Yantic Fire Engine Company #1

09/01/2026

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 1, 2026

The Double Standard of Norwich Firefighters Local 892 Leadership

Statement from the Yantic, Taftville, Occum, and Laurel Hill Volunteer Fire Department Chiefs:

Organized labor has long championed the right to question management, demand transparency, negotiate before accepting terms affecting its members, and insist that workplace standards be applied fairly. Those principles should not disappear simply because the firefighters asserting them are volunteers.

In February 2025, Norwich Firefighters Local 892 President Michael Podzaline penned a letter sharply criticizing The City of Norwich, CT leadership over the Fire Chief hiring process. Podzaline wrote that the process had “compromised trust in city leadership” and raised “serious concerns about the integrity of decisions” affecting his department and the community.

City Manager John Salomone responded just as sharply, rejecting the union’s allegations and suggesting that perhaps everyone should “question the leadership of President Podzaline.”

Whatever one’s view of that exchange, Podzaline was exercising a principle organized labor understands well: when you believe management has acted improperly, you question the process, advocate for your members, and demand accountability.

Yet when Norwich’s volunteer companies question City leadership and the process used to restructure their fire service, they are routinely characterized as obstructionists.

The double standard extends to negotiations. Podzaline recently argued that the City “repeatedly offered agreements” allowing volunteers to remain in service, that those offers were rejected, and that the volunteers “refused every available path to remain in service.”

That characterization omits important context. Before the City removed Yantic from service, it gave it less than 15 hours to sign the City’s original agreement. Months later, Yantic and the City were engaged in discussions over an interim resolution. Additional meetings were contemplated, and Yantic sought to continue those discussions. Instead, the City publicly characterized the unfinished negotiations before Yantic had received a written interim agreement to accept or reject.

Local 892’s own collective bargaining process typically involves months of negotiations, participation by City officials, and ultimately review and ratification by its membership.

Would Local 892 accept less than 15 hours to execute an agreement affecting its members? Would Podzaline consider unfinished negotiations taken to the media a substitute for completing that process?

The same question of consistency applies to professionalism. The volunteers have repeatedly been criticized publicly over conduct, accountability, and compliance with the so-called “unified command.” Yet video released by the City from a January incident shows a confrontation involving both a Yantic firefighter and City Fire Lt. Christopher Paige. Chief Sam Wilson subsequently sought disciplinary action against the volunteer firefighter. If comparable action was not taken regarding his own officer’s conduct, the public is entitled to ask why.

More recently, Local 892 member Michael Christoff publicly posted imagery of the Taftville firehouse accompanied by a song repeatedly declaring “we taking over” following the City’s assumption of operations there. Whatever the intent, that is difficult to reconcile with the professionalism and cooperation continually demanded of the volunteers.

No department or union should be judged by the conduct of individual members. But neither should professionalism be a standard invoked only when criticizing the other side.

This is ultimately about consistency. If Local 892 has the right to question City leadership, so do the volunteers. If organized labor expects meaningful negotiations before accepting agreements affecting its members, volunteers deserve the same consideration. And if professionalism and accountability are expected from volunteer firefighters, they should be expected equally from career firefighters.

The unpaid volunteers, who more than double the staffing of the entire paid department, deserve the same respect and processes afforded to any other organized labor group, especially a group that provides the service for zero pay. Do not be fooled; none of this is about safety but rather “control.”

# # #

08/24/2026

The officers and members of the Yantic Fire Engine Company would like to thank everyone who turned out Saturday, for our steak and lobster dinner. Despite mother nature not fully cooperating, your attendance made it very successful! It really was a great community event. We look forward to seeing all of you again next year! Chief Bobby Allen

08/11/2026

To date, The City of Norwich, CT has spent more than $480,000 in taxpayer dollars staffing Yantic, as well as legal and PR fees. Continue to make your voice heard with City officials and let them know enough is enough!

08/07/2026

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 7, 2026

Before Assigning Blame, Norwich Deserves the Full Story

Statement from the Yantic, Taftville, Occum, and Laurel Hill Volunteer Fire Department Chiefs:

Norwich residents deserve an open and honest discussion about the future of their fire service. Instead, they are increasingly being presented with conclusions before the most important legal questions have even been answered.

At Monday night’s City Council meeting, the Council considered transferring more than $535,000 to cover additional Fire Department expenditures following the shutdown and takeover of Yantic and Taftville, respectively. Taxpayers have every right to ask why those costs were incurred, whether they could have been avoided, and what the long-term financial impact will be.

The meeting also reflected the depth of public concern. Emotions ran high, decorum broke down, and members of the public were ultimately removed from the Council chambers. While maintaining order is an important responsibility of the Mayor, the frustration expressed by residents should not be dismissed. It reflects just how significant these issues have become.

Unfortunately, much of the public discussion surrounding this issue has shifted away from those legitimate questions and toward assigning blame.

Before the meeting, Councilwoman Jill Zuccardy wrote on social media that “Yantic closed itself” and that the volunteer companies are responsible for diverting more than half a million taxpayer dollars to make a political point.

Following last week’s court hearing, Councilman Joe DeLucia publicly stated that the volunteer departments are “the plaintiffs, the instigators,” that they are causing the legal costs and overtime expenses, and that their lawsuit is intended to protect “long-standing and entrenched fiefdoms” rather than improve public safety.

Councilwoman Zuccardy and Councilman DeLucia are entitled to their opinions. What deserves equal recognition is that these remain matters in dispute.

One fact is not in dispute. The events that led to Yantic’s shutdown and the City’s hostile takeover of the Taftville firehouse resulted from executive actions taken by City officials. The City removed Yantic from service, repossessed its city-owned apparatus, terminated its funding, and assumed responsibility for protecting its district.

Yantic initiated no legal action until AFTER the department was removed from service and the City repossessed all apparatus. The City initiated Yantic’s closure; it was a premeditated and well-choreographed legal action in conjunction with the Norwich Police Department.

Additionally, the City took the Norwich Fire Department’s Squad A engine out of service several weeks ago. It replaced it with a Yantic engine, while continuing to negotiate in bad faith with Yantic, Taftville, Laurel Hill, and Occum.

The City, via court order, forced Taftville to “vacate the firehouse immediately,” a stronger action with less legal rights than an eviction notice. The City changed the locks on the Taftville firehouse and assumed its operations and responsibility for protecting its district. Those actions did not result from a City ordinance, a Charter revision, or a vote of Norwich’s citizens.

It should also be made known that the agreements presented to Yantic and Taftville by the City Manager and Chief Wilson are different; the Taftville contract forces the department to become a combination department with the City department, essentially throwing away 109 years of history and dedicated community involvement.

At the same time, East Great Plain has signed nothing—no agreement, no contract—and yet they can still operate without City oversight on every single call, which is currently happening for Laurel Hill and Occum department responses.

Additionally, the City Council has done nothing for several months on the alert system, even though the volunteer departments continually bring it up at the Public Safety Meetings.

The central issue before the Superior Court is whether City officials possessed the authority under the Norwich Charter to implement their so-called “unified command” through executive action.

The volunteer fire companies maintain that the Charter requires a different process. The City maintains otherwise. The Court, not social media, newspaper comment sections, or political rhetoric, will ultimately decide those legal questions.

Likewise, while the additional Fire Department expenditures followed Yantic’s shutdown and Taftville’s takeover, reasonable people may disagree about whether those costs were unavoidable, whether different decisions by City officials could have produced a different outcome, or whether responsibility is shared among multiple parties. Those are legitimate questions deserving thoughtful public discussion, not predetermined conclusions made by City officials.

Seeking judicial review of governmental authority is neither extraordinary nor improper. Courts exist to resolve disputes over the limits of governmental power. Asking a judge to interpret the Norwich Charter is not an attack on public safety. It is the lawful process our system provides when government officials and citizens disagree about the scope of governmental authority.

Regardless of where one stands on this topic, every taxpayer should expect elected officials to distinguish between opinion and established fact, respect the judicial process, and allow the public to reach its own informed conclusions.

Norwich deserves nothing less.

# # #

07/24/2026

To date, The City of Norwich, CT has spent more than $450,000 of taxpayer money on staffing Yantic (including the trailer on Clinton Ave.), Legal and PR fees since the volunteer station's forced closure in February. How much more of your money does the City need to spend before they realize it's time to reopen Yantic?

07/21/2026

🦞🦞Save the Date!!!!! August 22nd🦞🦞

07/17/2026

To all of the supporters of the Yantic Fire Engine Company #1, Laurel Hill Volunteer Fire Co. #6, Taftville Fire Co. #2, and Occum Fire Department: we couldn't do it without you! As you head into the weekend, take a minute to check out the GoFundMe page below, set up to support the four volunteer departments' legal costs as we continue our case against the City of Norwich. Funding will also aid with operational and equipment needs and continued service to the community. We will share updates along the way so donors can see how their support is utilized.

Thank you for standing with Yantic, Taftville, Laurel Hill and Occum Volunteer firefighters and for helping keep this tradition of service alive!

For generations, these volunteer fire companies have shown up… Little Ledgers LLC needs your support for Yantic, Taftville, Laurel Hill & Occum Volunteer Fire Depts

07/14/2026

Well said by ConnecticutEast!

Firefighters criticized Norwich officials for negotiating "through the media."

07/10/2026

Statement from Yantic Fire Engine Company No. 1 on yesterday's City of Norwich press release:

Yantic Fire Engine Company No. 1 is disappointed that the City has once again chosen to conduct negotiations through the media rather than complete the private discussions already underway.

Yantic leadership was never presented with a written interim agreement, asked to sign an agreement, or given a deadline to accept or reject an offer. On the contrary, the parties had engaged in hours of discussion, agreed that additional meetings were necessary to clarify unresolved issues, and Yantic leadership subsequently met with its membership to gather input.

As recently as the morning of July 9, Chief Bobby Allen contacted the City Manager seeking another meeting to continue those discussions. By the afternoon of July 9, instead of receiving a response from the City Manager, he was approached by various outlets seeking comment on the City’s press release.

Instead of responding to Chief Allen’s request and allowing the process to continue, the City publicly released its own characterization of unfinished negotiations. It announced that Yantic had “not formally responded” to an offer it had never been formally asked to accept or reject.

This pattern has repeatedly undermined efforts to build trust and reach a resolution. Private discussions appear productive until details are selectively released to the media and used to portray Yantic as unwilling to cooperate.

Meaningful negotiations require candor, confidentiality, and good-faith communication, not public deadlines and press releases created after the fact.

Yantic remains prepared to continue meaningful discussions aimed at restoring the company to service while protecting public safety, respecting the City Charter, and resolving the legitimate concerns of its members. If the City shares that objective, it should return to the negotiating table and allow that process to work rather than attempting to negotiate through the press.

07/04/2026