Council approves ordinance eliminating chief fire marshal title after reconsideration vote

The City Council voted to amend the composition of the fire department to eliminate the chief fire marshal title and increase the number of fire marshals, after a motion to reconsider the previously defeated ordinance was approved and members debated the change. The ordinance amends the department composition from chief fire marshal 1 to 0 and fire marshals 1 to 2.

The vote to reconsider the ordinance passed on the floor; the clerk recorded eight yeas to allow reconsideration. After discussion, the council approved the ordinance authorizing the structural change, with the clerk recording five yes votes in favor of removing the chief fire marshal position. The council president summarized the voting choice by saying, “If you wanna put it back the way it was before we voted, you gotta vote no on this.”

The matter drew extended discussion. Several council members said they had changed their positions since the previous meeting. One council member said they had spoken with union leaders and described personal hesitation: “I am changing my vote tonight from last week,” and said they wished the measure had been referred to committee for more review. Another council member cited military experience and said they planned to meet further with the union and the fire chief before making a definitive long-term decision: “I wanna talk to the union first.”

Council debate focused on several points raised on the record: whether removing the chief fire marshal title would affect promotional opportunities within the department; whether municipal code language refers specifically to a “chief fire marshal;” and whether the firefighters’ union had adequately engaged the council in person before the reconsideration vote. One council member criticized the union’s form of communication, saying they were “disappointed” that the union had sent letters but did not have representatives present at the earlier meeting.

The council discussed parliamentary options during the floor proceedings. Members referenced Robert’s Rules of Order on whether the matter could be recommitted to committee and noted that, after reconsideration, an ordinance can be reintroduced as a new measure in a later session. Several council members said they expected further meetings with the fire chief, union representatives and other stakeholders before any related personnel or implementation steps were finalized.

No implementation timeline, effective date, or specific personnel actions tied to the ordinance were stated on the record during the meeting. The council did not record any formal amendments to the ordinance during the floor debate. Several members said the topic could return for further consideration if new information or union negotiations warranted it.