This is written in response to the letter from the Briggs Neighborhood Committee that appeared in the Sept. 24 edition of this newspaper. We recognize that residents have a right to opinions that differ with ours, but it is important that opponents of the Station No. 2 renovation project do not continually mislead your readers.

The Hicksville Board of Fire Commissioners has, for the last 35 years, attempted to provide for capital building projects and expensive fire apparatus purchases, by setting money aside from each annual budget into capital reserves accounts, specifically in an effort to avoid burdening our taxpayers with bond issues. It is our intention to fund the Station No. 2 renovation in this manner. There will be no bond involved with this project.

This renovation is not being undertaken "for 27 volunteers" as the Briggs Neighborhood Committee would characterize it, but rather to ensure that the residents of Hicksville, particularly those living near Station No. 2, have a state-of-the-art station for volunteers to respond from to assist the community. The fire station is not for the firefighters. It is for the community, which has a responsibility to provide these brave and selfless volunteers with a safe and adequate station from which to operate.

We certainly wish that the costs of providing fire protection and emergency services had not escalated over the years. Unfortunately, state and federal requirements have mandated that local governments make improvements to their facilities and equipment without providing the necessary funding. Although local communities are forced to pay the costs, many of these requirements have improved facilities and equipment for volunteer firefighters and provided them with a safer environment.

It is simply too convenient to quote numbers and take the reprehensible approach that this is money spent on 27 volunteers. There are currently 231 members of the Hicksville Fire Department, 43 of whom are assigned to Station No. 2. They are not demanding better facilities. We, as elected officials with an obligation to provide safe facilities from which to operate, are making a determination that they, and the firefighters who follow them, should have just that.

To those who would confuse this project with one designed simply to provide volunteer firefighters with a taxpayer funded "country club" environment, we invite you to spend several days or weeks or months or years leaving your family and the comfortable surroundings of your home to rush out in times of emergency to assist your neighbors. Or, to take the time to attend meetings, training sessions, drills, and other community enhancing activities before you focus on the nature of these improvements from that perspective.

If the facilities at our fire stations were as enjoyable as claimed, we would assume that people would be breaking the doors down to join the ranks of the department. The volunteer firefighters who serve this community are cut from the finest fabric that our community has to offer. To continue to devalue their dedication by these comments about meeting facilities, kitchens, gyms, etc., misses the point and is damaging to the morale of our fire department and damaging to our community.

Criticism concerning the cost of the project by those who would suggest and promote that we spend a greater amount by purchasing and utilizing an alternative site is disingenuous at best. These same people who demanded that we conduct studies to evaluate the project and then criticized us for spending the money are now criticizing the cost of the project. It would appear that the cost of the project would not be a critical issue if it involved moving the fire station to another neighborhood.

In addition, the Board of Fire Commissioners, in an attempt to answer the concerns of the residents who live close to Station No. 2, directed the architect to revise the original plans, resulting in added costs.

This project is not "outrageous." It is essential to the safe operation of both the department and the district. In our opinion this project is the only feasible alternative to meet this objective. What is outrageous is the manner in which the facts and issues have been distorted in an attempt to defeat this project.

The Hicksville Fire District has, for many years, prided itself in providing state-of-the-art trucks for use by the volunteers to serve our community. We have maintained a schedule to replace fire apparatus, enabling us to sell the used vehicles before they have lost all of their resale value. And to keep costs down, we recently adopted a program to provide more uniform specifications for the apparatus. The purchase mentioned by the "Committee" is part of that program and is in the best interests of the community.

The "Committee" criticizes the level of use that the gym facilities in our fire stations are receiving. We already place too great of a burden upon our volunteers with regard to their fire duties to mandate minimum attendance levels at gym workout sessions. The important thing is to provide them with access to the facilities so that they have the opportunity to maintain the level of physical fitness that will enable them to avoid illness or injury in the performance of their duties. A certain level of responsibility falls upon participants to take the time to do their physical fitness training. We mandate periodic physical examinations, and thus, limit the activities of any firefighters whose lack of physical fitness activities has caused them to fall below minimum excepted fitness standards.

The "Committee" also mentions a supposed $750,000 judgment against the district. There is no such judgment, but rather the district has been exposed to potential liability based upon age discrimination claims that relate to the length of a service award program provided for our volunteer firefighters. In 1989 the district, with voter approval, and in accordance with the mandates of New York State statutes, established this program, designed in accordance with the laws of NY State. The district has been informed by the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that in its opinion the New York State designed program violates federal age discrimination laws and must be changed. The EEOC has taken a position that the defense of following a state law is not a proper defense to a violation of a federal age discrimination statue. The district must now expend significant funds to defend its claim, and ultimately may need to fund an expensive amendment to the plan as well as the payment of retroactive benefits. This is a problem that will impact all fire districts in New York State that have implemented these programs.

We urge you to attend civic meetings and listen with an open mind. We hold public meetings at 20 East Marie Street in Hicksville at 6:30 p.m. on the second Tuesday of each month. Please come and observe the business that is conducted and tell us what your concerns are. Or, write to us at that same address.

This letter has been sent by me and is not an endorsement by the Hicksville Board of Fire Commissioners.

Robert Dwyer

Chairman, Hicksville Board of

Fire Commissioners

I've lived in Hicksville now for more than 33 years. My husband and I have raised our three sons here and now our grandson is a Hicksville native, born and bred. As the mother of sons, having the firehouse in such close proximity to my home was a blessing. Having the firemen living across the street, down the block, around the corner was and is an honor.

Years ago, we used to hear the fire horn go off and it became a part of our lives. It did scare any company I had visiting until they realized what it was and what it meant. I have had to call the fire department on occasion. Once when my husband (a police officer) was on duty, my dishwasher started smoking up my kitchen. It was late at night and I had to call the fire department. They came immediately, soothed my nerves, found the cause and luckily, they didn't need their hoses that night.

The close proximity of the firehouse has been a constant assurance to me and many of my neighbors, as well as my children, that help is around the corner, never too far away that they can't respond quickly. The Second Company has always been there as long as I've lived out here, and it was one of the reasons I liked the area where I bought my house. I liked being that close.

My husband and I and our family want the firehouse to stay where it is. Many of our neighbors belong to that house and can respond to this end of Hicksville in a minute's time. I don't want the volunteers traveling down to another location to get in trucks and come all the way back to where they started from to help me or an asthmatic child, someone's broken leg or a car accident, never mind an elderly neighbor. I really want them to stay where they are, and go forth with their expansion, which they so desperately need. (Just go down to the firehouse and ask for a tour, they will be very glad to show you, in person, exactly what is needed). Many of the neighbors who lived here when I moved in are now elderly and they need quick response. I certainly wouldn't want my parents' lives depending on a response from the other side of town, and I'm sure no one else wants that either.

The need for the firehouse to be right off Woodbury Road is vital to the egress of the trucks to the main street, which will carry them to any part of Hicksville. It is imperative especially to the lives of children at play in side streets, elderly crossing the street and our animals running out of the house unexpectedly while the fire trucks are trying to hurry down a side street to a house fire.

I, for one, want the firehouse to stay exactly where it is and get its expansion to fit with the times and the community within the plans that they so exhaustively changed and rearranged to appease the people.

Diana Michell

Co-chair

Hicksville Residents to Save Your Neighborhood Firehouse