Chisholm Council Deadlocks on Proposal to Pause Fire Department Services

Dozens of Chisholm residents packed a specially called City Council meeting March 19 only to watch it dissolve without a single vote, motion, or public comment — leaving unresolved a proposal that would have suspended the city's fire department for at least 30 days beginning this Sunday.

The agenda item, authored by council member Holewa, called for sweeping action: ceasing fire department operations effective March 22, placing every department member on administrative leave, directing the city administrator to hire outside investigators to audit department personnel, and reaching out to mutual aid departments to cover the city during the pause. "I am asking the fire department to cease operations effective 3/22/2026 for a minimum of 30 days and direct the city administrator to work with outside parties to conduct an investigation and audit into the personnel of the department," Holewa wrote in a memo included in the council packet. "This would also include placing members of its entirety on administrative leave."

Holewa said the proposal was driven by a reliability crisis. In a phone call Thursday afternoon, Holewa cited threats from anonymous firefighters to quit the department or simply not respond to calls. "We have no idea who is going to show up for fire calls," Holewa said. "It's not fair to hold the city hostage."

Firefighters pushed back against both the characterization and the remedy. Dan Lucente', who had addressed the council at its March 11 meeting, said the department never requested an investigation. Instead, Lucente' said, firefighters delivered "a black and white statement of no confidence against Lantz and Show." On Thursday, Lucente' called the Holewa agenda item retaliatory, noting it was focused solely on the fire department.

Lantz, speaking at the meeting, offered a competing interpretation. He said the proposal had nothing to do with separating personnel who work across both fire and EMS services, framing it instead as "an attempt by fire leadership to remove individuals who call for the need for evaluation, review and accountability."

The council's silence on the matter drew sharp reactions from those who had made time to attend. Some inside the chambers responded with jeers; at least one person called the meeting "a joke." Outside, a different sentiment prevailed. A couple of citizens expressed relief, saying they had worried no viable backup plan existed to maintain fire coverage if the motion had actually passed.

The standoff leaves Chisholm's fire department in an unresolved limbo, with the proposed March 22 pause date now passed and no council action on record to resolve the internal conflict that prompted the proposal.