A group of nearly 40 supporters of the eight Hackensack emergency medical technicians (EMTs) to be laid off on Sept. 14 protested outside Hackensack University Medical Center (HUMC) last Thursday while continuing a petition drive meant to roll back the city’s privatization of emergency medical services.

Supporters of the EMTs, along with Hackensack Fire Department union officials, presented more than 1,300 petition signatures to municipal officials from registered city voters on Aug. 21. The petition requested that privatizing the city’s emergency medical services be put on the ballot as a referendum question this November. The fate of the eight EMTs has been hotly contested since the February agreement between the city and the hospital to build a new cancer center, which included a provision to transfer daytime ambulance services to HUMC. The transfer, which the administration states will save the city $600,000 but cost the eight EMTs their jobs, is scheduled to take place Sept. 15.

Standing outside the hospital, firefighter John Linquito, president of International Association of Fire Fighters Local 2081, noted that the petition drive has continued, with the number of signatures reportedly close to 2,000.

"We are going to keep going," he said. "We’re doing this now for information so that people know what the council has done regarding this issue. They don’t want the people to be heard, and we’re here today because the hospital hasn’t shown up at the council meetings or answered our questions. We were well aware of the laws about petitions before we started."

Zisa: wrong law

However, city officials differ from union representatives’ assertions about the legality of the petitions. In a previously published report, City Attorney Joseph Zisa stated that Hackensack’s form of government does not permit residents to petition for ballot initiatives. Zisa noted that the right to referendum that the EMT supporters referenced on their petition applies to municipalities organized under the Faulkner Act. Hackensack is regulated by the Municipal Manager Act of 1923.

"They cited the wrong law," said Zisa.

On the weekend of Aug. 23-24, EMT supporters received a letter from City Clerk Debra Heck stating Zisa’s view regarding the petition initiative.

Zisa was not available to provide further comment.

Range of reactions

Dr. Joseph Feldman, chairman of the emergency trauma department at HUMC, declined comment regarding the petition drive. However, he did note that the hospital was in the process of working out a memorandum of understanding with the city to complete the transfer of emergency medical services before Sept. 15, reportedly to Vanguard Ambulance Service of Rutherford. Feldman did comment on the nature of the February agreement between the city and the hospital, stating clearly that is was part of the developer’s agreement to build the cancer center.

"The city requested us to take over their paid service," he said. "We’re complying with that agreement."

Demonstrator Julie Otto lives in Fort Lee but has worked in Hackensack. Her belief that the agreement should be challenged in a November vote is rooted in neighborly concern.

"I live in another town but I very well could use this hospital," she said, noting the daily influx of workers into Hackensack from surrounding communities. "We’re all neighbors. I would like friends of mine who live in Hackensack to see this on the ballot. They sent in over 1,300 signatures already. That should close the deal."

Otto also pointed to a new series of hospital monitoring bills signed by Gov. Jon Corzine and enacted on Aug. 8 that includes a bill requiring acute-care hospitals such as HUMC to hold annual public meetings with the communities that they serve.

"This meeting should take place in the course of the next few weeks," she said. "The hospital should explain how it behooves them to use a private ambulance service with less experience and no connection to the community."

Firefighter and Hackensack resident Michael Shiner, 37, stood nearby with his son Matthew, seven weeks, and stated that he would continue to attend city council meetings and protests to try to reverse the agreement. However, he was not overly optimistic.

"This is a last ditch effort here," he said. "I don’t think that they are going along with the petition, because either way they have to approve it. For example, the city says that they can’t go over the spending cap, but if they fill out a waiver form to the state, they possibly could. They could put just going over the spending cap on a referendum, but they don’t want to do that. They haven’t blinked. They are turning a deaf ear to their constituents."

While Linquito agreed that the situation for the EMTs looked grim, he was not yet willing to give up the fight. He noted that union officials are awaiting the outcome of a complaint filed with the New Jersey Public Employment Relations Commission designed to compel city officials to come to the negotiating table, and are considering other legal options as well. But Linquito admitted that the ballot initiative might wind up on the back burner.

"I don’t think that there is much of a chance to get this on the ballot," he said. "The city took their stand already, because their deal has been done already. The people aren’t for this move. But the people don’t run Hackensack. They do."