It was then that I was introduced to EMS as a first responder. In 1986 I took my first EMT class after returning from Fort Jackson S.C. from basic training and AIT as an Army Reservist. I was not successful as I failed the written test by 1 point and did not know then that I could retake the test again. So in 1993 I finally re-took the course and became certified as an EMT. I served as a volunteer in a local service for 18 yrs never once being disciplined, reprimanded or suspended. During that time period I received 9 certificates for the saving of a life. In 2008 I took an Intermediate course and became cetified at the Intermediate level. I have never had any issues with following protocols set forth by OEMS and the Massachusetts Department of Health. I have in my career done well over 3,000 volunteer calls for help just as an EMT and continue to work as a part time and volunteer EMT-I. I served 14 yrs as a volunteer FF, I am 911 and telecommunications certified. I was certified as an Intermittent police officer through the Agawam Police Academy in 1997. I served in the Army Reserves from 1985 when I joined until 1997 when I was Honorably discharged at the rank of E-4 Specialist.
So if those are character flaws then I am guilty as charged. If defending ones self against wrongful accusations because I live my live with morals and refuse to do illegal things as well as standing up for my fellow man is wrong then I am guilty. If there is one thing I learned in my career as a soldier, EMT, police officer and 911 dispatcher is that you document things and you document well because you never know when that documentation will get you through a court case and the onslaught of a defense attorneys questioning should a case go to court. Well I made it a point to carry that experience of documenting over to my job as a city employee and that is why I am able to lay my head down at night with a clean conscience. If one does not lie, hide or misguide the truth then when the time comes for questions they are better truthfully answered. I would encourage you or any other news outlet who may also have questions to also ask me to look at my documented path as an employee of the city and determine for yourselves who was the wolf in sheep's clothing.. This is the reason I not only documented my daily life in the highway department, but also took pictures and videos along the way.
Civil service decisions are not always providing complete testimony. For example. on the one regarding a derogatory remark made about the President Of The United states did not reflect how a written statement from one of the employees completely contradicted his in person testimony and was proven to have lied. It does not state that I actually made a statement about the president only that I allegedly stated look who's running this country. The other decision does not reflect how we were ordered to keep the trucks running at all times so that the GPS trackers would remain on. Nor does it mention how I tried to contact my foremen by radio but the radio was not working. The foremen stated that the radio was working not knowing I had a copy of the write up of it not working. It did not reflect how I had asked repeatedly for my work orders in writing and was refused therefore leaving the door open for such interpretations of what was or was not to be the job given and whom ordered it. It also makes no mention of how during the hearing officers visit to BMC I was able to prove the head of security lied during his testimony regarding locations of bathrooms he said did not exist. It also does not reflect the fact that when he testified regarding the 5 pictures provided that they were hand picked by the highway superintendent from a 30 minute video that just happened to be erased after the pictures were chosen and printed. The head of security testified he watched an hr of video with the superintendent and the superintendent stated he watched 33 minutes with the head of security. None of that was mentioned in the report..
I am not sure if this helps at all. I do ask that you set this up as you see fit but also that you do not print anything I did not say unless you ask me first. I am a man of transparency. If you have any questions or would like to see any documentation I have please feel free to ask and I will do my best to comply.
I do hope to serve on this committee as I am more than qualified to do so. I just hope that the councilors will respond back and educate themselves with what is being offered to them as proof documentation. If they do not then I know that they were never interested in the truth to begin with. I am however confident that most will respond. Those who do not want the truth will not.