Choosing the label of disorganization over corruption, the five members of the Syosset Board of Fire Commissioners have blamed most of its fire district's past budget anomalies and inconsistencies, recently detected by a state comptroller's audit, on poor documentation and internal procedures.

At a Monday, January 11 public meeting held before a civil, yet skeptical crowd of approximately one dozen people - many representing the incorporated villages of Oyster Bay Cove and Laurel Hollow that receive firematic services from Syosset - the commissioners reviewed allegations of financial misconduct which are currently being investigated by the Nassau County District Attorney's Office, acting on account of the report.

The excuses given by the commissioners - Chairman Henry Marzola, Ronald Geraci, Peter J. Morley, William Strong and George Wulforst Jr. - which were those of organizational errors, prompted several people, most prominently Mayor of Oyster Bay Cove Michael Peragine, to challenge whether Morley, who was re-elected last December in an uncontested election, can ably serve the district as both a commissioner and the fire district secretary.

One of the problems listed in the auditor's report is that some of the minutes recorded from previous board of commissioners' meetings did not include the approval of expenditures for certain services and equipment. Recording minutes was the responsibility of Morley.

A commissioner holds a non-paying, volunteer position, while the district secretary receives a salary. Although a commissioner is, by law, permitted to serve the role of secretary as long as he abstains from votes pertaining to his salary, opposition is claiming that Morley holding the two positions presents a conflict of interest.

"When you eliminate having both hats separate, you eliminate checks and balances," said the outspoken Peragine in an interview after the meeting.

But the commissioners emphasized the legality of Morley's secretarial appointment, and dismissed the notion of Morley abdicating one of his two positions.

With that, they turned to the controversial auditor's report, reviewing its criticisms and recommendations. The five-member panel attempted to absolve itself of more than half of the 42 problems listed before deciding to finish addressing the remainder of the list at its next meeting, on Monday, January 25. Morley asked that the board end the controversy expeditiously by holding an impromptu meeting the very next evening, but he was outvoted four to one.

Problems cited in the auditor's report basically fall into two categories - those caused by insufficient record-keeping and those involving exorbitant expenditures.

Procedural faults accounted for most of the inconsistencies listed in the report. For example, the auditors could locate no clear record within the minutes of a 1993 public meeting that the Board of Fire Commissioners adopted resolutions awarding five public works contracts totaling $821,290 for renovations to its Station #3 on South Oyster Bay Road. According to the report, the board also did not properly process claim vouchers or invoices when paying contractors and sub-contractors for these renovations between 1993 and 1995.

The report also scolded the board for allowing Chairman Marzola to occasionally sign blank checks, without knowing vital information such as the amount or the payee. "An important feature of internal control is lost when one of the two signatories is permitted to sign blank checks," said the report.

There were also numerous cases of accidental overpayments and duplicate payments to employees and contractors.

Fire district attorney Raymond Lavallee, admitted that the board of commissioners needed to organize its procedures, but said that all mistakes were made in good faith, and most overpayments have already been rectified.

But slipshod bookkeeping could not account for every questionable expenditure. The state comptroller's office suggested that the commissioners spent exorbitant amounts of money on expenses such as out-of-state conferences, an annual bash and vehicles called racing rigs that are used more for competition than for actual fire fighting.

According to the report, in 1996 and 1997 the fire district expended approximately $57,000 on the repair and maintenance of two racing vehicles, and in 1998 purchased a truck and a trailer, used to transport these vehicles to various events, at a cost of $135,000. "We question whether these expenditures were a prudent use of public moneys," read the report.

Commissioners were quick to refute that opinion, saying that these vehicles are used by the department's most elite firemen to partake in state-sanctioned racing drills, and are some of the best recruitment tools for young members.

Nevertheless, the audit stated that "There is no express authority for the acquisition of equipment and vehicles for utilization by the fire department in competitive events, nor is there express authority for fire department personnel to participate in such events at fire district expense."

The commissioners argued, however, that the rigs have a fire fighting purpose as well, explaining that within the past year the two rigs, which are essentially pumpers, were used in the extinguishing of one brush fire and one car fire. But while the two pumpers seem to have at least limited use, the accompanying trailer seems to have no applicable use in extinguishing fires.

Also heavily probed was the fire district's 1997 Annual Installation Dinner in April, which amounted to a $74,000 expenditure. Certain costs relating to this affair were considered wasteful, such as $9,000 for souvenir personalized pens, a photographer's fee of almost $3,000 and an $11,000 band.

"I don't know where you get your bands from, but I've gotten bands for weddings for five, $6,000," quipped one Laurel Hollow civic leader.

Lavalee defended the expenditures, claiming, "This is, legally, the only thing the fire district can provide as a reward to the people who volunteer to risk their lives."

The protesters stressed that they did not want to deny the firefighters their just dues, but they did complain that in rewarding the firefighters, the fire commissioners crossed the line that separates "spend" from "splurge."

A spokesperson from another local fire district said that it is the commissioners' responsibility to set caps on spending for certain non-essential items. On the other hand, he added, "The [state] guidelines of how to operate a fire district are terrible."

Commissioner Geraci said that the audit will not pressure the board to spend more conservatively in the future, but added that what will be necessary is to, after any purchase, "document that we got the best for our buck."

Another listing on the report has for years been a source of local criticism - the purchase of additional property next to Syosset's Company 3 station house. Both the taxpayers and the auditors believe that the district overpaid when it bought the next door house's property for $500,000. Actual property value had been estimated at about $200,000 less.

But the commissioners said that they were in a bind. Desperate to buy additional property needed for parking spaces - a requirement that surfaced after a child was nearly hit by a fireman's car - the district was in no position to argue the homeowner's selling price down.

"Recognizing this was a case of supply and demand, and that this was a piece of property they needed, that's the reason why they had to exceed the price," asserted Lavallee.

The representative from another fire district said that, as a whole, the Syosset Fire District has not gotten a fair shake. He said that these auditing procedures, and the scrutiny resulting from them, are far from uncommon. Having said that, he did imply that at times the Syosset district appears to have acted somewhat carelessly.

Chairman Marzola defended his board's intentions, stating that "We try to give them [the firefighters] whatever they need to do a better job," and that cost shouldn't be a factor when lives are on the line.

While protestors found that opinion difficult to dispute, they no doubt had reason to wonder why a fire district with one of the top tax rates in the county, with a history of spending money freely, hasn't been able to invest some of its capital into improving its internal organization.

To view the state comptroller's audit in its entirety, visit web site www.osc.state.ny.us.