administration-leadershipCivil SuitMunicipal LiabilityPoliticsYou Can't Make This Stuff Up

Firefighters Sue Massachusetts City Over Residency Requirement

In an unusual twist to a not-so-uncommon headline, two fire captains have joined eight other city residents in suing the City of Springfield for not enforcing its residency requirement. The suit was filed in Hampden County Superior Court naming the city, the fire department and the fire commissioner.

According to the complaint:

  • “There has been a long standing history in Springfield, particularly in the ranks of the Fire Department, of ignoring the city ordinance’s residency requirement.”
  • “The citizens and registered voters of Springfield are harmed by the lack of government that enforces the valid ordinances.”

The current ordinance requires members of the police and fire departments reside within 15 miles of the city. The plaintiffs claim that six of the city’s eight district chiefs fail to comply with the residency requirement.

The two fire captains listed as plaintiffs, Marc Savage and Curt M. Marcellin, live in the city. The issue has been a contentious one in the city for several years. The suit seeks a court order to require the city to enforce the law.

Curt Varone

Curt Varone has over 50 years of fire service experience and 40 as a practicing attorney licensed in both Rhode Island and Maine. His background includes 29 years as a career firefighter in Providence (retiring as a Deputy Assistant Chief), as well as volunteer and paid on call experience. Besides his law degree, he has a MS in Forensic Psychology. He is the author of two books: Legal Considerations for Fire and Emergency Services, (2006, 2nd ed. 2011, 3rd ed. 2014, 4th ed. 2022) and Fire Officer's Legal Handbook (2007), and is a contributing editor for Firehouse Magazine writing the Fire Law column.

Related Articles

5 Comments

  1. When someone is hanging out of a window to escape smoke and heat from a fire, I highly doubt that the first thing they ask their rescuer when they climb to ladder to get them would be “are you a Springfield resident or live within the 15 mile limit? If not, please get some who is to save me…

  2. That’s not the point. Ordinances (law) are enacted for a reason. In this instance, probably for emergency callback purposes. If the city doesn’t enforce this law, what others are they not enforcing, or won’t enforce? Not enforcing laws, codes, or ordinances, leaves the city liable should something untoward occur.

  3. It may also be a case of keeping payroll (tax) dollars local, and keeping the employee “vested” in the community. I’ve heard both espoused as reasons for a residency requirement.

  4. If you really think that politicians are worrying about callbacks when they enact residency requirements, I have a beautiful bridge to sell you in Brooklynn.

Back to top button