The Poquonnock Bridge Fire District board appeared to have reached a deal with its union to return nine laid-off firefighters to work, then it appeared the deal was off, now it may be on again. Just add another twist and turn and twist to the tumultuous past couple of years in the Groton fire district.

For the sake of fairness, adequate fire protection and firefighter safety, the best outcome would be for the board and union to sign a compromise contract that revives adequate staffing.

It has become exorbitantly expensive for taxpayers in the district to pay for professional fire protection. It is also fundamentally unfair, because this largely blue-collar section of town pays for the fire protection of an area that has about half the public buildings and a large commercial district, assets that benefit everyone in town.

Groton should reorganize how it provides and pays for fire protection. However, in a town that zealously protects its myriad fiefdoms - be it numerous fire districts, three police forces, or dual city and town governments - that is not happening anytime soon.

In the meantime, the Poquonnock district board must try to climb out from under an overly generous 10-year contract approved by a previous board in 2012, which district voters subsequently ousted for its contractual liberality. A mediated deal would do just that by cutting the contract to four years, forgo cost-of-living adjustments for retirees and impose other concessions. In return, nine laid-off firefighters would go back on the job, properly staffing work shifts.

Earlier this week, fire district attorney F. Jerome O'Malley informed union leadership that the board had rejected the deal. This was strange, because the board had not met or voted, at least not legally. Board President Alan Ackley told a Day reporter that meetings involving contract negotiations do not have to be noticed or public.

That's not true. While a board can vote to go into closed session for contract negotiations, the meeting itself must be public, with proper notice in advance. All votes must be in public.

Fortunately, when the board did legally meet Thursday, it voted to reconsider the compromise contract. What comes next is unclear, but whatever it is it must be part of a legal and open process.