Quoted from CICERO

If we don't give REMS a taxing district, we will have dead children in the streets.  Talk about fear mongering.

The fear mongering is coming from the Anti-REMS crowd .. trying to say that REMS is not doing its job ..
which is a bald faced lie.  
The fear mongering is coming from the Anti-REMS crowd .. saying that 10 cents per thousand is TOO much
for quality local Emergency Medical Services.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The fear mongering is coming from the Anti-REMS crowd .. trying to say that REMS is not doing its job ..
which is a bald faced lie.  
The fear mongering is coming from the Anti-REMS crowd .. saying that 10 cents per thousand is TOO much
for quality local Emergency Medical Services.

Spare me Ron. No one has ever accused REMS of not doing their job and doing it well...when they were available to do it... ANY
amount in taxes is too much when it is unnecessary.

Quoted from gadfly

Spare me Ron. No one has ever accused REMS of not doing their job and doing it well...when they were available to do it... ANY
amount in taxes is too much when it is unnecessary.

........and it IS unnecessary!!!

Quoted from gadfly

Spare me Ron. No one has ever accused REMS of not doing their job and doing it well...when they were available to do it... ANY amount in taxes is too much when it is unnecessary.

I believe that the new tax is necessary.

Quoted from CICERO

If we don't give REMS a taxing district, we will have dead children in the streets.  Talk about fear mongering.

And this is how the liberal socialists irresponsibly tax and spend......fear monering!!!

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I believe that the new tax is necessary.

Unfortunately, a majority of TAXPAYERS are disagreeing with you.

Quoted from 147

Unfortunately, a majority of TAXPAYERS are disagreeing with you.

That remains to be seen -- we haven't had a referendum on the matter nor a survey.
Most of the folks that I spoke to at the meeting this week .. were willing to vote for the tax district
if it means that it will keep REMS.    Most of the people that I have spoken with going door-to-door
were willing to vote for the tax district if it means that it will keep REMS.

So I think it is hogwash to say that a majority of the taxpayers are disagreeing with me.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

That remains to be seen -- we haven't had a referendum on the matter nor a survey.
Most of the folks that I spoke to at the meeting this week .. were willing to vote for the tax district
if it means that it will keep REMS.    Most of the people that I have spoken with going door-to-door
were willing to vote for the tax district if it means that it will keep REMS.

So I think it is hogwash to say that a majority of the taxpayers are disagreeing with me.

Most of the "folks" at the meeting were with REMS or the fire departments....and I'd be willing to bet that you present REMS as
the only game in town...with no mention of the tax free option and the added benefits with it...no mention of the financial
realities with REMS...no mention of Mohawk's full range of emergency services that REMS cannot offer...no mention of Mohawk's
superiority in terms of advanced equipment and specialized services...the same tactics that have been in use for years...the
one-sided story approach.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The fear mongering is coming from the Anti-REMS crowd .. trying to say that REMS is not doing its job ..
which is a bald faced lie.  
The fear mongering is coming from the Anti-REMS crowd .. saying that 10 cents per thousand is TOO much
for quality local Emergency Medical Services.

the fear mongering comes from the politicos who woo the 'poor poor elderly' and the poor poor parents......it's an emotional speak....
it's a damn ride to the hospital......non-guaranteed in either case with non-guaranteed results.......

so it really doesn't freakin' matter who put it up.....but I do know that the gumba machine likes to suck $$ from the brokenheart
crowd......

Quoted from bumblethru

And this is how the liberal socialists irresponsibly tax and spend......fear monering!!!

again .. I am not a liberal or a socialist or liberal socialist  ..   a taxing district to help support our LOCAL
ems to purchase ambulance and equipment is not irresponsible .. we pay taxes to fire districts to purchase
fire engines and equiment .. we spend town tax dollars for a police department and they use tax funds to
purchase police cars and equipment    --- EMS is a part of public safety IMHO and very necessary and
it would be IRRESPONSIBLE to  NOT fund REMS.

Frankly, I don't care what KR and her crowd think on the issue .. I support REMS and will work to save REMS
and am willing to pay an ambulance tax to keep REMS.  (period -- end of conversation as far as I am
concerned)

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Frankly, I don't care what KR and her crowd think on the issue .. I support REMS and will work to save REMS
and am willing to pay an ambulance tax to keep REMS.  (period -- end of conversation as far as I am
concerned)

Spoken like a true liberal Ron. I don't care what others think...I don't care if we further burden taxpayers unnecessarily... I have
no viable arguments to support my position...I just want a new tax...so others can have a free ride.

Don't forget the part about ending this conversation where you are concerned.

Quoted Text

ROTTERDAM
One vote may decide ambulance issue
Official says Mohawk should get contract if district vote fails
BY JUSTIN MASON Gazette Reporter
Reach Gazette reporter Justin Mason at 395-3113 or jmason@dailygazette.net

    Years of debate over whether to publicly fund Rotterdam Emergency Medical Services Inc. or privately contract with Mohawk Ambulance may come down to one vote later this year.
    Supervisor Frank Del Gallo said the taxing district that would be established through an upcoming referendum vote should support REMS, the nonprofit company now serving the town. But if property owners vote down the taxing district, he said the town should automatically contract with Mohawk, the Schenectady-based for-profi t ambulance service.
    “If they want a tax district we’ll give it to REMS,” he said Friday. “If they don’t, we’ll give [the contract] to Mohawk.”
    Del Gallo said no date has been set for the vote yet; board members will be discussing the issue in the coming weeks.
    Delineating the company funded by the proposed tax district might clear up some of the confusion that existed in June, when members of the Town Board were trying to schedule a date for the referendum. Town Attorney Michael Godlewski previously said the ballot question couldn’t legally identify the company that would ultimately be funded.
    At the time, Del Gallo also indicated that the town’s ambulance service contract would need to put out to bid, regardless of whether the referendum passed. This caused confusion among board members and ultimately prompted them to postpone the vote.
    Mohawk released a statement indicating the company wouldn’t require a subsidy regardless of which direction the vote goes. In turn, the company has offered to reimburse Rotterdam for services provided by the town-funded paramedic corps.
    “Certainly the people in Rotterdam should have voice in this process,” said Tom Nardacci, a spokesman for Mohawk. “This is a way for them to have a voice.”
    Joe VanDerwerker, the president of REMS’ Board of Directors, was unaware of Del Gallo’s new directive regarding the vote. He was perplexed why the referendum would have anything to do with Mohawk at all, since the town board could still fund REMS through the general fund. .................>>>>.....................>>>>..................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r01701&AppName=1

“If the vote goes down, there’s no reason in the world this town board should automatically give a contract to Mohawk,” he said.

Is VanDerwerker kidding? If the unnecessary vote for an unnecessary tax goes down there is EVEN MORE reason to give the contract to Mohawk...we
had EVERY reason to do it years ago. Any elected official who would choose to unnecessarily fund an increasingly expensive service with public money
against the will of those who would pay for it would set a new low in local socialist politics.

If this unnecessary vote takes place and goes down, Joe V. couldn't possibly come up with one "reason in the world" why it should not go to
Mohawk...REMS has yet to advance one single LEGITIMATE argument to justify publicly funding an insolvent organization in all of the years
this debate has been in progress...especially when there has always been a fiscally responsible option that does not burden taxpayers.

I think Joe V is nervous that if the vote fails, he'll need to go get a real job