Buffalo rejects post-funeral booze tab for Firefighters

[JimmyPFD 11]

If they are trying to get the city to pick up the bar tab; I have to admit that I would agree with the city on this one.

BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) — The city of Buffalo is refusing to pay for alcohol purchased for receptions held after the funerals for two firefighters killed in the line of duty last year.

Story

Edited February 23, 2010 by jack10562
Source Site Copyright Material

[gamewell45 258]

If they are trying to get the city to pick up the bar tab; I have to admit that I would agree with the city on this one.

Story

I concur; taxpayer dollars should not be used to purchase alcohol.

Edited February 23, 2010 by gamewell45

[JetPhoto 626]

I agree (should have had it listed as "beverages" LoL)

Must have been one hell of a party

[tmurph1244 1]

I believe NY state seriously frowns opon governments paying for alcohol

[ny10570 745]

because no volley FD pays for their members to drink, right? Parades, inspections, holiday parties, annual meetings, and even a few dept bars are the big ones.

[MJP399 4]

NY10570 sounds like a very good rebuttal, because no volley FD pays for alcohol, However, I for one don't think drinking should be an expense for either volunteer or paid. I feel that if we are going to go off topic as you have, that both groups should be held to represent themselves in a positive demeanor and be fit for duty

[x635 4,066]

NY10570 sounds like a very good rebuttal, because no volley FD pays for alcohol, However, I for one don't think drinking should be an expense for either volunteer or paid. I feel that if we are going to go off topic as you have, that both groups should be held to represent themselves in a positive demeanor and be fit for duty

I don't feel he went off topic. I think he hit the nail on the head. He's not saying anything negative, just pointed out what has been a proven fact. It's not about groups, it's again about the law affecting us all equally.

This event was after 2 LODD's with FF's from all over the country attending, and was provided for in Buffalo FD's contract. The City isn't paying the union ANYTHING for what the union provided their members and fellow brother during this event like they are supposed to. They are instead trying to tie it up in red tape.With all the issues there (such as using pickup trucks as ladder trucks) they need to pick their battles. From a reliable source in Buffalo, the $11,000 quoted by the media was for ALL of the catering for the reception-food,soda, etc.

Not that I agree with the alchohol portion of it, but if their contact didn't say anything prohibiting it, then they are (the city) in a bind.

Also, notice the title of the article.

[JFLYNN 681]

NY10570 sounds like a very good rebuttal, because no volley FD pays for alcohol, However, I for one don't think drinking should be an expense for either volunteer or paid. I feel that if we are going to go off topic as you have, that both groups should be held to represent themselves in a positive demeanor and be fit for duty

I've always wondered...when I see the apparatus parked out in front of the food store where I live and the volunteer firefighters are collecting donations and selling raffles, does any of that money go toward parties or functions / conventions where alcohol is served? What about the letter I receive in the mail asking for donations? Is any of that money used to purchase alcohol? What about the 2% monies? Is any of that money used to purchase alcohol? Keep in mind now, that if any of that money was used to purchase alcohol I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with it so long as the people who contributed the money were aware of where it was going and they are not led to believe, as most people are, that is going toward firefighting equipment.

At least in Buffalo they were up front about it. Serving and consuming alcohol is perfectly legal, as long as those doing so are of age and do not work or drive while impaired. Most of us would choose to serve alcohol to those people who come to a get together after a funeral for one of our family members. That is what the Buffalo Fire Department did- they offered food and drink to those who came to mourn their brothers. They have apparently interpreted that expense to be part of what should be covered as funeral expenses as per their contract. They obviously feel that they have nothing to be ashamed of and neither do I.

[INIT915 1,119]

I'm kind of surprised anyone is defending the choice to use more than $11,000 of taxpayers money for alcohol. If the BFD Union wanted to raise the funds for it, that would be a different story.

[ny10570 745]

Why is dinner an acceptable expense, but responsibly consumed alcohol unacceptable? If you're going to fund any social functions, then you might as well fund all of them. I wasn't criticizing volley FD's that pay for booze, just trying to point out the hypocrisy of getting on Buffalo firefighters for trying to do so.

[Tanker 10eng 140]

I'm kind of surprised anyone is defending the choice to use more than $11,000 of taxpayers money for alcohol. If the BFD Union wanted to raise the funds for it, that would be a different story.

I agree 100% here.... was that for a gathering of mourners or a frat party... lets keep it to the matter at hand... I agree about any money being collected through taxes being used for alcohol, regardless if its career or volunteer... Bottom line its wrong... and this time it was from a career department.

The union was wrong...

[x635 4,066]

I'm kind of surprised anyone is defending the choice to use more than $11,000 of taxpayers money for alcohol.

From a reliable source in Buffalo, the $11,000 quoted by the media was for ALL of the catering for the reception-food,soda, etc.

Here's the "more to the story" that the orignal article didn't mention. I suggest reading the article and looking at it from an open mind:

http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/02/23/966378/dispute-grows-over-expenses-for.html

As for the people trying to make this a "career vs. volunteer" issue, what if your municpality agreed to pay for something and didn't come through? Granted, the City shouldn't pay for alchol, but they didn't tell that to anyone nor was it in the contract. It's a reimbursment contractually-obligated issue and the City Of Buffalo AGAIN trying to stiff their firefighters. Despite it being "right or wrong" to serve alchohol. THIS IS WHY CAREER FIREFIGHTERS AND OTHER LABOR UNIONS HAVE CONTRACTS. Unless it's worded that alcohol is prohibited at events funded by the City in the City policy at the time of negotiation or worded in the contract, the city needs to pay up.

was that for a gathering of mourners or a frat party

That comment was uncalled for. Have you ever seen the catering bill for an event with 100's of people? And Buffalo FD has 698 career firefighters, not to mention guests.

[JFLYNN 681]

I agree 100% here.... was that for a gathering of mourners or a frat party... lets keep it to the matter at hand... I agree about any money being collected through taxes being used for alcohol, regardless if its career or volunteer... Bottom line its wrong... and this time it was from a career department.

The union was wrong...

Our paychecks are funded through taxation. So, therefore, are you saying that we should not be able to spend any of our salaries on alcohol?

This is monies which the BFD union feels were owed to them contractually to be spent as they see fit for funeral expenses. Alcohol being served at a funeral reception is a normal, legitimate expense.

There were many thousands of mourners in Buffalo for two funerals and consuming alcohol off duty at a funeral is a perfectly legal, acceptable thing to do. Considering the numbers of attendees I don't think either $7,600, as the union claims, or $11,000, as the City claims, is a lot of money to spend on booze. It was not a frat party, however, this whole matter is obviously a thinly veiled attempt for the Buffalo City Administration to make it look like just that in order to discredit the union.

Some on this site are attempting to take that ball and run with it for their own reasons...

[INIT915 1,119]

Our paychecks are funded through taxation. So, therefore, are you saying that we should not be able to spend any of our salaries on alcohol?

This is monies which the BFD union feels were owed to them contractually to be spent as they see fit for funeral expenses. Alcohol being served at a funeral reception is a normal, legitimate expense.

There were many thousands of mourners in Buffalo for two funerals and consuming alcohol off duty at a funeral is a perfectly legal, acceptable thing to do. Considering the numbers of attendees I don't think either $7,600, as the union claims, or $11,000, as the City claims, is a lot of money to spend on booze. It was not a frat party, however, this whole matter is obviously a thinly veiled attempt for the Buffalo City Administration to make it look like just that in order to discredit the union.

Some on this site are attempting to take that ball and run with it for their own reasons...

Well, very presumptuous (or clairvoyant) of you to assume what other Members are thinking. It seems like the Union doesn't need help discrediting themselves here. Just like in volleyball, sometimes when someone sets you, you spike it. And coming from a Union that has had 14 line of duty deaths in 10 years, with all associated expenses paid by the Union, I have no qualms about saying so.

As for the secondary debate that has evolved, in full disclosure, I think use of taxpayer funds to stock bars at volunteer stations is equally unethical and an abuse.

[bfxfd 8]

because no volley FD pays for their members to drink, right? Parades, inspections, holiday parties, annual meetings, and even a few dept bars are the big ones.

This is not a valid response. Volunteer Fire Departments use private funds that the fire company controls not the department.

[x635 4,066]

This is not a valid response. Volunteer Fire Departments use private funds that the fire company controls not the department.

But where are the "private funds" obtained? Not all volunteer departments use private funds for social events, either.

I am not "attacking" volunteers as some people may think, I just think a deal is a deal with this case. I don't see why people feel so compelled to defend volunteers with knee jerk reactions whenever someone says anything about volunteers. This isn't a matter of career vs. volunteer, nor is it even alchohol, it's again a deal is a deal.

Also, there were a lot of corporate and private donors for this event. The city is basically trying to stiff the union for trying to be hospitable to it's 658 members in a time of need (2 FIREFIGHTERS DIED) as well as those that traveled hundreds of miles to pay their respects. If Buffalo City has an issue, let them take it up with their next contract negotiation.

I don't agree with any alchohol being used in conjunction with any fire service event. But volunteer departments need to remember- when/if the public asks where the money came from whatever event, do you have a valid reason? Is there a bar in your firehouse? Do you hold social events at your firehouse involving alchol? Even if it is "private funds", is that from member dues or donations? Times have changed, and alchohol related social functions need to be seperate from firematic events.

This particular department had it in clear writing that money was to be used for this kind of event.

[Raz 14]

This is not a valid response. Volunteer Fire Departments use private funds that the fire company controls not the department.

Private funds that magically appear from where?

[gamewell45 258]

because no volley FD pays for their members to drink, right? Parades, inspections, holiday parties, annual meetings, and even a few dept bars are the big ones.

My firehouse is a "dry" firehouse. Don't even think of bringing in a beer onto fire district property for consumption. You get caught, you will be disciplined.

No district monies are spent on any alcohol for the firefighters; if its at a parade or inspection dinner, its paid for with monies donated for that cause. Thats why we do fundraisers and/or raffles.

[Tanker 10eng 140]

Our paychecks are funded through taxation. So, therefore, are you saying that we should not be able to spend any of our salaries on alcohol?

This is monies which the BFD union feels were owed to them contractually to be spent as they see fit for funeral expenses. Alcohol being served at a funeral reception is a normal, legitimate expense.

The money earned through paychecks is your salary, you worked hard for it, you have the right to do what you want with it... No argueement... and if everyone kicked in money from their salary, we would not be typing here. But they didn't...

In these economics times, when people are being laid off, work is slow, unemployment is high, and cities are being faced with having to cut back on employees, the union really did not think this through. Sure they have an agreement for funds to show honor to its fallen members, and the city had an unwritten rule against paying for alcohol. So use the funds for food and what ever services are needed. The union should of opted to pay for the alcohol from their own accounts. Then there would of been no problems.

Look at it from the eyes of someone who is on unemployment or food stamps, and can only get so much money each week to live on. That $ 11K or 7K is allot of money which could feed alot of hungry people.

and X635 - the last time I saw that much spent on alcohol was in college at a Frat Party, sorry, I do not get out that much anymore...

[JohnnyOV 2]

because no volley FD pays for their members to drink, right? Parades, inspections, holiday parties, annual meetings, and even a few dept bars are the big ones.

SOCIAL ORGANIZATION...

mearly stating that I highly doubt tax payer dollars pay for booze for fire district functions. Money that is fund-raised for a social organization that can do what it wants with that money is a different story

[JohnnyOV 2]

Considering the numbers of attendees I don't think either $7,600, as the union claims, or $11,000, as the City claims, is a lot of money to spend on booze.

Just for factual purposes alone, estimate $50 average for a handle of top shelf liquor and you're looking at 152 handles of liquor at a total of $7,600. For $11,000 you are looking at around 220 handles.

[JohnnyOV 2]

Private funds that magically appear from where?

OK, its class time:

Most volly departments operate under a set of by-laws for a social organization, much like the elks lodge or loins club. They, however, supply the man power for the fire district (which is the taxing entity) to operate its equipment and preform it duties on calls. The fire district and the fire company are two totally and completely separate entities.

When a department holds a boot drive or any other fund raising event, and the signs out front say support [insert taxing name here], the money raised will go to the taxing entity. If however the sign says [insert social organization here], then the money goes to the members of the social organization and they can do what they want with the money.

[Remember585 815]

OK, its class time:

Most volly departments operate under a set of by-laws for a social organization, much like the elks lodge or loins club. They, however, supply the man power for the fire district (which is the taxing entity) to operate its equipment and preform it duties on calls. The fire district and the fire company are two totally and completely separate entities.

When a department holds a boot drive or any other fund raising event, and the signs out front say support [insert taxing name here], the money raised will go to the taxing entity. If however the sign says [insert social organization here], then the money goes to the members of the social organization and they can do what they want with the money.

Well said! I have two gripes with this story. One, I can't believe a municipality would nickel and dime the deaths of two employees, especially firefighters killed in the Line of Duty.

Secondly, and I am only asking a question and not stirring a pot, do unions, such as IAFF Locals, have fund raising events to set aside funds for things like this? Don't a lot of IAFF locals have benevolents or something so they can take care of their own when something happens? If so, wouldn't this be a * issue?

Honestly, I am annoyed and sickened at the fact that expense is being discussed following two deaths. It doesn't matter who they were, what they did or how they died. What's wrong with society that everything has a price tag now? What ever happening to doing the right thing?

Edited February 24, 2010 by Remember585

[efdcapt115 1,511]

I KNEW this was going to happen here, that members were going to "take the bait" that the City of Buffalo threw out to see where it would stick. Well if you bit into this ALCOHOL arguement, you've been BUFFALOED.

First, it is disgraceful that news organizations do not even do the DUE DLIGENCE to find out what happens after a LODD funeral; it's called a COLLATION, not a "reception", not a "party", nothing other than a collation, which is a religious term meaning "light meal." The term reception is reserved for happy occassions; like a wedding reception.

THOUSANDS of firefighters, career and volunteer alike, some from as far away as Australia attended two LODD funerals. The Union did the right thing in providing those members with a Collation, where brother firefighters, law enforcement, ems, all came together to commiserate, after standing at attention for TWO LODD funerals.

Ever been to a LODD funeral? Ever stand at attention for three or four hours? Then imagine this day, and doing it TWICE. Think you might want a bite and a brew, drink, soda, coffee afterward? Of course you would, so let's stop being ridiculous about this issue.

This is a simple case of a CONTRACT VIOLATION. The union has an ironclad, protected by LAW agreement with the C.O.B. which states, the city will pay the union $12,500 for a LODD funeral for expenses incured. Period. It doesn't say, "well, we'll pay for this line item or that line item", it says will pay for expenses. The City has violated the contract, the union has probably grieved the issue, this will be mediated, arbitrated, wind up in court, and the city will LOSE...and THEN PAY.

There are difficult and protracted contract negotiations between the city and the union right now. The firefighters and cops have marched on city hall, and many believe bringing ALCOHOL into the disscusion was merely an attempt to smear the union.

Let's please not get into who drinks what and where with who's 2% money or fundraising, etc. If you engage in that, you have been Buffaloed in this case.

No on-duty members imbibe at colations, period. The insinuation is thrown out to see where it will stick, and it landed right here on emtbravo, and you guys are missing the issue of a contract violation, and making judgements that you should not be making; whether "taxpayer's money" should be used for alcohol is a bogus disscusion. Corruption in gov't is rampant. Governors spend millions of dollars decorating their offices. Legislators are bought by lobbyists. Our tax money by the billions has been thrown at large corporations, who in turn have handed out RECORD BONUSES to their incompetent CEOs. YOUR money at work fellas. Where is the uproar about that?

Let us remember what we are talking about here, and if some locals like INIT's pay for their own expenses for an LODD funeral, well they obviously don't have a LODD funeral expenses line in THEIR contract, or they'd be getting reimbursed for it.

http://www.wkbw.com/news/local/84990367.html?video=YHI&t=a

[efdcapt115 1,511]

500 Firefighters, Police Officers Protest In Buffalo

As ineffective Mayor Byron Brown gave a speech inside the convention center police and firefighters walked around the exterior of the building protesting the lack of a contract.

The city has failed to pay the funeral expenses of two Buffalo firefighters killed in the line of duty last year.

Chip McCarthy and Jonathon Croom died in the line of duty. Their families also marched in the protest.

Byron Brown has had an ineffective turn as Mayor of Buffalo and now he, and council, have dishonored those who gave their lives in service to the city

http://www.firefighterhourly.com/firefighter_hourly/2010/02/500-firefighters-police-officers-protest-in-buffalo.html

[x635 4,066]

....the union really did not think this through...

How did the union not think this through? It is in their CONTRACT. A Contract's a contract, and if were going to play the game of "well, it's tough economic times" and deny the unionized workforce (construction, fire, plumbers, etc) what is provisioned for (and fought for) in their contract, then what is the point of the contract? If the union gives in to this and pay for it, it will set a precedent that the city will use for leverage against firefighters for other things in their contract. Sure, some unions should give back if they can temporarily during negotiations if they feel something is not neccesary, but the way they stiff Buffalo FD, they deserve everything in they get in that contract.

[BFD1054 1,552]

Well said! I have two gripes with this story. One, I can't believe a municipality would nickel and dime the deaths of two employees, especially firefighters killed in the Line of Duty.

Secondly, and I am only asking a question and not stirring a pot, do unions, such as IAFF Locals, have fund raising events to set aside funds for things like this? Don't a lot of IAFF locals have benevolents or something so they can take care of their own when something happens? If so, wouldn't this be a * issue?

Honestly, I am annoyed and sickened at the fact that expense is being discussed following two deaths. It doesn't matter who they were, what they did or how they died. What's wrong with society that everything has a price tag now? What ever happening to doing the right thing?

John, well stated bro. I couldnt imagine losing 2 brothers in the line of duty and then have the City reneg (sp?) on the locals contract.

Also, im also interested if the IAFF sets aside funds for these times? I would assume they do, possibly funds from union dues?

I KNEW this was going to happen here, that members were going to "take the bait" that the City of Buffalo threw out to see where it would stick. Well if you bit into this ALCOHOL arguement, you've been BUFFALOED.

First, it is disgraceful that news organizations do not even do the DUE DLIGENCE to find out what happens after a LODD funeral; it's called a COLLATION, not a "reception", not a "party", nothing other than a collation, which is a religious term meaning "light meal." The term reception is reserved for happy occassions; like a wedding reception.

THOUSANDS of firefighters, career and volunteer alike, some from as far away as Australia attended two LODD funerals. The Union did the right thing in providing those members with a Collation, where brother firefighters, law enforcement, ems, all came together to commiserate, after standing at attention for TWO LODD funerals.

Ever been to a LODD funeral? Ever stand at attention for three or four hours? Then imagine this day, and doing it TWICE. Think you might want a bite and a brew, drink, soda, coffee afterward? Of course you would, so let's stop being ridiculous about this issue.

This is a simple case of a CONTRACT VIOLATION. The union has an ironclad, protected by LAW agreement with the C.O.B. which states, the city will pay the union $12,500 for a LODD funeral for expenses incured. Period. It doesn't say, "well, we'll pay for this line item or that line item", it says will pay for expenses. The City has violated the contract, the union has probably grieved the issue, this will be mediated, arbitrated, wind up in court, and the city will LOSE...and THEN PAY.

There are difficult and protracted contract negotiations between the city and the union right now. The firefighters and cops have marched on city hall, and many believe bringing ALCOHOL into the disscusion was merely an attempt to smear the union.

Let's please not get into who drinks what and where with who's 2% money or fundraising, etc. If you engage in that, you have been Buffaloed in this case.

No on-duty members imbibe at colations, period. The insinuation is thrown out to see where it will stick, and it landed right here on emtbravo, and you guys are missing the issue of a contract violation, and making judgements that you should not be making; whether "taxpayer's money" should be used for alcohol is a bogus disscusion. Corruption in gov't is rampant. Governors spend millions of dollars decorating their offices. Legislators are bought by lobbyists. Our tax money by the billions has been thrown at large corporations, who in turn have handed out RECORD BONUSES to their incompetent CEOs. YOUR money at work fellas. Where is the uproar about that?

Let us remember what we are talking about here, and if some locals like INIT's pay for their own expenses for an LODD funeral, well they obviously don't have a LODD funeral expenses line in THEIR contract, or they'd be getting reimbursed for it.

http://www.wkbw.com/news/local/84990367.html?video=YHI&t=a

As always, well said Capt. Way to include facts and get to the point! If the City of Buffalo violated a union contract, which seems to be the case, then they should be responsible and pay. The issue should not be booze, as this was included in the overall catering cost.

Side note - The bar tab at my wedding was over $4,000 and that was just 130 guests . I wont even go into how much the rest of it cost.

[IzzyEng4 427]

All of us here have attended a re-pass (yes that is what it is called) after a funeral. A lot of the time a place is rented with food and refreshments served. When you are billed it is itemized aka everything is listed that was purchased. So obviously when the city got the bill they said WHOA WAIT A MINUTE! So do you think that the city is wrong for not paying for the alcohol on the bill? I don't, what city pays for alcohol for events?. But then again if the city said hey we are going to foot the bill, they should have said that no alcohol should be served or paid for by the city.

On the other hand yes the contract was violated but the whole thing should have been planned better. The only people that got BUFFALOED are those involved in this "fight" that didn't cross their T's and dot their I's.

[gamewell45 258]

I KNEW this was going to happen here, that members were going to "take the bait" that the City of Buffalo threw out to see where it would stick. Well if you bit into this ALCOHOL arguement, you've been BUFFALOED.

First, it is disgraceful that news organizations do not even do the DUE DLIGENCE to find out what happens after a LODD funeral; it's called a COLLATION, not a "reception", not a "party", nothing other than a collation, which is a religious term meaning "light meal." The term reception is reserved for happy occassions; like a wedding reception.

THOUSANDS of firefighters, career and volunteer alike, some from as far away as Australia attended two LODD funerals. The Union did the right thing in providing those members with a Collation, where brother firefighters, law enforcement, ems, all came together to commiserate, after standing at attention for TWO LODD funerals.

Ever been to a LODD funeral? Ever stand at attention for three or four hours? Then imagine this day, and doing it TWICE. Think you might want a bite and a brew, drink, soda, coffee afterward? Of course you would, so let's stop being ridiculous about this issue.

This is a simple case of a CONTRACT VIOLATION. The union has an ironclad, protected by LAW agreement with the C.O.B. which states, the city will pay the union $12,500 for a LODD funeral for expenses incured. Period. It doesn't say, "well, we'll pay for this line item or that line item", it says will pay for expenses. The City has violated the contract, the union has probably grieved the issue, this will be mediated, arbitrated, wind up in court, and the city will LOSE...and THEN PAY.

There are difficult and protracted contract negotiations between the city and the union right now. The firefighters and cops have marched on city hall, and many believe bringing ALCOHOL into the disscusion was merely an attempt to smear the union.

Let's please not get into who drinks what and where with who's 2% money or fundraising, etc. If you engage in that, you have been Buffaloed in this case.

No on-duty members imbibe at colations, period. The insinuation is thrown out to see where it will stick, and it landed right here on emtbravo, and you guys are missing the issue of a contract violation, and making judgements that you should not be making; whether "taxpayer's money" should be used for alcohol is a bogus disscusion. Corruption in gov't is rampant. Governors spend millions of dollars decorating their offices. Legislators are bought by lobbyists. Our tax money by the billions has been thrown at large corporations, who in turn have handed out RECORD BONUSES to their incompetent CEOs. YOUR money at work fellas. Where is the uproar about that?

Let us remember what we are talking about here, and if some locals like INIT's pay for their own expenses for an LODD funeral, well they obviously don't have a LODD funeral expenses line in THEIR contract, or they'd be getting reimbursed for it.

http://www.wkbw.com/...l?video=YHI&t=a

I daresay what will most likely happen; if in fact it is part of the collective bargaining agreement between the city and the firefighters union where it spells out that the city has to pay the expenses, including alcoholic beverages, then it'll be a open and shut case and the bill will be paid in its entirety. However if the langauge is vague or not all encompasing then it'll go in front of an arbitrator who will hear what both sides have to present as evidence; review other cases of this type and magnitude; look at past practice and the notes of the prior negotiations so they can ascertain the "meeting of the minds" when the agreement was reached and then render a decision.

Either way the firefighters lose. If the union prevails, the bill will get paid, but the city will paint the firefigthers & their union as greedy, unsophisticated public servants using money that could be well spent on worthy projects or programs rather then on alcohol during a rough economic climate the city is currently facing. If the city prevails, then their going to say that "we were right all along and the union forced us to spend monies on an arbitrator even tho' we told them they (the union) were wrong". Moreover the public will take a negative view no matter what the outcome because alcohol was involved. In retrospect, the union should have picked up the tab for the brews and chalked it off as money well spent to avoid negative public relations. Just my 2 cents.

[chris 18]

Quit it , City officials are upset because the money could have been used on a weekend bender with hookers. All government agencies misappropriate money and this is going to honor two of Buffalo's bravest, its a slap in the face that this wasn't just paid then a new policy or agreement drawn up between the city and the union. shame on the city.