The Firefighter Who Wasn't

“Here's a letter we received from a former Middlebury 

fireman now living in the southwest:

I've always said that the Middlebury FD had too many trucks. Even 

when I belonged there for my 17 years. They should sell that ladder 

truck and two of the engines that they NEVER use and then they will 

be able to buy a new one. I understand firefighters need up to date 

equipment, but not when you never use it. They have the same 

amount of equipment as in _________ (where I am a Captain now) 

but we run about 300 calls a month as compared to Mdby's 80? a 

month. So why do they still have so many trucks? “

This is another fake letter from one of Mr. DeAngelis’s imaginary friends. The language illustrates that this person is not a real firefighter, was never a firefighter in Middlebury, and has absolutely no understanding of firefighting. Its not worth wasting pixels discussing it any further.

Town Meeting Out. Referendum In. Apparatus Gets Older

There will be no list of petition signing residents published on this blog.   Signing a petition is just as much about democracy and freedom of speech, as holding a Town Meeting. The people who signed this petition are entitled to voice their opinion, and I believe also entitled to their privacy as residents, without their names being paraded through the Town Square as if they were 18th century witches.

This blog is about reporting the truth. Thats it. Thats the agenda. 

Mr. DeAngelis distorted the truth in his October 28th, letter, and this blog told the truth about what’s really going on.  Click Here. 

The Town will conduct a referendum which will cost $2500.  The MVFD will make an appeal to residents to support the purchase of a new pumper, in which a majority of the purchase price has already been paid for. The BOS and BOF have made it clear that purchasing the pumper now, will not have an affect on taxes.

If the referendum on the pumper fails, it fails. As a taxpaying resident, I think it would be huge mistake. The Town can no longer continue to hide its head in the sand year after year and not address apparatus replacement.  To me it’s reckless.  As stated numerous times on this blog, such action not only jeopardizes firefighter safety, but also the safety of our residents. 

In addition to this, the tax hike that awaits residents down the road when additional pieces of fire apparatus will be added to the list, will be absolutely staggering. Delaying the inevitable, only exasperates the problem. See Foreshadowing Of Things To Come. Our taxes will not be going down next year.  They will be rising again, with an unchecked Region 15.  

The apparatus will get more expensive. After January 1, 2009, the price of the pumper will jump $40,000.00 to $45,000.00. 

Purchasing the pumper now will help blunt the huge tax increase that will result later. 

Another Canard Spun By Mr. DeAngelis

“Spending proposals in Middlebury are cloaked in canards

Weeks ago when Middlebury voters were told they were voting for a total 2008-09 town budget, it was a lie. They merely were voting for part 1. Now First Selectman Thomas Gormley and Selectman Robert Desmarais are back with part 2.

They want voters to approve at least $1 million for expenses they didn't put in the budget because the budget would have been defeated for the fourth time if they had. They also need approval for deals already cut without proper approval.

Now they want taxpayers to fork over more than $500,000 for a new fire truck because they say the privately owned Middlebury Fire Department has no money. This is untrue. Lucille Condon bequeathed $200,000 to the department. Is Chief Paul J. Perrotti using any of that money for a new fire truck? No. The department's ambulance service turns a profit of nearly $200,000 a year. Is the chief using any of that money for a new fire truck? No. None of the $825,000 he reports on the department's federal tax forms is being used, either.

When will the lies stop? When will voters stop believing the lies? Vote 

"no" to part 2 of the budget Thursday.

Pat DeAngelis”

Mr. DeAngelis cannot win in the arena of truth, so he must resort to publicly spreading lies, and distortions.

1) He falsely tells his readers that taxpayers will have to fork over more than $500,000.00 for a $474,000.00 pumper, yet never mentions that $315,000.00 of that amount has already been set aside, and approved by taxpayers in previous budgets. 

2) He falsely tells his readers that the L. Condon bequest can be used to purchase a new fire engine. That is not correct. The L. Condon bequest had very specific terms. Purchasing a pumper was not included. So, you can take that right off the table.  It can’t be used...period. You can’t change the Will. It should be noted that these funds ARE being spent in a manner that benefits the community.

3) He falsely tells his readers that the MVFD Ambulance makes a profit of $200,000.00 a year. That is also incorrect. This blog has outlined in detail on several occasions how the Ambulance Billing Funds are spent.  They are detailed in the following posts:

Middlebury Has A Better Deal Than Winsted, And Winsted Has A Pretty Good Deal.

Mischaracterizing The MVFD Ambulance Fund.

Read the above links for details, but in a nutshell, all funds received by the MVFD Ambulance go towards maintaining the ambulance. Any profit left over at the end of the year, is saved up to purchase the next ambulance. In about three weeks the MVFD will be receiving the new FD12.  The price tag of this ambulance, approximately $190,000.00. None of this will be funded through taxes. It is 100% paid for through the MVFD billing. So all that money in the ambulance fund that Mr. DeAngelis says can be used to purchase a pumper has already been used to purchase an ambulance.

4) He falsely tells his readers that the MVFD has $825,000.00 that could be used to buy a pumper. That statement is not true. The Chief of the Department responded to this back in January of this year. Although some of the figures have changed a little, the general outline is still accurate.  Click Here To Read The Chief’s Letter.

“Gormley, Desmarais and Perrotti are trying every which way to stifle the people. Instead of a free, open referendum they want a tribal meeting where they can wear their war paint, scream and eat ham sandwiches.”

The Town Hall Meeting has been the purest form for democracy for 300 years in New England. It was also the way the Town approved fire apparatus when Mr. St. John was in office. 

The statement that Gormley, Desmarais, and Perrotti are trying to stifle the people is just plain asinine.  Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel stonewalled apparatus replacement since 2003. The result is a fleet of aging apparatus.

Engine 1  17 years old

Engine 2  27 years old

Engine 3  20 years old

Engine 4  21 years old

Rescue 1  30 years old.

Tom Gormley and Bob Desmarais are not playing politics, but rather, working together as Republican and Democrat, in a bipartisan effort to do what is right for this community. They are slowly sorting out the mess they inherited from the previous administration. 

Part of their job is public safety. Ignoring apparatus replacement jeopardizes not only firefighter safety, but the safety of the entire community.

Chief Paul Perrotti’s number one priority is the same number one priority of every Chief in this country - FIREFIGHTER SAFETY AND PUBLIC SAFETY.  In order to ensure that these priorities are fulfilled, firefighters must be provided with the proper equipment. Frontline apparatus over the age of 20 years old threatens these priorities. NFPA recommends that all frontline apparatus be replaced after 20 years. Click Here For Information About Apparatus Replacement.

The apparatus problem will only get worse if Middlebury delays ordering this lifesaving equipment.  If the Town does not act by January 1st, 2009, the cost of the apparatus will increase by as much as $45,000.00.

What would motivate Mr. DeAngelis to write such a letter, when nothing in his letter is true? It is just another attack against a great organization that helps people on a daily basis.

Don't Worry About Lawsuits ... We Have Insurance.

“You can sue all you want, the town has insurance.

and besides read the CT Law, you assume part risk by being a VOLUNTEER ! You don't get paid for this.”

We don’t need to protect the safety of our volunteers, because the Town has insurance.   As long as we have great insurance, and great lawyers, the lives of our volunteers are expendable.  Brilliant!

You don’t need to lecture the MVFD about risk.  They know all about risk and danger. Our volunteers do what they do because they have character, and they are willing to put themselves in dangerous situations, because of their genuine concern of the well-being of their fellow man. The truth is that these guys are heros and you cannot take that away from them. They should be provided with the equipment to help insure their safety as well as the safety of our residents.  That is something we should all be fighting for.

Replacement Schedules Of Fire Apparatus

In August of 2004, the Fire Apparatus Manufacturer’s Association (FAMA) produced a detailed White Paper on apparatus replacement. See above.

Click Here To Read Complete White Paper

From The Chief Fire Officer’s Desk Reference:

From FirefightingInCanada.com

“On a strategic level, it makes sense to create a long-term policy for ongoing replacement of fire apparatus first, and then conduct need studies on a case-by-case basis as required. This is what Alberta's Bonnyville Regional Fire Authority (BRFA) - which protects the Municipal District of Bonnyville and the Town of Bonnyville - did about five years ago, says Regional Fire Chief Bryan McEvoy.”

"We sat down with our municipal council and jointly established a 15 year replacement cycle for our apparatus," Chief McEvoy tells Fire Fighting In Canada. "When it came time to switch out equipment acquired in 1991, the rules were already in place. This keeps the process simple and free of politics, and allows us to focus on the nuts-and-bolts of replacing equipment properly. We had also done the research necessary to determine what kind of basic truck design we wanted to deploy, so that the needs study could focus on customization."

From the Laguna Beach, California website:

“Most municipal fire departments in Southern California have adopted a policy of replacing fire engines on a 10 to 15 year schedule.

Recommendation:

The scheduled replacement cycle for fire engines should be changed from twenty years to fifteen years of front line service and five years of reserve service. The Fire Chief and Mechanic Maintenance Supervisor will evaluate each apparatus once the 15 year mark is reached and make a decision whether to remove from front line duty based on its condition.”

From Richmond Fire/Rescue:

“RFR is already extending the useful life of fire apparatus by deferring the replacements beyond the 15-year life cycle.  With this initiative comes increased costs of repairs and maintenance and a reduction in vehicle reliability.  Attempting to extend beyond a 15-year life cycle will increase the risks and may result in costs that outweigh any optional benefits.”

The MVFD has been trying to replace the rapidly aging fleet of fire apparatus since 2002.  Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel stonewalled this effort. There was an original plan to replace and/or refurbish three pieces of apparatus in 2003 and bond the entire project. Mr. St. John allowed politics to enter into the picture, and the end result was a fleet of fire apparatus that includes:

Engine 1 17 years old

Engine 2 27 years old

Engine 3 20 years old

Engine 4 21 years old

Rescue 1 30 years old.

This puts an extraordinary burden on our taxpayers.  The notion that the cost of fire apparatus will go down is just not true. Since 2003, the cost of this apparatus has grown exponentially. In the not too distant future Middlebury will need to replace more than one engine.

Attempting to block the replacement of this important piece of lifesaving equipment is certainly not in the best interest of the taxpayers pocketbooks, nor the safety of our firefighters and the residents they protect.

The Bugaboos Of The MVFD

From Voices 10/25/08 - Jamie Cura

Board of Finance member Mike McCormack said the economic climate has changed significantly in the last two months.

"I don't think we can be looking at the bugaboo of inflation in making decisions now," he said.

----------------

Mike McCormack is once again giving us his opinion while ignoring the facts, and once again, his opinion is incorrect when it comes to emergency services in Middlebury. A bugaboo is an imaginary object of fear.  There is nothing imaginary about the following.

There will be a $20,000 price increase in the cost of the pumper, if it is not ordered before December 1, 2008.  That is what the factory is telling the MVFD.  The price has already been discounted from the original specification price of $505,919.00.  

There was a reduction in price to $474,000.00 by the Ferrara National Sales Manager, as an attempt to increase Ferrara’s presence in New England, and to also break into the MVFD which has been traditionally an American LaFrance house. Since Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel ignored the replacement of fire apparatus since 2003, there are several pieces of apparatus that will need to be replaced soon.  Ferrara understands that, and has lowered the price to get their foot in the door.  

Making matters even worse, and further discounting Mr. McCormack’s assessment of the state of fire apparatus pricing in the United States, NFPA 2009 will go into effect on January 1, 2009.  Changes in NFPA will add another $20,000.00 to $25,000.00 to the cost - on top of the $20,000.00 December 1st increase. This increase in price cannot be changed since it is mandated by the NFPA. That is a $40,000.00 to $45,000.00 increase all for the same pumper.

The notion that the cost of fire apparatus will go down is not realistic.  Chief Perrotti was quoted by Voices saying that the cost of apparatus in 2002 was $300,000.  Only 6 years later it has increased by $174,000. That’s $174,000 Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel could have saved us, if they had acted when asked by the Fire Department.

“Selectman Elaine M.R. Strobel suggested having a referendum as opposed to a town meeting. She cited a list of four reasons why she feels a referendum is more suitable than a town meeting, with the first reason being that the town population is too large to get an accurate measure of residents' wishes.”

Is Mrs. Strobel continuing playing politics with public safety by pushing for a referendum that could possibly delay this important purchase and thus costing taxpayers as much as $45,000.00 if it was ordered today? Why has she not publicly supported the MVFD and their effort to purchase this lifesaving equipment?   

Her statement that the Town’s population is too large to accurately measure the resident’s wishes in a Town Meeting, seems hypocritical. During the St. John administration was there ever a referendum to decide on the purchase of fire apparatus?

When Will The Lies Stop????

“The voters in Middlebury have been lied to more than in any other Connecticut town...  

In lie number two, they want the taxpayers to fork over more than half a million dollars for a new fire truck because they say the privately owned Middlebury Fire Dept has no money. Not true. L. Condon gave the Fire Dept a bequest of $200,000. Are they using any of that money for a new fire truck? No. The fire dept ambulance service makes a profit of $ 200.000 a year. Are they using any of that money for a new fire truck? No. How about the $ 825,000.00 they report on their IRS forms? Are they using any of that towards a new fire engine? No. Mr. Gormley and Mr. Desarais didn’t want to authorize a free, open machine vote relative to this vote. Why? Because Mr. Gormley and Mr. Desmarais said. 

“Nobody votes”. The truth is that approximately 1400 “nobodies” voted in the last referendum. Another lie.

When will the lies stop? When will the voters in Middlebury stop believing the lies? Vote “no” to part 2 of the budget on Oct. 29th.”

Good question. When will the lies stop?  Mr. DeAngelis is very correct...  The voters in Middlebury have been lied to more than in any other Connecticut town, and all the lies have come from OMP.  

The motivation behind Mr. DeAngelis is to attempt to block the replacement of Engine 2. This is a continuation of the animosity towards the MVFD started by Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel. This animosity jeopardizes firefighters and the safety of the public, and needs to end.

Here are some of the lies.

1) The L. Condon bequest can be used to purchase a new fire engine. Wrong! The L. Condon bequest had very specific terms. Purchasing a pumper was not included. So, you can take that right off the table.  It can’t be used...period. You can’t change the Will. It should be noted that these funds are being spent in a manner that benefits the community.

2) The MVFD Ambulance does not make a profit of $200,000.00 a year.  That is also a lie. This blog has outlined in detail on several occasions how the Ambulance Billing Funds are spent.  They are detailed in the following posts:

Middlebury Has A Better Deal Than Winsted, And Winsted Has A Pretty Good Deal.

Mischaracterizing The MVFD Ambulance Fund.

Read the above links for details, but in a nutshell, all funds received by the MVFD Ambulance go towards maintaining the ambulance.  Any profit left over at the end of the year, is saved up to purchase the next ambulance.  In about three weeks the MVFD will be receiving the new FD12.  The price tag of this ambulance, approximately $190,000.00. None of this will be funded through taxes.  It is 100% paid for through the MVFD billing.

3) The $800,000.00 lie. Mr. DeAngelis thinks this can be used to purchase a new pumper. There is no $800,000.00. The Chief of the Department responded to this back in January of this year.  Although some of the figures have changed a little, the general outline is still accurate.  Click Here To Read The Chief’s Letter.

4) Mr. Gormley and Mr. Desmarais (as it is really spelled) didn’t want to authorize a free, open machine vote relative to this vote.  Town Meetings are the purest form of democracy. 

Some of the Town Meeting items are house keeping items, like selling equipment. Every time the Town has a referendum it costs the taxpayers $3000.00. That’s certainly going to cut into the profits of some of the sales.

But, what about the big items on the list.

A) The Long Meadow Bridge Project. The Town has a Federal Grant that will pay 80% of the cost to replace Long Meadow Bridge.  The Town has a $400,000.00 contribution.  It seems to me that it would be obvious to take advantage of the Federal Grant.  There is no reason why a Town Meeting can’t handle that question.

What are the alternatives? Reject the grant, and saddle Middlebury residents the full cost of the project sometime down the road? Or,  as some have suggested, just close the bridge all together?

B) The replacement of Engine 2. Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel have stalled the replacement of this important safety equipment since 2003.  Middlebury’s fire apparatus fleet is rapidly aging, and stalling replacement any longer will just make matters a whole lot worse for our taxpayers down the road.

When Mr. DeAngelis says that you are voting for spending $474,000.00 of new funds he is not telling you the truth. The taxpayers have already paid for $315,000.00 of the cost. Taxpayers are actually voting to spend $159,000.00 of the remaining balance. The remaining amount can be paid off using a short-term loan. 

It has been said by more than a few residents, none of who are in the Fire Department, that they would hesitate to sign any petition that would try to stand in the way of public safety and the good work of the Fire Department.

Further delaying the replacement of Middlebury’s “First Due” apparatus seriously affects firefighter and public safety. Not replacing such apparatus increases the Town’s liability.

If this pumper is not order before December 1, 2008, there will be an immediate price increase of $20,000.00.  After January 1st, 2009, there will be an additional $20,000.00 to $25,000.00 in the cost.  

A Message From "Taxpayer"

Automobiles are considered Antique if 25 years or older. Many of the ones you see at car shows are bright and shiny - beautifully preserved. They are brought out for shows but seldom used for demanding driving duties.

Last week, in the Republican American we read about such a vehicle - beautifully maintained - where the wheel fell off on the road.

I think we all would agree that for out family vehicles we would want to have them be as new as possible for demanding use on the highway with family and children. We certainly would not want our primary vehicle to be over 20 years old, no matter how well maintained or shiny it was.

How is emergency fire equipment any different?

That's why we have a vehicle replacement plan for such equipment. What happened to Middlebury's plan? I'll tell you. Doctor Edward B. St. John personally scuttled that plan. Plenty of money for new pinstriped green trucks to bring gravel to build cluster housing, but nothing for the fire department.

Don't blame Paul Perrotti for playing politics. Paul was asked to produce a vehicle replacement plan. He did it. He's championed it year after year. And year after year he has been derailed by Ed or his cronies.

Volunteers Should Pay The Town To Work

“Who’s going to pay for Perrotti’s violation?

When Perrotti took work away from Public Works employees the town had to pay those individuals who didn’t do the work. It was only fair, since the work was taken away from them by a guy who should have known, in fact Perrotti was warned not to do other people's work and deprive them of an income. Gormley had to pay the men for the work 

Perrotti did. Where did that money come from?

It should have come out of the money the town pays Perrotti. It would have if Gormley had any guts.

Perrotti will probably say he was "saving" money. Really? How much money did the town "save" when the legal bills for the fire dept ( Perrotti ) were paid?”

What violation?  Chief Perrotti has been maintaining the grounds at Fire HQ for years, spreading mulch around the various plantings before the annual Open House during Fire Prevention Week. Who gave him permission to do so this year?  Danny Norton, Tom Gormley, and Bob Desmarais.

Actually, most of the work was done by a person who was serving community service.  Wouldn’t working around Fire HQ constitute community service, and how would that be a violation?  Is the community service program threatening PW workers?

The entire “depriving PW workers of income” argument is asinine.

This has been the normal practice for years under Mr. St. John’s administration.  No problems.  Mr. Gormley is elected.  Now there is a problem.  Mr. St. John is trying to attack Mr. Gormley in every way possible. It does not take much thought to understand the source of this silly complaint.

Because of the Town’s financial problems, part-timers were not hired this year.  This left an enormous amount of work for the PW. The dump had to be closed on one day, so that the operators could mow grass. It sounds like the PW has more than enough work to keep all their workers busy.

Mr. DeAngelis sings an endless song how the Town is ripping us all off on our taxes, but when Chief Perrotti does work for FREE, to help keep costs down, Mr. DeAngelis has a problem with that.  Why?  Because Mr. St. John has a problem with it. This is so hypocritical.

The notion that Chief Perrotti should pay the Town for work that he actually performed escapes all forms of logic.

If Chief Perrotti is taking work away from PW workers, what about the Greenway Committee, and the Beautification Committee? Are they not also taking work away from PW workers as well? Should we abolish both of those committees?

Maybe all volunteer programs in Town should be abolished, and replaced with paid union workers. What would that do to your taxes?

This is so incredibly petty, its not worth spending anymore time on.

As far as legal bills?  Is Mr. DeAngelis talking about the legal bills the Town had to pay when Mr. DeAngelis subpoenaed Mr. Belden, and the Town attorney accompanied him to Hartford, for Mr. DeAngelis’s frivolous FOI hearing?  How much did that cost the taxpayers, and what earth-shaking information came from the entire hearing?

Maybe he is talking about the legal bills that were not paid by taxpayer money, but actually paid from non-taxpayer MVFD funds.  They would include -

1) Legal advice when Mr. St. John’s office questioned whether or not the MVFD ambulance and it’s EMTs were insured, when he knew all along that they were.

2) The legal bills that mounted up when Mr. St. John and his army of taxpayer-paid lawyers, tried to cease and take over the ambulance billing system that saves Middlebury taxpayers thousands of dollars a year. The contract was flatly rejected by the MVFD membership, and the Gormley administration threw the contract out the door when they were elected.

3) The MVFD funds that are spent so that Connecticut FOI law is followed. Mr. DeAngelis with his never-ending FOIs is attempting to acquire the records of the private club side of the MVFD, which is not funded from taxpayer money. He is not entitled to this information.

The money that has been spent to defend the MVFD from the divisive attacks of  Mr. St. John and Mr. DeAngelis could have been used to fund so many of the wonderful charitable organizations that the MVFD supports each year.  What a waste of money.

The Truth About The Pumper Replacement Plan

Brief History:

To my knowledge the pumper replacement plan started in 2002, although I have heard that there were plans started even before that.  The original Engine 2 drawing was dated 2002.  The MVFD has a spec that is dated February 11, 2003. 

In the Winter of 2003, MVFD Officers met with then First Selectman Ed St. John, to discuss the replacement of Engine 2.  Mr. St. John expressed a real interest in what he described as a “Global Plan” - solving three problems all at the same time by replacing Engine 2, refurbishing or replacing Engine 4 and Rescue 1.  He expressed an interest in bonding the entire project. 

Then came the politics.  Mr. DeAngelis FOIed the MVFD for Mr. St. John’s Ph.D. documents, presumingly to dig up “dirt” on Mr. St. John, while fighting Town Hall against the Straw Pond Development.  The MVFD complied, as was mandated by law, and the relationship between the MVFD and Mr. St. John began to erode.  Mr. St. John began a series of attacks against the MVFD and its leadership.  No pumper on the horizon.

In 2005, disheartened from the past attacks against the MVFD, many of the MVFD members (certainly not all) chose to support Mrs. Bollard for First Selectman.  A bitter campaign ensued, but in the end Mr. St. John won the reelection. Even though Mr. St. John won, he was unable to put his bitterness aside and work with the members of the MVFD. In fact, the exact opposite was about to happen.

In the Spring of 2006, the Chief and Officers of the MVFD appeared at a Selectman’s meeting to ascertain what the status was with plans to replace the pumper. In a series of three meetings with the Selectmen that could be characterized as a bureaucratic wild goose chase, Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel voted to form a fire commission, instead of making a decision about replacing the pumper themselves.  They outsourced their duties to a group of uninformed, untrained, and politically motivated and appointed individuals to make decisions about lifesaving equipment for this community. Click Here.

The fire commission proved to be an enormous mistake. It did not expedite delivery of a new pumper, but rather was put into place by Mr. St. John and Mrs. Strobel to delay it.  In the meantime the cost of the apparatus was continually rising. In November of 2007 the voters rejected the Charter and a permanent fire commission, by voting it down by  almost a 2 to 1 ratio.  

To further delay the replacement plans, Mr. St. John hired a consultant for $9000.00 to study the Town’s apparatus needs.  This was a waste of taxpayer money since Mr. St. John was already well aware of the fact that apparatus needed to be replaced and indicated so in the 2003 meeting with the MVFD.

Early in 2008 the fire commission was dissolved and work was started to pass a Town Budget. The budget finally was voted on, which brings us to the present.  The MVFD is still attempting to replace a 27 year old fire engine, a project started in 2002.

Because of the inaction of the previous administration, Middlebury now has an aging fleet of fire apparatus.

Engine 2 27 years old

Engine 3 20 years old

Engine 4 21 years old

Engine 1 17 years old

Rescue 1 30 years old.

Here Is Where We Are Now:

When American LaFrance went Chapter 11, the MVFD went to the Department’s second choice with the same spec; Ferrara Fire Apparatus.

When the local sales representative priced the MVFD spec, the price of the engine came to $505,919.00, which was well above the American LaFrance price. This is the important part here. The National Sales Manager of Ferrara was aware of the LaFrance bid, and was also aware that the MVFD was chiefly an American LaFrance Department.  In an effort to break into Middlebury, and to increase Farrara’s presence in New England, he agreed to lower the price of the apparatus to $474,920.00.  That is a great deal of savings for the Town.   This price is good until December 1, 2008.

Sharp Price Increase Looming:

After December 1, 2008,  the company will increase their prices.  This would mean that the price of the engine will increase by another $20,000.

On January 1, 2009, NFPA 2009 goes into affect and there will be another price increase of $20,000.00 to $25,000.00.  

Not acting now will increase the apparatus price by January 1st 2009, by $40,000.00 to $45,000.00. Middlebury will get the same truck, but pay a whole lot more.

There is already $315,000.00 that has been set aside for purchasing this pumper.  The Taxpayers have already voted for these funds, and it does not affect anyone’s taxes.  There is $159,000.00 that must be raised to pay for the engine in full. It has been said that this remaining amount can be paid for our of unassigned funds that are already present in the current budget.

The clock is ticking and time is running out.  Forcing a referendum will further delay the process and bring the Town dangerously close to the December 1st deadline. Middlebury has a chance to close the deal on a project started in 2002.  

When the MVFD started to work with former First Selectman Ed St. John the price of the pumper was $360,000.00.  Because of the delay of the past administration, the pumper will cost approximately $114,000.00 more.

In an April 18th, 2005 poll, published on Firehouse.com, with 6827 respondents, only 6% of the responding departments owned a “First Out Engine” older than 20 years.

The apparatus in town is not getting any younger.  Further delays will exasperate the problem and will lead to steep tax increases down the road. In addition, ignoring the problem, increases the chance of equipment failure. Engine 3 has already failed once this year on its way to a call. If our apparatus fails at the moment it is needed the most, it becomes a safety issue, and a liability issue for the Town. Firefighter safety and the safety of our residents should be Middlebury’s number one priority. 

The Town Meeting - The Purest Form Of Democracy - Corrected

“Gormley , Desmarais say "no" to referendum, hope to sneak million dollar 

package through late night Town Meeting.

Yesterday, at the Selectman's meeting Gormley and Desmarais said 

"no" to a free , open referendum vote on hundreds of thousands of additional 

dollars of tax increases. They want to sneak the million dollar package through 

a late night town meeting.

Like thieves in night they want to come in and steal your wallet, again.

There is a petition going around town that calls for a referendum vote on the

issue. Sign it when you see it and vote "no " to this insidious tax increase.”

(Correction: This posting has been edited from a previous post - It was reported to me that Mrs. Strobel voted against the Town Meeting. That information was not correct, so I have republished this post with the correct information.  Mrs. Strobel voted for the Town Meeting even though she was more in favor of the referendum. Mr. DeAngelis fails to mention on his website that Mrs. Strobel did indeed vote in favor of the Town Meeting along with Mr. Gormley and Mr. Desmarais.)

What about the Town Meeting?  Mr. DeAngelis falsely characterizes the Town Meeting as a dangerous place to tread, full of bullies and thugs, waiting to trounce on your freedom of speech.  Wrong again.

Town Meetings are considered the ultimate symbol of freedom of speech.

In the 19th Century, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in regard to New England Town Meetings the following:

“in New England, where education and liberty are the daughters of morality and religion, where society has acquired age and stability enough to enable it to form principles and hold fixed habits, the common people are accustomed to respect intellectual and moral superiority and to submit to it without complaint, although they set at naught all those privileges which wealth and birth have introduced among mankind. In New England, consequently, the democracy makes a more judicious choice than it does elsewhere.”

In Woodbury:

“The origin of Woodbury's Town Meeting must be sought in the history of the colony and in the meetings of the first settlers, members of the Congregational Church or " Standing Order " as the establishment was called. Just when and how Woodbury's Town Meeting became a purely political governing body is not known. The Town Meeting today is an assembly of the legal voters of the town for the purpose of transacting the business of the town. It is a form of pure democracy. The Annual Town Meeting is held in the Town Hall on the first Monday of October, at which time the budget is presented by the Board of Selectmen. The polls are also open for the election of town officers. The Annual Town Meeting is adjourned to the second Monday in March, and at this meeting the budget is voted, and a tax is laid on the grand list. Any other relevant business may be presented at these meetings. Special town meetings may be called by the selectmen, or upon the application of twenty qualified voters, but the business of these meetings must be stated in the call. Notices of town meetings must be published in a newspaper in circulation in the town and are posted on the public sign post on front of the Town Hall at least five days before the meeting. The town clerk is by law, clerk of the Town Meeting. The moderator is chosen from the last corrected voting list.”

William Francis Galvin, the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts said the following about the Town Meeting:

“The purest form of democratic governing is practiced in a Town Meeting. In use for over 300 years and still today, it has proven to be a valuable means for many Massachusetts taxpayers to voice their opinions and directly effect change in their communities. Here in this ancient American assembly, you can make your voice heard as you and your neighbors decide the course of the government closest to you.”

How about Vermont:

“On the first Tuesday of March, voters in communities across Vermont come together to discuss and vote on town issues.  This is called Town Meeting Day.  For over 200 years Town Meeting Day has been an important political event as citizens elect local officials and vote on town and school budgets and make many other decisions for the town.  In many towns, Town Meeting has also become a place to discuss state and national issues that effect us in Vermont.”

Connecticut:

“Connecticut shares the Town Meeting form of government used by many other New England communities. They differ from Massachusetts and the northern tier of states in being more tightly bound to the published agenda -- in Connecticut, the Town Meeting may discuss, but not alter, an article placed before them; nor may they place new items on the agenda. If a Town Meeting rejects a budget, a new Town Meeting must be called to consider the next proposed budget. State Law allows the Board of Selectmen to adopt an estimated tax rate and continue operating based on the previous budget in the event a Town Meeting hasn't adopted a new budget in time.”

So where are the thieves? The only thieves we have seen are the one’s who, in the dead of night, stole American freedoms from the lawns of Middlebury.  There are also those thieves who steal the truth from the residents on a daily basis, through lies and distortions, that only serve to bolster their cantankerous views of what they comprehend as the truth. Their motives are not to benefit this community, but rather create chaos and instability.

Middlebury Has A Better Deal Than Winsted, And Winsted Has A Pretty Good Deal

Winsted ambulance deal gets approval

 BY GARY GENTILE
 REPUBLICAN-AMERICAN
  WINSTED—Selectmen on Monday approved a less ex­pensive one-year deal for emergency medical service with the Winsted Area Ambulance Association.
  Taxpayers will save about $12,000 this year. The new contract charges the town $7.50 per resident, plus the cost of workers’ compensation and liability insurance. The town was paying $9 per resident plus insurance, or $91,916, in the contract that expired June 30.

  The nonprofit association dropped its rate for Winsted because of its ability to raise a large part of its budget by billing patients. The association also serves Barkhamsted, Colebrook and Hartland. Winsted is the only town that has a written contract.

  Selectmen expressed satisfaction with the association’s services and pricing even though the group has a significant surplus. The association has averaged a surplus of $30,338 per year since 1997-98, with an average surplus of $100,919 the last five years.

  Still, the group buys its own ambulance and other equipment, and often makes generous donations to police and fire departments for such items as stun guns. The group also provides free first aid training in the schools.

 The association is not willing to waive its fees entirely because of the unpredictability of reimbursement from Medicare and other insurance carriers, Selectman Jeffery Liskin said.

  “Trust me, if we went out to bid we’d be paying about a half a million dollars for the same service,” Liskin said.

--------------------------------

Kind of like Middlebury except.

1) MVFD does not charge the Town one penny for providing the service. In fact, the MVFD pays out $80,000 a year for a contract with Campion Ambulance for ALS services. Winsted charges each resident $7.50. The article did not state whether or not ALS services were included. 

2) MVFD has never taken anyone to collections if their insurance company would not pay the bill.  Winsted is not willing to waive its fees entirely because of the unpredictability of insurance companies.

Winsted is similar to Middlebury in that -

1) The MVFD buys its own ambulance and equipment. Middlebury currently has a new ambulance that is in the process of being built, and will be delivered in a few months.  The price tag to taxpayers? Zero.

2) The MVFD gives donations back to departments in town. MVFD recently purchased 4 defibrillators to be placed at various public places around town, and $25,000 worth of Holmatro Rescue Tools.

3) As Selectman Jeffery Liskin said, the contract saves Winsted about a half a million dollars a year for the same service. Middlebury realizes the same savings.

-----------------------

It seems like the Town of Winsted is pretty happy with their system, even though the service bills, and the Town still has to kick in $7.50 per person, plus insurance. In 2000 the population of Winsted was 7,321. If the population remained stable that would be $54,907.50 plus insurance costs.  

Middlebury insurance costs for vehicles come under the Town’s Fleet Insurance which would presumedly be significantly less than what Winsted is paying for a private organization. In addition most of the personnel who ride the ambulance are cross-trained firefighters who are already under the Town’s insurance policy.

Middlebury has a great deal. It’s hard to imagine why anyone would want to mess with it. But, Mr. St. John spent thousands of dollars of taxpayer money last year paying his lawyers to try to do just that.  Mr. St. John’s contract would have killed the goose that laid the golden egg.  Fortunately, the MVFD flatly turned down the contract, and when  Mr. Gormley and Mr. Desmarais were voted into office, the one-sided contract was thrown out the window.

The MVFD is currently putting the finishing touches on a new contract with the Town that will be mutually beneficial.

More Lies And No Leadership

“they (leader at mVfd) pulled the new truck out of the budget to make it look like a 3% decrease but instead will place the new truck funds on 2nd half of budget to be "voted" on at town meeting (stacked by supporters)

whose playing a game ??
looks like the leader of mVfd is. They pulled the funds for this new truck so it would look like 3% DECREASE in the town budget when in essence the 2nd part of the budget will be INCREASE. Stop being sneaky and voting for this under the taxpayers noses. Gee let me guess....the entire fire dept (trucks and personnel) will be there for "town meeting".
God help anyone who speaks against it. They will be tared, feathered and spit on.”

To me this is truly amazing that one can constantly perpetuate a never-ending string of lies and never entertain the slightest thought of checking out whether or not a statement is accurate.

It is a fact that the MVFD did cut their budget (not including hydrants).  Over the last two years the MVFD cut its budget by almost 14% to a level of $209,448.00.  That’s almost one half of what the library’s budget is.

However, the pumper was never part of the budget issue at all, and no one at the MVFD ever requested that the pumper be delayed. In fact, it was exactly just the opposite.  The MVFD has been trying to move forward on this pumper since 2003. Mr. St. John and Mrs Strobel did nothing to move this ahead, and did everything to delay it. It appears that Mrs. Strobel is playing the same game still.

Once the new administration came into power a new push was made to expedite this replacement apparatus.  The Department was told by the BOS and BOF that once the budget was passed, they would move ahead on apparatus replacement.  The MVFD did not like the delay, but in the spirit of cooperation, waited until the budget did pass.

To say that the MVFD pulled the funds was just an absolute lie.  It never happened.

Most of the money that will go toward the new pumper has been set aside each year for the purpose of purchasing the pumper.  This is money that has accumulated through past budgets that have already been approved by the Taxpayers. In fact, there is $315,000.00 set aside to purchase this equipment. The total price tag is $478,000.00, so there is a deficit of $163,000.00 that needs to be raised.  That Washington Dr. $946,000.00 could have easily made up the difference.

“Elaine Strobel is the only Selectman with the guts to call for such a 

referendum”

The apparatus is an essential tool to accomplish a needed task, and Mrs. Strobel is attempting once again to delay this replacement shows a real lack of leadership on her part.  She is elected by the residents to do her job, and that is to help make decisions that are in the best interest of the residents in this community. Fire protection should be way up on that list. Mrs. Strobel should be supporting apparatus replacement, as she should have supported the budget.  It appears her allegiance to Mr. St. John is stronger than her allegiance to the safety of residents, thus continuing the crusade of putting politics above public safety.  

If the pumper is not ordered by the end of the year, the cost of this piece of apparatus will go up by another $50,000. If the apparatus was ordered back in 2003 when it was scheduled to be ordered, it would have cost almost $125,000 less than it does today.  

Thats what happens when you have people in power who care more about their own agenda than the people who they were elected to serve.