Rescue Squad Update

Yes but my point is, when the peanut gallery (all of us) sees those plans, we aren't entitled to demand, or suggest even, changes based on our own opinions. For example, if I were to see the plans at their next fundraiser, turn to Dan or Melanie and start in with you don't need 3 bays, you should just make two longer bays, you don't need separate sleeping quarters, just share the space blah blah one of them, hopefully, will tell me to kick sand.

I'm very happy to have the new Rescue squad go through only the appropriate approval channels for private development, as long as it is using charitable fundraising, rather than taxpayer dollars to complete any needs beyond the monies being transferred. If they discover they are going to need to ask the Village for more, then they would need to subject the plans to the higher level of public scrutiny.

(I will be giving some extra to Rescue Squad fundraisers only once it is clear to me that I will not be giving additional funds as a taxpayer. Until then, I will stick to my standard annual donation, since dollars are a bit tight this year)

Why shouldn't the Rescue Squad put their architectural plans out for some public scrutiny? They are getting $1,000,000 of taxpayer funds and the right to build on taxpayer land. It is not just a matter of a private organization using its own money to do what it wants on its own land. I wonder what sort of agreement the village crafted with them.

ace789nj said:

Yes but my point is, when the peanut gallery (all of us) sees those plans, we aren't entitled to demand, or suggest even, changes based on our own opinions.


I don't think I suggested we were. I asked if they would be share with the BOT (public comment) or with any of the standing committees (Planning Board, Historic Commmission, etc.)

That said, I'd probably be more willing to kick in a few extra bucks for a design that I thought was an asset to the community vs something more mundane.

susan1014 said:


(I will be giving some extra to Rescue Squad fundraisers only once it is clear to me that I will not be giving additional funds as a taxpayer. Until then, I will stick to my standard annual donation, since dollars are a bit tight this year)


That's reasonable, but isn't it likely that we won't know if additional tax dollars are needed until after fundraising efforts are pursued but not received?


Red_Barchetta said:

susan1014 said:


(I will be giving some extra to Rescue Squad fundraisers only once it is clear to me that I will not be giving additional funds as a taxpayer. Until then, I will stick to my standard annual donation, since dollars are a bit tight this year)


That's reasonable, but isn't it likely that we won't know if additional tax dollars are needed until after fundraising efforts are pursued but not received?


That is the chicken and egg problem, isn't it? I don't want to be the sucker who gives twice, both through an extra donation and through a tax increase...

I'm afraid it is going to be the job of the Rescue Squad and the Village government to convince me that I'm going to be asked to open my checkbook for this building once, not twice going forward...wish I was feeling flush enough for it to be otherwise.

susan1014 said:

Red_Barchetta said:

susan1014 said:


(I will be giving some extra to Rescue Squad fundraisers only once it is clear to me that I will not be giving additional funds as a taxpayer. Until then, I will stick to my standard annual donation, since dollars are a bit tight this year)



That's reasonable, but isn't it likely that we won't know if additional tax dollars are needed until after fundraising efforts are pursued but not received?


That is the chicken and egg problem, isn't it? I don't want to be the sucker who gives twice, both through an extra donation and through a tax increase...

I'm afraid it is going to be the job of the Rescue Squad and the Village government to convince me that I'm going to be asked to open my checkbook for this building once, not twice going forward...wish I was feeling flush enough for it to be otherwise.


+1

spontaneous said:

They should already have the radio and equipment - as they are currently operating. They would only need to move it to the new building.

The exhaust system is also a complicated system that needs to be installed by a professional as improper installation could cost lives.


It is not "could", but it does. It is not uncommon that EMTs suffer CO poisoning (some are fatal) due to improper ventilation installation or ineffective use of existing ventilation system. In one instance, a junior EMT died becasue the crew did not hook up the dropped from ceiling style exhaust tube and they kept the rig running becasue it had an issue with starting it. Anyone contemplating designing a municipal facility with a garage should know the special needs such as exhaust requirements.

I don't understand the radio budget specific to the new building though. During my tenure as an EMT elsewhere (why I have not volunteered in SO when I moved here eventhough made an attempt but decided not to do so is an unrelated subject), I never felt the need to have any stationary radio equipment to handle nearly1400/year calls. Hand-held radios and pagers plus cell phones to call back the dispatch when needed were more than adequate to be effective.

I will have to check with our board before publishing the plans on a public message board... but I do want to clear up some misinformation. We do not receive taxpayer funds. The building is being built with private donations, most of which will be the $1 million provided by Jonathan Rose (the 3rd and Valley developer). They are contributing the money in exchange for taking our old building and not having to incorporate our headquarters into the 3rd and Valley development as originally planned.

Dan,I think people are concerned that if the $1MM and the fund raising isn't enough to pay for the new building, the village will give you the balance. Are you saying that will not be the case?

scottgreenstone said:

Dan,I think people are concerned that if the $1MM and the fund raising isn't enough to pay for the new building, the village will give you the balance. Are you saying that will not be the case?

This...SORescue, sorry if I didn't define the situation clearly. Until recently this deal was being brokered and controlled by the Village, with substantial involvement of our Village President, including the shelter plan. Since it was the village government who negotiated the amount that the SORS was given, I can imagine the SORS coming back to the Village government if they under-negotiated the amount.

I am comfortable with the transfer of the remaining Jonathan Rose money, and the use of the Sloan Street land. I have an amount in mind that I would give as a special one-time building fund donation (2-3 years of our standard donation, I think), INCLUDING any additional tax dollars that I might end up paying into the deal.

scottgreenstone said:

Dan,I think people are concerned that if the $1MM and the fund raising isn't enough to pay for the new building, the village will give you the balance. Are you saying that will not be the case?


The biggest concern is that $100,000 of the Jonathan Rose money was wasted on unused design work and rent of temporary space caused by unnecessary delays. We all know how this came about, it has been discussed here plenty of times before. But I would like to know what the "most of which" means in this statement

SORescue said:

The building is being built with private donations, most of which will be the $1 million provided by Jonathan Rose


Are we short $100,000? If so, I guess we all know where that money went. If we are short more than that, how much more and why?

Rob_Sandow said:

I would like to know what the "most of which" means in this statement

SORescue said:

The building is being built with private donations, most of which will be the $1 million provided by Jonathan Rose

What I meant was the building will be built with private funding and the most of that funding will be the $1 million from Jonathan Rose. The rest will raised through fundraisers and donations from the public.

Rob_Sandow said:

Are we short $100,000? If so, I guess we all know where that money went. If we are short more than that, how much more and why?

Approximately $70,000 of the Jonathan Rose contribution was spent so far (prior to the project being given to us). Nothing else has been spent although I anticipate that we will be receiving invoices from the architect very soon.

Susan, I thank you very much for your contributions and hope that we can continue to count on your support. I was not calling what you wrote misinformation but rather responding to statements like this that are simply not true and only serve to confuse people:

jayjayp said:

They are getting $1,000,000 of taxpayer funds and the right to build on taxpayer land.
We are not getting $1,000,000 of taxpayer funds. The money is from a private developer. (While we are getting the right to build on taxpayer land, we are essentially just moving from one Village owned lot-- 3rd Street-- to another-- Sloan Street).

As for the question of if we will be asking the town for money in the future, all I can say is that I really hope not. We are committed to completing this project with the funds that we have and what we are are able to raise privately. One of the biggest advantages of this being a private construction project and not a public one is that we can actually negotiate with builders and sign "not to exceed" contracts. Once the plans are complete enough to bid out to builders, we can negotiate a contract that fits within the budget.

We have managed to survive since 1952 without taxpayer funding and I have no reason to think that would change. (Plus the village changed the way that the building was being constructed partially so that they would NOT have to spend money on it, so I am not very confident that we would get anything if we asked).

I'm sure people will not like that I am not answering with a blanket "no"-- but I'm trying to come as close as possible without being able to predict the future. I would hope that people will look at our 63 year history of being responsible with our finances and budgets and know that we are good stewards of the donations that we receive.

Thanks,

Dan

Thanks Dan.

Just remember 60 of those 63 years was without Torpey as our chief negotiator. And we all know his track record to date.

Not that I disagree with passing the $1,000,000 to the Rescue Squad for what they contribute to the village in terms of service, but, if I'm not mistaken, that money was given by Rose to the village to use as it wanted, in return for tearing down the Rescue Squad building and taking over that land. So to that extent, it was taxpayer money. I have never understood who owned the building that was torn down, but I assume it was the village since it was on village land.

As for any additional funds the Rescue Squad might require, have they considered going with hat in hand to the Maplewood council since I understand the RS provides a lot of service to Maplewoodians as well?

Finally, as to revealing the architectural plans, I do not know what, if any, review rights the Village has with respect to what will be built, but I think given the location, it would be proper to reveal them to the public.


jayjayp said:

if I'm not mistaken, that money was given by Rose to the village to use as it wanted, in return for tearing down the Rescue Squad building and taking over that land.


You are mistaken. Originally Jonathan Rose was going to incorporate our building into the development. That didn't happen. The plan was changed and instead they would contribute money to the village for the village to relocate our building off-site.

That also didn't happen. The plan was changed AGAIN to Jonathan Rose contributing the money directly to us and the village not being involved with the project at all.

No money was ever given to the village. The money is being given directly to the Rescue Squad by Jonathan Rose Companies. Additionally, the village has agreed to sell us the lot next to the firehouse for $1 with a stipulation in the contract that the lot can only ever be used to house a Rescue Squad and if that ever changes, ownership reverts back to the Village. (That is the same as the 3rd Street lot that housed our previous building which Jonathan Rose has now taken over for the 3rd and Valley development).

Dan

Dan-

Wasn't the village to receive the funds from Rose and didn't the village give over rights to the money to the RS? So to that extent, it was taxpayer money, the rights to which were given to the RS, right? I am not trying to belabor a point, only to get it right. I distinctly remember it being said at a BOT meeting that the village could do whatever it wanted with the $1,000,000.

jayjayp said:

I distinctly remember it being said at a BOT meeting that the village could do whatever it wanted with the $1,000,000.


Who said that?

When you have renderings that you like if you set them up at the temporary site curious people like me will come by to look, and probably leave a donation. Not, mind you, that I want input, I just like to see things. Show off your new baby, that's what I think.

ace789nj said:

jayjayp said:

I distinctly remember it being said at a BOT meeting that the village could do whatever it wanted with the $1,000,000.


Who said that?


jayjay is correct. This statement was made by Redevelopment Counsel, Joe Baumann:

http://youtu.be/zRnczU6CzDA


I don't think that it's necessary at all to discuss who did what to whom. There was a long debate about what the Village could do with the money, but it serves no purpose to get into it again. The Village has given the Rescue Squad the $1 million to use for the construction of the new building, and it's theirs.

I'm confident that the Rescue Squad is determined to keep the costs as low as possible. Yes, there is the possiblilty that the $1 million plus donations will not be enough to pay for the construction of the building. But I'm sure that the Rescue Squad is determined to avoid this.


Dan, many thanks for the details.

Hi, I have to belabor the point a bit more because it is confusing a lot of people and in turn that is harming the Rescue Squad financially. When people hear "taxpayer money" they think of money that comes from the taxpayers. We have had multiple people tell us that they will be decreasing their donations this year because they heard or read on here that the village is giving us $1 million and as Susan said above, they don't want to "give twice"-- through taxes and a donation.

The village is contributing zero dollars. The video posted above, from a BOT meeting a year ago, is discussing a hypothetical situation that did not end up happening. As noted above, originally the developer was going to incorporate our building into the development. That didn't happen. Then the next plan was for the developer to pay $ to the town and the town would construct the building (and yes, theoretically, the town COULD have taken the money and ran, and not built anything, although nobody was actually proposing that). But that plan didn't happen either. What actually DID happen is on February 24th, the board of trustees voted completely remove the village from the project, and leave it completely between the Rescue Squad and Jonathan Rose. No money was ever transferred to the village and no money ever will be. The money is going from a private developer to a private 501c3 organization.

The reason I am belaboring this point is because it is a very important distinction. People are confused enough from all of the various plans and the back and forth, and when arguments about semantics related to hypotheticals from previous plans enter into it... it confuses people even more. The end result is that people walk away with the false impression that their taxes are somehow being spent on the Rescue Squad. That is not true.

Dan

Dan, I agree that the $1MM is not taxpayer money and essentially not coming from the village. However what I think really concerns people, which I have mentioned above, is if you do not raise enough money for the building, then what? WIll you go to the village and ask for money (taxpayer money)? That is really what everyone is concerned with given that the village negotiated very very poorly for the $1MM from Jonathan Rose. They should have negotiated that Jonathon Rose cover the cost of the new squad, not just give an arbitrary $ amount.

Thanks Dan. My only concern with my post above is that between unused design work and rent of temporary space caused by mismanagement prior to the project being turned over to the Rescue Squad, $100,000 that could have been used for the construction disappeared. This was no fault of the Rescue Squad. I am just wondering if that is the difference you will have to make up through private fundraising, or if that was never enough in the first place and you will need more.

I think SOV needs to cut a check for 100k. We bumbled around, burning through cash for weeks, then dropped the whole thing like a hot potato.

Dan - Thank you for correcting me when I said that the Village was giving the $1 million to the Rescue Squad. It was just poor wording on my part. It might actually be correct to say that the Village was giving its right to receive the $1 million to the Rescue Squad. It was the Village that signed the agreement with Jonathan Rose. This was part of the purchase price of the property that Jonathan Rose paid to the Village.


Although I said that it wasn't necessary to go back and discuss who did what to whom, perhaps a recap of the debate that took place would be helpful. The whole question came up in connection with the question about the shelter. Residents had only been told that the BOT was hoping to bring in the project at around $700,000 - 800,000. The remainder of the $1.1 million could be used to cover cost overruns, or even used to reduce taxes. A poster suggested that the Village couldn't use the excess, if any. That was his argument for building the shelter. That the developer would only be liable for the amount used for the actual construction of the building. By using the amount above the budgeted(at the time) to build a shelter, it was a "win-win" for the Village- that the Village would get a shelter using money from the developer that it might otherwise not receive. (This of course before we knew that even without a shelter the Village could not build the new building for $1.1 million.) This was clearly incorrect, and gave rise to the discussion as to whether the Village hypothetically could keep the entire amount and not even build a new rescue squad building.

Thank you for keeping us updated and I wish you and the Rescue Squad success.

I think that development counsel and his firm (or their carrier) should cut a check to the Village for the cost of the rescue squad less the $1.1M. Of course, the Village is not looking at this failure as potential malpractice.

Who was the counsel and what does their engagement letter say? If they committed malpractice I am sure there will be an attorney who will take it on contingency. Also the damages would be what they assured us the cost would be and what it actually cost.

cramer said:

Village was giving its right to receive the $1 million to the Rescue Squad. It was the Village that signed the agreement with Jonathan Rose. This was part of the purchase price of the property that Jonathan Rose paid to the Village.


If this is the case, ie, Village sold property to a private developer in exchange of the promise of $1.1M of the purchase price to be used for a new RS building, why is that money not "tax payer's" money? This does not sound like a "donation".


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.

Latest Jobs

Employment Wanted

Lessons/Instruction

Sponsored Business

Find Business

Advertisement

Advertise here!