fireguy43

Any idea when this was?

Valid points. I would just ask you to consider those situations where anonimity is out of self-preservation. I am perfectly willing to put my name and affiliation on my profile, but when you see what happens to some of the posters on here, it just isn't worth it. 1) My posts reflect my personal opinions and not those of my department. They (my officers and my department members)don't need to feel responsible or defend me for what I say, no matter how stupid it might be. 2) There is far too much stereotyping on here, and to identify your affiliation just invites comments that are sometimes infantile and irrelevant. Paid vs. volly, how many pieces of equipment you have vs. someone else, oh, you can't get out until second dispatch, etc. I've seen all of these comments/topics on here, and none of them were deserved. The first time someone threw one of those my way, I would respond, and Seth or one of the moderators would have to ban me from the site, etc. Why create work for them, and aggravation for myself? I'm just saying that a blank profile doesn't mean someone's hiding. As to QTIP and the rest, you're right. There are a few someones on here who I firmly believe say things just to stir the pot, and if you call them on it, you get the innocent "who me" followed by the infamous "QTIP". Annoying yes, but it's a free country. If you or anyone else is really interested in who I am or what my affiliation is, PM me and I will be happy to share.

Psssst..... Tommy,you're at minus 9! Lay low for a while, that whole Mobile Life thread killed you. When you asked the question, I thought no one was rating you, and I was going to offer to throw a negative your way every once in a while.... now I see that everyone else did before I could.

So a couple of guys have masterfully demonstrated their abilities to find words in a dictionary, and also to skillfully copy them into a meaningless thread for others to argue about. Get real guys, there are more important issues than what a department puts on the side of their rig, like what they put IN it, and who they put ON it.

1) The world is full of examples where taxes are levied on people who derive little to no benefit from the service. Let's not make this sound like the fire service has a monopoly on that problem. Talk to anyone in upstate NY about how much of their tax dollars go to support downstate, I've seen those stories in the media all of the time. Ask anyone in the counties of the Hudson Valley why they need to support the MTA, and you'll get an earful. Is it wrong? Absolutely. Should it be fixed? Sure. Will it happen anytime soon? Doubt it. Specifically as it relates to the fire service, I can't think of any "career" legislation that costs taxpayers in other communitities tax money, but give me some time and maybe I can come up with something. 2) Politicians are indeed an opportunistic bunch, and yeah, they approve things that will enhance their popularity. Vollies don't have a corner on this market, as politicians are always eager to kiss a___ to get the endorsement of whatever career unions they can find. No difference there, a vote is a vote, career or vollie, and a good deal of the politicians out there will fall all over themselves to get the vote, no matter what. 3) Despite your protestations to the contrary, the act of classifying the issue in terms of "career" or "vollie" makes the issue one of "career" vs. "vollie". The issue is really one of the political process, access to decision-makers, and how the political process is tainted by special interest groups, be they career unions or vollie lobbying groups. Both are guilty of looking out for their own members to the exclusion of what it costs everyone else. If you really don't believe it is a career/vollie thing, then stop using the terms when you make a point.

Back up a minute on that one..... a gross oversimplification. There are many communities that do not have "career departments", but to suggest that they have somehow "opted out" (your words "chose not to fund...")is ridiculous. It suggests that there are no other variables at play and that is just not true. Not every municipality or unincorporated area has the wherewithal to have a "career department" if they so chose to. Here we go again with the "paid vs. vollie" argument. We almost made it a month on this forum without this flaring up again.

And the far end of New Hamburg just became the close end to the City of Poughkeepsie, another reason the COP contract makes so much sense.

Let's remember a few points here. MLSS covers the Village of Fishkill, parts of fire districts in town of Fishkill, East Fishkill Fire District, Village of Wappingers and New Hamburg Fire District. Pretty active and populated territory ( at least for Dutchess County). It is not uncommon for East Fishkill alone to drop two consecutive calls, let alone the other areas-sometimes 3. Factor in a 36 mile round trip from Village of Fishkill to Vassar (farther from much of the East Fishkill Fire District), and it is not uncommon that one or more of their busses is out of service on a call for over an hour. There is not an unlimited supply of these units, so sure, they may have a run underway in E. Fishkill, get a call in Wappingers, and have a third call in New Hamburg. They backfill with a unit from Orange coming across the bridge. Unless you look at the big picture, and how many units are already out on calls, it is out of context to talk about MLSS backfilling from the bridge.

I think it is fair to say that MLSS enjoys a favorable reputation generally. I don't think that anyone is saying that they will be a vast improvement over Transcare, that will only be evident once they are on the ground and performing. From what little I know, Transcare did a good job while they had the contract. What is safe to say is that they are locally owned, locally managed, and very competent. They have taken over other contracts in the past from other providers, and some of the bad press that the other providers used to get is not being generated about MLSS. You are right, only time will tell, but if they replicate the job that they are doing elsewhere in the County, then everything will be fine.

When you post on a string that refers to a new provider for the City of Poughkeepsie, Mobile Life is the provider, and you conclude a long list of the positives that the previous provider offered with the statement "...something just does not add up here at all", it can reasonably be inferred from the comments and the method of delivery that you are not happy with the decision. Do you have a factual basis for being upset/concerned/disappointed/whatever with the fact that MLSS is replacing Transcare, and if so, would you please share it with us? I have no beef with Transcare, I don't really know their operation. I do know MLSS very well, and I am very comfortable with their service levels. My reading glasses are fine, thank you. You might also want to go easy on the exclamation points. :angry:

I'm not sure what "doesn't add up". MLSS will be staffing out of the exact same building that Transcare used from what I understand, as well as their existing South Avenue location- two sides of town instead of one. As to how many dedicated units, that would all be spelled out in the RFP and the bid, so they are bound to provide whatever coverage the contract calls for, or the City can address that as a contract issue. Add to that the fact that MLSS already covers a great deal of Southern Dutchess and Ulster Counties, and you will have additional units in and out of the City all day long going and coming from Saints and Vassar. Do you have any factual basis for believing that MLSS will provide an inferior level of service to that which Transcare offered? MLSS is a locally owned and operated company. I see them in action all of the time, and I think they do a good job. I honestly don't get all of the emotional hysteria that some on this site keep spouting about this agency over that agency. MLSS was just awarded the contract this week, and already they're getting trashed before they even take their first call. I don't understand it.

Might be an improvement over your current response times

You show up one time looking like Howdy Doody and you're done.

You would have to know the guy to fully appreciate the humor of him asking for a country store. Slim Pickens meets Slim Shady.

Puh-leeze... you have no idea what this means, you've never had to ride with this guy at 2 am on a tanker run. I may have to make a new "driver rule", no s___kicker boots in the shotgun seat!

Thanks guys for all of your "help". Now I have to see "Tex" walking around the firehouse all the time. It wasn't bad enough that his jeans used to be halfway down his butt crack, now he'll be wearing boots and a 10 gallon.

I asked a viable question which I don't think you are qualified to answer factually. It's not an interrogation, I just want the facts, not someone's guesses. Who was involved in the decision to put a tanker in Beacon, and who decided that it would be Pleasant Valley's? Surely Beacon Car 1 was involved to some extent, but did he request PV or just a "tanker"? Did the county decide who it would be or did PV volunteer? Just looking to get details on how the command decision was arrived at, not because I want to second guess the decision. I think it was a great idea. As to "listening up", two posts from you and both dripping with sarcasm and attitude. Not necessary nor appropriate in this forum.

And you know this because you were involved in the decision making process? You're an officer in either BFD, PVFD, a County Coordinator (or Deputy Coordinator)or a member of the dispatch staff?

Great thread, active intelligent discussion, and most of us can learn something. Kudos to Chief Pells, Bnechis, and other posters

Yes I did understand. I live in Southern Dutchess and responded to calls during the storm myself. Instead of being insulting, read my post. I am interested in the how and who of the decision. I am not challenging the move, in fact, it was a pretty good idea, and represents a creative decision making scenario. Kudos to all involved in making the decision, including the PVFD for stepping up, and BFD for anticipating the possibility of the need. I would just like to know the nuts and bolts of how the decision was reached, and what made them choose PV. No need to get nasty...

No offense meant to PVFD, nor to the City of Beacon. What I meant by the comment was that it is unusual for a M/A request from so far away. It's been done, but it isn't common. To get a M/A request in PV from Beacon, and for a tanker, no less, is quite unusual. My curiosity is to the decision making process. Did BFD Car 1 request a mutual aid tanker and let DC911 decide how far away to go for it so as to escape the snow line, did BFD car 1 specifically request PV, did DC911 poll a number of Chiefs from the northern end of the county to see who could fulfill the request? Etc., etc. I'm more interested in understanding "how the system worked".

My apologies Tom, you were correct. There's an interesting conversation.... not saying it was the wrong call, but I would like to hear the rationale for going so far afield. Tankers with a at least a couple thousand gallons in Glenham, Hughsonville, East Fishkill, etc.. Did BFD consciously think about where the heavy snow line was and go beyond it? Again, not questioning the decision, just fascinated as to what the thought process was. Anyone from Beacon care to explain? AND..... what were they thinking in PV when they got called to the big city

An amazing attempt at conserving punctuation marks....

Tommy- Beacon called Pleasant Valley? For a tanker????????? Ouch. Check the facts, that doesn't sound right on so many levels.

Before one of the many armchair quarterbacks chimes in, this picture was not on I 84, but on a road that has ramps onto 84. Someone will eventually point out that there are no traffic lights and telephone poles on an interstate highway, and then we'll have three days of responses picking apart every detail of the picture. From the looks of the picture, Lime Kiln Road Andrew?