No one can answer your questions yet.  No provider other than REMS has been selected, at this point.

To speculate on intentions/staffing/cuts/costs would be just that, speculation.

No one can answer your questions because a FOR PROFIT ambulance service will make the
decisions that benefits ITS bottom line .. and not our public safety and community needs.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

No one can answer your questions because a FOR PROFIT ambulance service will make the
decisions that benefits ITS bottom line .. and not our public safety and community needs.

No decision on a provider has been made at this time, unless you're speaking from "inside knowledge", therefore, your statement is completely speculative.

Mohawk is a  FOR PROFIT corporation --- that is a FACT --- it will make its operating decisions based
on the principles of making a profit for its owners.  

There is no way you can dispute that clearly obvious FACT .... and it does not take any decision by the
town board to make it so ...  IT HAS BEEN A FOR PROFIT CORPORATION FOR YEARS.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Mohawk is a  FOR PROFIT corporation --- that is a FACT --- it will make its operating decisions based
on the principles of making a profit for its owners.  

There is no way you can dispute that clearly obvious FACT .... and it does not take any decision by the
town board to make it so ...  IT HAS BEEN A FOR PROFIT CORPORATION FOR YEARS.

At this time, Mohawk Ambulance Service is not the chosen provider - period.

Quoted from 147

At this time, Mohawk Ambulance Service is not the chosen provider - period.

Who said they were the chosen provider ????   You really need to LEARN how  to read .. because your
reading skills are quite deplorable.

Quoted Text

ROTTERDAM
REMS faces tough road ahead
Not-for-profit’s subsidies to end
BY JUSTIN MASON Gazette Reporter

    New Year’s Day will bring some daunting challenges for Rotterdam Emergency Services Inc., but offi - cials with the not-for-profi t ambulance company insist it’s here to stay.
    Starting next month, REMS will no longer receive roughly $152,000 in subsidies provided by the towns of Rotterdam and Princetown. REMS could also face fi scal scrutiny from Supervisor Frank Del Gallo, who promised to wage an effort at recouping any payments received through the company’s past practice of billing for advanced life support services provided by the town-funded paramedics.
    The confluence of these issues has placed the company in a bit of a financial quandary, after Rotterdam property owners rejected a referendum that would have created a tax district to fund the ambulance service. But the leadership of REMS has remained adamant about their intentions to continue serving the town as its primary ambulance provider.
    “We’re going to regroup,” said Joe VanDerwerker, the president of the company’s Board of Directors. “It’s going to be business as usual, but it’s going to be a bit leaner than before.”
    And that means there could be some signifi cant changes in store for the company as it presses forward. In short, VanDerwerker said, the free services historically provided by the company will end next year.
    “We’re going to charge for everything we do,” he said.
    VanDerwerker said REMS will likely start hard billing patients. As the term suggests, hard billing takes a firm line on collecting payment from those who utilize the ambulance service. An exception would be those patients who are destitute.
    The company also plans to distance itself from the town, unlike the oversight structure that was proposed under the tax district. VanDerwerker said the only connection between the two will likely be the fuel the company purchases from the town.
    “We’re breaking away from the Town Board,” he said.
    It’s unclear whether members of the Town Board will pursue a contract with the for-profi t Mohawk Ambulance Service. Last fall, Del Gallo indicated he would advocate for a contract with Mohawk, provided the tax district vote failed.
    Mohawk lobbied hard against the tax district and even hired an elections lawyer to observe the vote this week. A spokesman for the Schenectady-based company said Mohawk remains interested in stationing an ambulance within Rotterdam for 24 hours a day and seven days a week without any town subsidy. .......................>>>>.....................>>>>..............................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r00904&AppName=1

Quoted from 1023

I probably have alot more knowledge of EMS services then the average citizen.  I have a few questions about how thiswill all work out if Mohawk takes over.

I really do not have a preference either way as long as the services provided are as good or better then what REMS was providing...

- How many ambulances will be stationed INSIDE the Town of Rotterdam on a day to day basis by Mohawk... 1?  2?  3?
Will it be 1 or 2 ambulances which would possibly be called out to Glenville or Schenectady or will they be dedicated to the the town?

- The paramedics are currently employed through the Police Department and were not apart of the taxing district voted on for the Ambulance service.  Will they be removed?  If the Rotterdam medics were removed that would be a savings of $280k per year using the 2011 budget.  

The service will be at least as good as REMS...I don't see how Mohawk could have grown steadily over their thirty year history
without delivering reliable, quality ems.

Mohawk would station one ambulance in a Rotterdam facility they will purchase...with a back up fleet of thirty ambulances that can
be dispatched at any time when needed.

The paramedics will not be removed and will remain the first ALS responders...ALS collection would be remitted to the Town and
given the estimates, would significantly reduce the cost of the paramedic program. Mohawk can administer ALS and will only do
so when paramedics cannot respond...as first response status would be retained by Rotterdam paramedics in a Mohawk agreement.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

No one can answer your questions because a FOR PROFIT ambulance service will make the
decisions that benefits ITS bottom line .. and not our public safety and community needs.

REMS will now have to do the same if they want to survive...they just said so in this morning's paper. If they had done that in the first
place they wouldn't be in this situation now....but I'm sure you won't accuse REMS of the same even as they adopt the same
BUSINESS practices.

No one ever begrudges, say, FDG, for all his millions...the only difference between FDG and Mohawk is the way they make their
money...and neither would continue to profit by meeting a demand if they did not deliver reliable, quality products and services.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Who said they were the chosen provider ????   You really need to LEARN how  to read .. because your
reading skills are quite deplorable.

Ron...you're acting like a sore loser.

Where are REMS getting the funds to pay for Frank Salamone's services?

Quoted from gadfly

Ron...you're acting like a sore loser.

No, I am tired of you folks distorting what I post ,,   and what I have posted since the referendum is
true ---- there are many residents who are VERY upset at the elected officials and non-elected persons
who led the no tax district assault.      

You can live in your fantasy land and think that you are the only one with a point of view --- but  the fact
is that the residents who support REMS vote, too   ---- and many will NOT be voting for those people who
sought the defeat of the ambulance tax district.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

No, I am tired of you folks distorting what I post ,,   and what I have posted since the referendum is
true ---- there are many residents who are VERY upset at the elected officials and non-elected persons
who led the no tax district assault.      

You can live in your fantasy land and think that you are the only one with a point of view --- but  the fact
is that the residents who support REMS vote, too   ---- and many will NOT be voting for those people who
sought the defeat of the ambulance tax district.

I don't see where any of the tax opponents have distorted your comments...but I think your characterization of their position as
an "assault" qualifies as distortion.

I have never suggested that others have no opinions...these boards could not thrive without them..it is obvious that they do...and
that this "fantasy" is not mine alone...the overwhelming majority of voters rejected the tax district.  

I'm proud and disappointed in rems. I'm proud of them for finally realizing that their only way to survive is to do business like a business and not depend on the taxpayers...forever! I'm disappointed because they didn't have the foresight to do this years ago.

And for all of those 1500 who voted for more taxes, they could all donate $100/year and make up the $10K/month they were getting from the taxpayers under tommasone's watch.  Tommasone did an injustice by authorizing that money to go to rems. Tommasone gave rems a false sense of security and it was clearly just a band aid for a hemorrhaging service.

In defense of tommasone, he obviously thought that if it went up for a vote, the residents would vote in favor of more taxes. He and his cohorts were wrong.

But rest assure......no one will be dying in the streets!

Quoted from bumblethru

In defense of tommasone, he obviously thought that if it went up for a vote, the residents would vote in favor of more taxes. He and his cohorts were wrong.

he been wrong a few times in how people woold vote