I have spoke with Ms. Donovan about this in a short conversation. I believe that I understand where she is coming from and am understanding the reason for voting for this a bit more.
It all comes down to oversight. The idea is this.
The first choice is that you have what is going on there right now, with people picked by REMS to decide how they are going to go about spending the money that is given to them directly out of the general fund. This money would have to be added back into the budget, otherwise I don't know how REMS would get the other money. Maybe they would have to find other places in the budget to take the money from, or it would be coming from a mid-year fund balance raid.
The other choice is to have the community able to speak up and be able to make decisions on what is going on. If the taxing district is approved, this would mean that the residents would have the ability to go to the polls to make decisions for REMS, as we can through the fire districts.
It's coming down to whether you want to spend the money and have no voice (taxation without representation, via the general fund balance) or if you wish to be able to enter your voice into the issues.
I am against higher taxes, but the fact is we're going to pay this tax either way. I think that the residents should have power over where their money is going to go and I will support this tax district.
Vote YES, December 14th.
I'd like to hear how people disagree with me. The funny thing is that the people who disagree with me are going to be the same ones that say that people have to stop voting the party line and actually think for themselves. Well, guess what. I'm doing it. I will be voting for it, which is thinking for myself, just like my votes in November for Angelo and Susie (although for a different reason, totally).
Kevin:
You identify choice 1 and choice 2 which correlate to funding REMS. You ignored choice 3 which is private service with no municipal funding via possible contracting with MAS. You worked in the insurance industry and probably know that ambulance transport coverage via full coverage insurance pays about double what Medicare reimbursement pays. In a report to the Town by REMS (see 11/27/10 post by Bumblethru and the attached Spotlight Article) REMS reported that their estimated revenue for 2010 would be approximately $426,000 dollars. Their three year annual Total Calls average for 2007-2009 (off the REMS website) is 2460. When you divide this into the estimated revenue, it is $173 dollars per call. This is less than the Schenectady County Medicare reimbursement rate for ambulance service. This says two things, first being that their revenue stream is less than Medicare allowed rates which is a losing business model. It also says that the area/territory of service is not conducive to providing a sustainable profit margin. The facts show that YOU the tax payer will have to make up this difference. REMS was established in October 2004, and as we all know developed into a debt service. There is no history of profitability, and we the tax payers sit here with years of bailout from the General Fund, along with the ALS billed monies, and look at their needs to replace all ambulances and question why someone would continue down this path. I do not believe everyone in this economic climate has the luxury of paying for ambulance service via a special tax AND through their insurance premiums. And guess who pays for the bulk of the Medicare payments . . . . . BINGO, we already do through our taxes!
By the way, . . . . Vote NO! December 14th to this poorly conceived, unnecessary tax.
OK!!!! I must have watched and rewatched these videos and even I am totally confused! HOW can the rotterdam town board, put forth a vote for or against a 'specific' ambulance service that should go out to bid?
This move just dirtied up the entire process with 'dirty politics'. imho
Putting this service out for bid would prevent the possibility of dirty patronage, political/personal gain that comes with politics.
And then the rotterdam town board passes a resolution 2 months ago that would award a YES vote to rems!!!!
The letter that went out to ALL rotterdam property owners was 'incorrect'. Are the rotterdam elected officials prepared to send out a correction?
It appears that this entire process was done a$$ backwards. And it appears that there was some political implications in this process. If that weren't true, the vote would have been the only criteria. There is apparently 'something' to be gained by 'some'!
And it also appears that Mohawk is the only entity that is telling the rotterdamians the TRUTH! IMHO of course.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I have spoke with Ms. Donovan about this in a short conversation. I believe that I understand where she is coming from and am understanding the reason for voting for this a bit more.
It all comes down to oversight. The idea is this.
The first choice is that you have what is going on there right now, with people picked by REMS to decide how they are going to go about spending the money that is given to them directly out of the general fund. This money would have to be added back into the budget, otherwise I don't know how REMS would get the other money. Maybe they would have to find other places in the budget to take the money from, or it would be coming from a mid-year fund balance raid.
The other choice is to have the community able to speak up and be able to make decisions on what is going on. If the taxing district is approved, this would mean that the residents would have the ability to go to the polls to make decisions for REMS, as we can through the fire districts.
It's coming down to whether you want to spend the money and have no voice (taxation without representation, via the general fund balance) or if you wish to be able to enter your voice into the issues.
I am against higher taxes, but the fact is we're going to pay this tax either way. I think that the residents should have power over where their money is going to go and I will support this tax district.
Vote YES, December 14th.
I'd like to hear how people disagree with me. The funny thing is that the people who disagree with me are going to be the same ones that say that people have to stop voting the party line and actually think for themselves. Well, guess what. I'm doing it. I will be voting for it, which is thinking for myself, just like my votes in November for Angelo and Susie (although for a different reason, totally).
Kevin, than I would suggest that you join the obama white house and put ALL private businesses into a taxing district. That way we, the government, can control 'who get's paid what' and 'what they can charge' and 'how much of a profit' they can make!!! It appears that you are clearly against capitalism and favor government control the same as ms. donovan!
Sorry to hear that you share the same anti-capitalistic ideology as ms donovan.
Remember Kevin, it was you who admitted that you were once for Walmart on the triangle.....but later came to your senses and realized you were wrong. Could this be the case again.....perhaps??
Must rotterdamians be reminded that Mohawk is not some fly by night ambulance service. They have been around for decades. They also have and can afford, THROUGH CAPITALISM, state of the art medical equipment, supplies, employees and service!
Only in backwards rotterdam! Poor bastards!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
If the tax district doesn't pass, there will be no need for the town to come up with funds to subsidize REMS because Mohawk Ambulance will be the only viable option. Mohawk doesn't require the taxpayers to subsidize their operation. Further, their proposal to the town, if it still stands, will provide $150K (or so) to the town fund.
The anti-REMS crowd needs to stop LYING
FACT There is NO subsidy in the 2011 budget for REMS ... and when the tax district passes on Tuesday -- the ambulance tax will NOT be used for salaries and other operational expenses.
FACT - All REMS needs is for the Town Board to authorize the Supervisor to sign an ALS contract for it to also reimburse the town $150,000 for ALS services.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
OK!!!! I must have watched and rewatched these videos and even I am totally confused! HOW can the rotterdam town board, put forth a vote for or against a 'specific' ambulance service that should go out to bid?
This move just dirtied up the entire process with 'dirty politics'. imho
Putting this service out for bid would prevent the possibility of dirty patronage, political/personal gain that comes with politics.
And then the rotterdam town board passes a resolution 2 months ago that would award a YES vote to rems!!!!
The letter that went out to ALL rotterdam property owners was 'incorrect'. Are the rotterdam elected officials prepared to send out a correction?
It appears that this entire process was done a$$ backwards. And it appears that there was some political implications in this process. If that weren't true, the vote would have been the only criteria. There is apparently 'something' to be gained by 'some'!
And it also appears that Mohawk is the only entity that is telling the rotterdamians the TRUTH! IMHO of course.
I'm in your corner Bumblethru. From what I gathered from the videos, the referendum cannot select a service provider, that is apparently against the law. So the explanation went that they gave to the resident that questioned the letter. ND claims the prior Resolution establishing REMS as the provider if the ambulance district passes is currently a valid and legal resolution. It looks as though the Town Board paired this outcome based on the possible vote outcome. Why else would you hold the referendum except for REMS. But the letter does seem deceptive/inaccurate in the sense that it implies you are only voting for or against a tax district, and the public is unaware of this prior marriage through the resolution of a tax district with REMS as the provider and that is really what the vote is about.
I am glad that you have "seen the light" on the referendum. I notice that the other folks are "dumping" on you now .. with all sorts of unfounded accusations. Don't worry, I know that you are a reasonable person .. just ignore the others.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
FACT There is NO subsidy in the 2011 budget for REMS ... and when the tax district passes on Tuesday -- the ambulance tax will NOT be used for salaries and other operational expenses.
FACT - All REMS needs is for the Town Board to authorize the Supervisor to sign an ALS contract for it to also reimburse the town $150,000 for ALS services.
This isn't an anti-rems issue...........so stop making up stories that fit your delusional thinking. FACT - Businesses are paying a portion for insurance for their employees that cover ambulance service. FACT - People pay a portion of their insurance to pay for ambulance service. FACT - People and businesses will be paying a third time through taxation if this tax vote passes.
NO MORE TAXES FOR ROTTERDAM!!! VOTE NO!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
The resolution calling for the referendum can NOT mention a specific provider --- and the referendum calling that the Town Board past in October does NOT mention a specific provider. However, a SEPARATE and DISTINCT resolution passed at the same meeting made the commitment that if the tax district is approved .. REMS would be the provider for the district. This is all PERFECTLY LEGAL .... and fairly easy to understand if you weren't blinded the venomous hate that fills your soul.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
I'm in your corner Bumblethru. From what I gathered from the videos, the referendum cannot select a service provider, that is apparently against the law. So the explanation went that they gave to the resident that questioned the letter. ND claims the prior Resolution establishing REMS as the provider if the ambulance district passes is currently a valid and legal resolution. It looks as though the Town Board paired this outcome based on the possible vote outcome. Why else would you hold the referendum except for REMS. But the letter does seem deceptive/inaccurate in the sense that it implies you are only voting for or against a tax district, and the public is unaware of this prior marriage through the resolution of a tax district with REMS as the provider and that is really what the vote is about.
Just look at the videos again. WHO on that rotterdam town board has the MOST to gain if the tax vote is passed and the MOST to lose by the outcome of this vote?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
This isn't an anti-rems issue...........so stop making up stories that fit your delusional thinking. FACT - Businesses are paying a portion for insurance for their employees that cover ambulance service. FACT - People pay a portion of their insurance to pay for ambulance service. FACT - People and businesses will be paying a third time through taxation if this tax vote passes.
NO MORE TAXES FOR ROTTERDAM!!! VOTE NO!!
FACT - and a lot of property owners feel that an additional $15 to $25 a year is a SMALL price to pay to keep REMS ..which is an IN TOWN institution that was created by Rotterdamians for Rotterdamians ... we don't want to privatize a vital public service. END OF DEBATE
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
FACT There is NO subsidy in the 2011 budget for REMS ... and when the tax district passes on Tuesday -- the ambulance tax will NOT be used for salaries and other operational expenses.
FACT - All REMS needs is for the Town Board to authorize the Supervisor to sign an ALS contract for it to also reimburse the town $150,000 for ALS services.
FACT - REMS HAS been collecting for ALS and never remitted the funds to the Town.
FACT - Steve Tommasone slipped $120,000 into this year's budget on his way out the door because he knew REMS would not be able to continue improperly retaining those funds and they would have gone broke by now.
Just look at the videos again. WHO on that rotterdam town board has the MOST to gain if the tax vote is passed and the MOST to lose by the outcome of this vote?
With the third party candidates last year, and the alledged (which I don't prescribe to) damage they did, ALL politicos are out to "buy" votes. This is a no brainer for the Town Board, the Resolution marrying the taxing district to REMS with its unanimous approval did not jeopardize anyone's careers. "Put it to the vote and let the residents decide!" was the safe road, or so they thought! So voters, let's oblige them . . .
FACT - REMS HAS been collecting for ALS and never remitted the funds to the Town.
FACT - Steve Tommasone slipped $120,000 into this year's budget on his way out the door because he knew REMS would not be able to continue improperly retaining those funds and they would have gone broke by now.
Both of those issues are fixable -- and have no bearing on the case for or against the tax district.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
FACT - REMS HAS been collecting for ALS and never remitted the funds to the Town.
FACT - Steve Tommasone slipped $120,000 into this year's budget on his way out the door because he knew REMS would not be able to continue improperly retaining those funds and they would have gone broke by now.
Both of those issues are fixable -- and have no bearing on the case for or against the tax district.
Neither is fixable because that money is long gone and can't be recouped. What would you do, have the hypothetical ambulance district increase the tax to pay back the tax money people already paid to the Town that was diverted from the General Fund to REMS? And of course this is all about the tax district because we have two debt issues. First being the debt accumulated including the past fuel bill, IRS, penalties etc. Second part being current operating debt like all ambulances in need of replacement, proposed salary and benefits. When you tally all the debt lines, and we know the ALS billing was kept by REMS, it muddies the water as to their true costs. These costs will be passed on to the recipients of a potential tax district above the rate structure currently recommended. What better way to buy votes than with taxpayer dollars, that's a bargain for the politicos!
C'mon AVON, don't let hundreds of thousands of unaccounted for ALS money muddy this process. Didn't you read the Schalmont survey? The resident a screaming for a taxing district.
Tommasone wanted to pass this taxing district using permissive referendum, even when this survey CLEARLY shows the majority of residents OPPOSE this taxing district - YET ALL POLITICAL PARTIES CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE VOTE. Go ahead Tracy, run Steve again. With those survey numbers, there will be plenty of fodder for a NNTP candidate to use to contrast him or herself from the current political class in Rotterdam.
Brian McGarry, stick to your principles in regards to creating a new taxing district, the majority of the Rotterdam residents agree with YOU!
Logged
