Quoted from CICERO

I'm not disagreeing with you on this point.  BOTH administrations are/were willing to stake claim to the REMS.  Both administrations are/were whoring themselves for political support. Republicans tried to do it in hopes of taking Conservative Party support away from the Democrats; the Democrats/Conservatives are doing it to expand Conservative Party influence and support.  After all, it's not costing them a dime to do it, it cost the taxpayers.

That is why I believe we must finally have the referendum - with a clear choice ->  Yes for the tax district
and REMS or NO -against the tax district and sent it out to bid.  Whatever the decision is -- as far as I am
concerned -- the issue will be settled.

There are other aspects of the referendum  that are troubling .. timing - could have been better -- but if we keep delaying the issue will never be resolved.    Absentee ballots - I was told there was a way to have
them but it requires the voter to pre-register at town hall for the absentee ballot.  
There were some dueling opinions from the various lawyers  -- past town attorneys, current town attorneys, and attorneys that speak at town board meetings ....  if the lawyers can't agree on what the state law says
about referendums and tax districts for ambulances -- how do they expect the average citizen to figure it
all out.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

That is why I believe we must finally have the referendum -

I don't think we "must finally" have a referendum.  If Rotterdam residents desire an ambulance service, we can debate WHO will service Rotterdam based on merit and the advantages and disadvantages of our current provider vs. Mohawk.  Creating a taxing district and putting it up for referendum without knowing WHO will be our servicer is putting the cart before the horse.  We have been funding the failing REMS for ten years through the budget process, why the rush now?  The conversation has to start with WHY should we continue to fund this non-profit over the for proft Mohawk.  Agian, based on merit and logic, NOT politics.

This rush to put it on the ballot in the middle of December to create a taxing district is an illogical step in this decision making process.  That is how you know this has nothing to do with a service for residents, and all to do with politics.

Quoted from CICERO

I don't think we "must finally" have a referendum.  If Rotterdam residents desire an ambulance service, we can debate WHO will service Rotterdam based on merit and the advantages and disadvantages of our current provider vs. Mohawk.  Creating a taxing district and putting it up for referendum without knowing WHO will be our servicer is putting the cart before the horse.  We have been funding the failing REMS for ten years through the budget process, why the rush now?  The conversation has to start with WHY should we continue to fund this non-profit over the for proft Mohawk.  Agian, based on merit and logic, NOT politics.

This rush to put it on the ballot in the middle of December to create a taxing district is an illogical step in this decision making process.  That is how you know this has nothing to do with a service for residents, and all to do with politics.

The town board has said -- passed a resolution -- if the Tax District is approved .. REMS will provide the
ambulance service ... if the Tax District is defeated ambulance service will go out to bid.  So the public does
know who the provider will be .. based on how they vote.

I don't believe for a minute that the "pro-Mohawk side" is acting solely on merit and logic --- politics has a huge part to do with it.      If one was solely interested in politics ... one would support Mohawk .. Mohawk
can afford to make bigger political contributions.    If one was more interested in merit and logic  .. one
would support the organization that will keep 4 ambulances IN TOWN  rather than the organization that at
best will have 1 ambulance and since it is profit driven that ambulance will probably be ALL over God's
creation picking up calls.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I don't believe for a minute that the "pro-Mohawk side" is acting solely on merit and logic --- politics has a huge part to do with it.      If one was solely interested in politics ... one would support Mohawk .. Mohawk
can afford to make bigger political contributions.    

Mohawk's political contributions don't cost me a dime as a taxpayer.  They actually generate revenue for the Town and save me money.  Imagine that!

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The town board has said -- passed a resolution -- if the Tax District is approved .. REMS will provide the
ambulance service ... if the Tax District is defeated ambulance service will go out to bid.  So the public does
know who the provider will be .. based on how they vote.

This isn't a debate.  How this should work is: It should be determined WHO our Ambulance provider is FIRST.  THEN determine if a taxing district is necessary to fund the chosen provider.  Tying the vote for a taxing district with who the provider will be is avoiding the debate of WHO the Town will have as their provider.  

Our elected officials should vote on WHO our provider is before putting a taxing district up for referendum.

Respectfully, it is a debate -- and the debate will be settled on December 14 at a referendum of property
owners.    If the vote goes YES ... then we will have an ambulance district and REMS.   If the vote goes NO ..
we won't have an ambulance district and the contract for ambulance service will go out to bid.

Although I would love to see the vote go YES .. for a variety of reasons,  I will be satisfied with whatever the
majority of the property owners decide.    Do I wish that it could have been handled differently?  YES
Would I have approached it differently if I had been on the Town Board?   YES     But, as the old saying goes
"what is -IS" and I think we just need to resolve th question and move on as a town.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Since it was the Tomassone administration that FIRST proposed the ambulance tax district and, in fact, they had campaign lawnsigns with  "Save Our EMS" on them in both 2005 and 2009 --- I can hardly see how youcan accuse this administration of fabricating the issue for political reasons.
As for prostituting themselves for political power -  the previous administration and the GOP "worked every
street corner" of this town and beyond to get political power.

It was in fact the Paolino administration who first entertained the idea of a tax district...at the request of REMS/White Eagle of
course...along with offers from reorganizational consultants to develop a business model and train a business manager in an attempt
to resolve the financial issues, which of course REMS rejected...and, of course, the Mohawk proposal which, naturally, they also rejected.
Paolino would have just privatized the service back then, if not for a lack of support from the Board at the time....which included
Tony Jasenki, their biggest cheerleader today. Paolino saw this scheme for what it was...and remains today....and he knew there was
no way any kind of fair vote could be executed, for the same reasons we continue discussing to this day. There was no way he
was going to allow this unnecessary vote to proceed without the unattainable accessibility and public education that should be
required. That's why he scheduled the around-the-town meetings...in an effort to do just that...but then, as now, the only ones in
attendance were mostly the interested parties.

This administration did not fabricate the issue of REMS...they are, however, using the last administration's blunder with the issue as
an excuse to force this vote, citing their "promise" to put it to a vote.Tommasone et al are the ones who agreed to force it through
without a vote as part of a political deal in which the Tommasone gang was screwed. It wasn't until Tommasone & Co. realized that
they were going to be stiffed that they used the conveniently timed opposition swell to defer the vote to the eligible electorate. Certain
members of this administration are now using that blunder to advance their support of this scheme through a vote they are certainly
trying to manipulate in favor of the interested parties.

The "Save Our Paramedics" campaign was nothing more than an effort to keep just that...our PARAMEDICS...a response to proposed
cuts in the paramedic program at the time and, more importantly to Republican candidates at the time, to simply oppose Democrat
Paolino. These are the same paramedics that would be retained in a service agreement with Mohawk and continue to be ALS first
responders.  

the signs clearly said   SAVE OUR EMS  .. they did not say save our paramedics

the GOP has played BOTH sides of the ambulance issue for the past 5 years  -- the GOP takes positions
based on the "wind sock test"  -- whatever way the wind is blowing that day .. that is what they believe.
That is Tomassone and company "floated" the idea of a referendum in August 2009 -- hoping to make
a political issue of it --- then they dropped it like a lead balloon when they got no traction on the issue

the fact remains that this is an important issue that has been left unresolved for TOO long --- it is now
on the ballot for a referendum on December 14  -- based on that result of that referendum  the town can finally put this issue behind it  ... and move on

You're still recommending forcing the people in Rotterdam to vote for a referendum that isn't needed when in fact it would be fiscally responsible to let Mohawk serve the town with an ALS ambulance and actually bring money into the town coffers. This is why most people today can't stand either party when they pull crap like this, same old game called taxpayer loses.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

it is now on the ballot for a referendum on December 14  -- based on that result of that
referendum  the town can finally put this issue behind it  ... and move on

With any luck, the end result will be a resounding NO!

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

If the vote goes YES ... then we will have an ambulance district and REMS.   If the vote goes NO ..
we won't have an ambulance district and the contract for ambulance service will go out to bid.

Another example of how this referendum is skewed.  The voter is led to believe that if they vote yes, they are guaranteed service from REMS, but if they vote NO, they may be led to believe that Rotterdam will have no service until the bidding process is complete.  To level the playing field and make this unnecessary referendum a fair vote, it should be determined who the provider will if the voter chooses to vote NO.  That way a YES vote = REMS and a NO vote = Mohawk.  Then the residents that choose to vote NO will have assurance that there will not be a lapse in service when they vote NO.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

That is Tomassone and company "floated" the idea of a referendum in August 2009 -- hoping to make
a political issue of it --- then they dropped it like a lead balloon when they got no traction on the issue

Yet another great political analysis by DVOR.  You are CORRECT there was NO TRACTION ON THE REMS ISSUE.  THE ROTTERDAM RESIDENTS  DO NOT WANT A TAXING DISTRICT, HENCE - DROPPED LIKE A LED BALLOON! Now this adminstration is jamming it down the residents throat against their will, and manipulating the election as legally allowed.  

DVOR, how can you say that this referendum is part of the democratic process out of one side of your mouth, and then say it was an unpopular issue during the 2009 democratic election process?  If the taxing district was unpopular with the residents during an election year, why are the residents in favor of it now?

Wouldn't it be counterintuitive to continue the same policy as the opponents you beat in the election?  

Corrupt Rotterdam politics.  Where's the ethics board?

The current town board passed a resolution saying that If the referendum vote goes in favor of the
tax district that REMS would remain the provider.   If the referendum vote goes against the tax
district it would put the contract for ambulance service provider out to bid.   That is clearer than the
previous arrangement.

Many unpopular or volatile political issues have been put up for public referendum in the past -- the
vote itself is part of the democratic process.  The fundamental problem with the Tomassone
administration was that it applied the "windsock test" to every issue ... that is why not much got
accomplished .. because every time the public opinion changed .. their approach to town problems
seems to have changed.

Now -- for discussion sake -- the opposite of the "windsock test" approach to goverment .. is the "my
way or the highway" approach to government    Equally problematic.

I prefer an approach that is somewhere in between those two extremes.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

the signs clearly said   SAVE OUR EMS  .. they did not say save our paramedics

the GOP has played BOTH sides of the ambulance issue for the past 5 years  -- the GOP takes positions
based on the "wind sock test"  -- whatever way the wind is blowing that day .. that is what they believe.
That is Tomassone and company "floated" the idea of a referendum in August 2009 -- hoping to make
a political issue of it --- then they dropped it like a lead balloon when they got no traction on the issue

the fact remains that this is an important issue that has been left unresolved for TOO long --- it is now
on the ballot for a referendum on December 14  -- based on that result of that referendum  the town can finally put this issue behind it  ... and move on

The signs were meant to oppose cutting our paramedic program...THAT was ems faction in jeopardy at the time!

Tommasone conveniently chose the referendum only after his political deal began to unravel and he took advantage of the
simultaneous growing opposition to the ems tax as a convenient way out of his end of the deal...which was to impose the tax
by a vote of the Board...it was already a political issue...always was and still is. It HAS gone on way too long...it should have been
privatized a LONG time ago.

The signs SAID --- Save our EMS ---  what the Tomassone, Parisi, Buchanan TROIKA meant by the
signs is anyone's guess .....  if they are in front of people who love REMS -- they will say they are
pro REMS ...   if they are in front of people who want Mohawk or some other private provider -- they
will coyly explain that the signs mean they support Mohawk or some other provider   .... and if they
were campaigning for votes along the Arctic Ocean  --- they would tell the natives that they believe in
letting the sick and elderly float away on an ice sheet,     They will say anything for a vote and power.