Quoted Text

Rotterdam EMS corps regains health
Saturday, July 11, 2009
By Justin Mason (Contact)
Gazette Reporter

ROTTERDAM — Rotterdam’s only nonprofit ambulance corps has a pulse, and it’s growing stronger.
After years of tumult, the Rotterdam Emergency Medical Services Inc. has placed a second ambulance on the road and now is showing signs of vitality. With the aid of town funding, the company is also starting to chip away at the debt it accrued over the course of nearly five years of financial despair, reported Joe VanDerwerker, the president of REMS’s Board of Directors, during a Town Board meeting.
“REMS is in pretty good shape,” he said Wednesday.
VanDerwerker said the company has reduced its fuel debt to the town to $15,000 and anticipates paying the amount in full within 10 months. He said REMS is also paying the Internal Revenue Service $2,000 per month while the company works out a settlement with the agency.
The company has also grown considerably in size. VanDerwerker said REMS now employs 42 workers, which is up from the 16 employees it retained when he became president of the board.
With a full staff and adequate funding, the company isn’t missing as many calls. On average, VanDerwerker said REMS misses about three of the more than 200 calls the company receives each month. Missed calls are handled by Mohawk Ambulance Service.
The current condition of REMS is in stark contrast to the company’s position just one year ago. The IRS had imposed tax liens against the ambulance corps totaling nearly $250,000.
These fiscal woes prompted town officials to withhold any subsidy of the ambulance corps, which was formed by a pair of volunteer companies with the understanding that there would be municipal funding. Board members also debated merging Rotterdam’s town-operated paramedic service with REMS, a concept that later proved unpopular with both entities.
Funding was finally provided to the company by the town of Princetown in November 2008. Rotterdam followed suit in February by contributing a $10,000 monthly stipend.
Rotterdam is now awaiting a report that will allow the town to move forward on a referendum needed to establish a tax district. If approved by voters, the company could become tax-funded much like the town’s volunteer fire departments.
VanDerwerker said that the funding has helped REMS rebound from virtual insolvency but warned that the company still needs help. He urged board members to advance a tax district that would allow the ambulance service to move forward.
“Right now, we’re paying our debts but we’re not moving forward,” he said.
Town Board member John Mertz lauded REMS’s success but wasn’t convinced of the need for a tax district to support the company. Instead, he said Rotterdam should fund the ambulance corps through the town budget.
“If [REMS] is ran properly, it doesn’t need a tax district,” he said.................>>>>.............>>>>...............http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/jul/11/0711_rems/

Quoted Text

“REMS is in pretty good shape,” he said Wednesday.

Quoted Text

The company has also grown considerably in size. VanDerwerker said REMS now employs 42 workers, which is up from the 16 employees it retained when he became president of the board.

Quoted Text

After years of tumult, the Rotterdam Emergency Medical Services Inc. has placed a second ambulance on the road

Quoted Text

VanDerwerker said that the funding has helped REMS rebound from virtual insolvency but warned that the company still needs help. He urged board members to advance a tax district that would allow the ambulance service to move forward.

“Right now, we’re paying our debts but we’re not moving forward,” he said.

Now which is it? Either your're in good shape, tripled your workforce (employees and added another ambulance - or you're "not moving forward" and need a taxing district.

Can't have it both ways.

Employees? I thought this was a volunteer squad?

Quoted from 147

Now which is it? Either your're in good shape, tripled your workforce (employees and added another ambulance - or you're "not moving formward" and need a taxing district.

Can't have it both ways.

Employees? I thought this was a volunteer squad?

Exactly! The point was, why would or should the taxpayers have to  pay for an ambulance squad when Mohawk would have given the town, the same if not better service at ZERO cost to the taxpayers? This is just as ridiculous as the bush/obama bailouts! Bailing out failing companies at the taxpayers expense!

this here is terrible and SHOULD BE FREE LIKE WHEN THE DEMOS RAN THINGS STUNADS!

For your information Sal the Ambulance Service has never been free as it was paid for by donations collected by the fireman during their fund drives and all the men and woman who served on the ambulance corps were volunteers which kept the cost to a minimum but it was still an expensive operation to fund. Price the cost of a new ambulance and the equipment needed and you'll understand why it's so expensive to keep the service running.

So now 'the town' is going to subsidize an ambulance corps and then say it is too expensive then 'make it private'......

sounds/looks like 'Atlas Shrugged' to me....

the government 'building a company' for 'the poor little guy'....

pasted from another thread...

Quoted from senders

Once we start paying for REMS---we ALL know what happens to government entities and the control thereof.....they get expensive
what does the government do then?----yup---put it out for BID.......

I'd say there is a 5year plan for a BID out,,,once REMS becomes a government paid entity.....

a company all nicely set up by whom-----'We The People'........

BID OUT NOW!!!!

no free ride from me.......and the ambulance isn't a 'free ride' either-----private/government

but you are NOT going to jumpstart off my back.......

DONT TREAD ON ME

You bring up some interesting points worthy of discussion.  First, whether the town bids out or not, we're already paying for it.  REMS received $100,000 from the general fund in an effort to get them financially sound.  That's your tax dollar so you're already paying.

Second, whether the town creates a tax district or bids out, it's going to get expensive.  We'll either create a tax district with a low initial payment (likely to rise annually thereafter) or a sweet initial bid to land the contract (just as likely to rise later on).  The "problem" with the first scenario is pretty obvious from a tax perspective but once that district gets created, it's virtually there to stay in perpetuity.  Whether that's good or bad is debatable.  My current concern is creating a tax district to provide a dedicated revenue stream for an organization that while admittedly seems to be making progress is still essentially in financial disarray.  I think the creation of a tax district at this juncture inadvertently creates a disincentive to manage financial concerns effectively now or in the future.  The "problem" with the second scenario is if REMS goes away because we choose a contract on short-sightedness benefit, I think we do a potential disservice on the public safety front.  I think we need REMS.

So what option is left?  The current approach of funding it through the general fund seems acceptable, at least in the short-term until we find out about their future self-sustainability.  It's public safety.  That's a good use of our tax dollar.  Of course, to fit it into the budget, other spending needs to be reduced (just like the town chose to do when they provided $100,000).

The ultimate determination of "what's best" is likely a little further down the road until we see what financial shape REMS can get in to.  We shouldn't make a hasty decision until we have a better handle on the benefits/implications of our choice.

Why isn't it incorporated into the fire districts??? makes for better coverage of the town.....all specialties included ALS/BLS.....
what are we paying for? just a ride?

I'm all for public safety,,,,but,an ambulance is for 'after the fact'.....

I say make it private now.....no issue political/$$ later......keep it simple NOW.......

JMHO

Looks like there is a special town board meeting tomorrow night.  Included is a resoultion calling for a public hearing in August that appears to be related to possible creation of a tax district for REMS???

http://www.rotterdamny.org/calendar1/calendar/eventimages/07232009.pdf

Quoted from Michael

pasted from another thread...



You bring up some interesting points worthy of discussion.  First, whether the town bids out or not, we're already paying for it.  REMS received $100,000 from the general fund in an effort to get them financially sound.  That's your tax dollar so you're already paying.

Second, whether the town creates a tax district or bids out, it's going to get expensive.  We'll either create a tax district with a low initial payment (likely to rise annually thereafter) or a sweet initial bid to land the contract (just as likely to rise later on).  The "problem" with the first scenario is pretty obvious from a tax perspective but once that district gets created, it's virtually there to stay in perpetuity.  Whether that's good or bad is debatable.  My current concern is creating a tax district to provide a dedicated revenue stream for an organization that while admittedly seems to be making progress is still essentially in financial disarray.  I think the creation of a tax district at this juncture inadvertently creates a disincentive to manage financial concerns effectively now or in the future.  The "problem" with the second scenario is if REMS goes away because we choose a contract on short-sightedness benefit, I think we do a potential disservice on the public safety front.  I think we need REMS.

So what option is left?  The current approach of funding it through the general fund seems acceptable, at least in the short-term until we find out about their future self-sustainability.  It's public safety.  That's a good use of our tax dollar.  Of course, to fit it into the budget, other spending needs to be reduced (just like the town chose to do when they provided $100,000).

The ultimate determination of "what's best" is likely a little further down the road until we see what financial shape REMS can get in to.  We shouldn't make a hasty decision until we have a better handle on the benefits/implications of our choice.

You apparently are echoing Joe Surhada verbatim on your views. How is it that he gets bashed here by your supporters for having the exact same view? I don't understand how you can have turned all your people against him considering you are both conservatives and both have the same view on this public safety issue? Thank you for that clear common sense prognosis Mike, you did yourself a service. I just wonder if everyone will now turn on you and say you "flip-flopped" even though you didn't. You just took a position which made sense. So now there are a couple of candidates that have that view at least I guess, from what they have said out there. Good.

Quoted from senders

I'm all for public safety,,,,but,an ambulance is for 'after the fact'.....

Maybe if you're already dead but I know I would want an ambulance that's properly equipped to keep me alive en route to the hospital and a crew that's going to get me there quickly and efficiently...and alive!  REMS does a great job of that as far as I'm aware.  They need better financial management and they seem to be moving forward in that regard which is good.

Quoted from Michael

Maybe if you're already dead but I know I would want an ambulance that's properly equipped to keep me alive en route to the hospital and a crew that's going to get me there quickly and efficiently...and alive!  REMS does a great job of that as far as I'm aware.  They need better financial management and they seem to be moving forward in that regard which is good.

Has REMS been given ALS (advanced life support) certification like Mohawk?

Quoted from GrahamBonnet

You apparently are echoing Joe Surhada verbatim on your views. How is it that he gets bashed here by your supporters for having the exact same view? I don't understand how you can have turned all your people against him considering you are both conservatives and both have the same view on this public safety issue? Thank you for that clear common sense prognosis Mike, you did yourself a service. I just wonder if everyone will now turn on you and say you "flip-flopped" even though you didn't. You just took a position which made sense. So now there are a couple of candidates that have that view at least I guess, from what they have said out there. Good.

Am I?  I don't know Mr. Suhrada's full blown position on the matter - has he stated it somewhere?  I try not to bash anyone, by the way, and certainly don't ever encourage others to do so either.

I think my view has been consistent from the beginning but I'll leave that for others to decide.  To be clear, I'm against creating a tax district.  I can support the general fund approach if REMS continues to demonstrate improvement (and we make offsetting cuts) and I certainly want to see REMS continue to serve us if possible.  I'm wary of replacing them but exploring alternatives never hurts.  That's about as simple as I can make it - and I hope I've been clear.  In the end, it really isn't about what I want, but what we (the whole town) wants.  Public hearings on the matter hopefully will be beneficial in making the decision.  Let's hope that whoever we elect gets it more right than wrong.

Quoted from 147

Has REMS been given ALS (advanced life support) certification like Mohawk?

I believe REMS is BLS (basic life support).  There are a lot of valid arguments for the different options.  I've told you where I stand given what I know, and I respect those that may differ.  It will be a difficult choice for whoever has to make it.

...well it is good that you also staking out your position and I think it is a sound one. Too bad all the real conservatives didn't check before they threw the only guy in Schenectady county history to vote against any and all property tax increases that came before him in seven years overboard. The one who actually walked the walk, proposed cuts, voted against bonding for the 100 million dollar nursing home, the 10 million dollar Downtown Library fiasco( one of 14 with hundreds of supporters there to bash him and no one to support him) and was even the rotten child-hating, anti-hockey-mom SOB who voted against a new "Zamboni" at the ice rink. Someone actually knows that in order to keep taxes down you have to vote NOT to spend money on popular things sometimes. That is called "action." Not just words. Action that costs votes from special interests and always loses you more votes than gains you, but does it no matter what because it is the right thing for the taxpayers of the FUTURE.

But don't worry, Mike. You are in good company now, or maybe the legislator is in good company since he agrees with the independent conservative who is running with a "new" platform. Too bad all the other gadflies didn't see it that way. The noise from the left is deafening enough, it is sad that the right didn't do their homework first, before they bashed.