some good friends are fireman...but..

the idea of them proposing to name a fire station after the late pucalik, that to anyones knowledge she had never even set foot in it, especially in light that it is the station that is most likely to close if the decision to close any stations is made in the future is utterly unconcsionable. and the fireman? they wouldnt even endorse her re election now they want to pay tribute to her? yeah right.

the woman tragically passed. you want to honor her name something she was involved with after her. a former teacher im pretty sure something involving kids, a park...a baseball field,...something like that would be a far more appropriate of a tribute then someone trying to use her memory to for their own personal gain.

so how bout this to make everyone happy.

the councils scolarships they give away annually... name those pucalik scholarships after kathy, and if the fireman want to show they really care about her memory they can do one of those boot collections to help boost its funding.

Firemen looked terrible trying to pull this one. They didn't even support Kathy and now they want to rename a fire station after her. They are trying to cash in on her passing.

Simon wrote:

Firemen looked terrible trying to pull this one. They didn't even support Kathy and now they want to rename a fire station after her. They are trying to cash in on her passing.

Personally, when I first read about it, I thought it very odd to name a fire station after any person. A firestation should reflect the city or town name. They could put a bench in front and a rock and plaque bearing her name in front. Or, do as Oracle said, contribute to a scholarship in her name.

I agree with Simon, "cashing in on her passing".

I've never met her, but the picture they ran in the Times, touched me. She looked like a down-to-earth woman, who loved and lived life to the fullest.

I had a friend tell me that if you are a Hammond fireman that you don't have to live in Hammond. Is that true?

by state law niether police nor fireman are required to live in the city where they work...they are required to be residents of lake county indiana however.

city ordinance requires probationary officers and fireman to live in hammond (state law permits this) but once there probationary employment period is over, they can move out of the city if they want.

Actually you don't have to live in Lake County. They can live in any adjoining county also. Just has to be in the state of Indiana.

I now understand why firemen have lost their political clout. They should be required to live in the community that they serve and recieve pay checks from.

Dickie wrote:

I now understand why firemen have lost their political clout. They should be required to live in the community that they serve and recieve pay checks from.

Why should positions such as fire chief or police chief be political? Maybe times have changed, but when and while I grew up, they were "promoted" to chief, based on performance, experience, loyalty to job, and merit.

Why do they elect or, appoint them?

Is this the same process used in other states, counties, municipals, cities, towns?

It is a job - and should be a separate entity outside political influence. Well, that's how it worked growing up; so when did it turn out to be political?

Back in the 70s, the Valpo police chief supported a candidate for mayor. The other guy won; chief lost his job. My uncle, who was Chief of Detectives at the time, wound back on patrol - the night shift!

KarenT wrote:

Back in the 70s, the Valpo police chief supported a candidate for mayor. The other guy won; chief lost his job. My uncle, who was Chief of Detectives at the time, wound back on patrol - the night shift!

So, it WAS political all that time?

I thought jobs like police, and firefighters only got promoted based on performance. How sad when it involves politics.

And why? Do you get favors, kick backs when politics are involved and if so, why? I always believed it was based on merit, experience, knowledge, leadership that (no pun intended) enable you to climb the "ladder". Now it's who you know, who you support, not based on your hard work, and no boundaries, then, right?

If that's how low it goes, it isn't right. It's not fair to others who deserve to be promoted. According to your answer, Karen, I guess the true merit system, based on performance is overlooked. Right?


That is so wrong.

No wonder my girlfriend's dad shot himself in the head as a Police Chief in his garage in Dolton when we were in high school. For no reason..blew his own brains out.

Maybe the merit system still works for jobs you have to take a test for - like sergent (guessing).

But if you are good enough to get paid by the taxpayers of a city then you should be good enough to live in the same city.

Dickie wrote:

But if you are good enough to get paid by the taxpayers of a city then you should be good enough to live in the same city.

It's the UNITED STATES of America. You should be able to work where you want and can work. Especially today.

You should also locate where the best schools are and where you know you can raise your kids.

Otherwise, it's just a Gary, IN. Would you want to live there and raise your kids in Gary, IN if you were a firefighter and that's the only opening?

A JOB is based on your intelligence, schooling, qualifications, etc. Not where you live. Sorry, don't agree, Dickie. Especially in dangerous neighborhoods.

I know two teachers who live in Valpo and teach in Gary. One of them gets her school loans paid for working in a needy area.