NEW HAMPSHIRE’S FASTEST GROWING ONLINE NEWSPAPER

No positives in getting rid of Rescue 2

Comment Print
Related Articles

Trying to stop the repossession of Rescue 2 may be harder than stopping Obamacare. The horse is pretty much already out of the barn.

But we think it would be irresponsible of us not to argue that from a fiscal as well as safety standpoint, this borders on the insane.

At least some, most likely all, of the four previous $40,000 lease payments for the town's best ambulance - Rescue 2, a 2010 Chevrolet - were paid for from the town's general fund, not Rescue's Enterprise Account.

That's because all the town's line item budgeting accounts share one bank account, one fund from which to pay bills.

When the previous ambulance payments were due, a check was written, the funds were shown deducted from the enterprise account line item and the payment was made.

But since the previous Rescue regime ran predominately in the red, obviously the $40,000 wasn't there.

So despite the wording of the 2010 referendum, town funds were used.

Then after four years of hemorrhaging taxpayer money to the tune of $200,000, selectmen in late fall of last year began to realize what was going on. They found that within the layers of interfund budgeting accounts, the Rescue enterprise account was one sick little puppy.

They decided they were going to keep a better eye on the enterprise account and make sure no town funds were used to fund Rescue, which is what the ballot question orchestrated by former selectman and assistant Rescue Chief Jason Cole stated and voters approved back in 2010.

So, you might ask, when Cole and the other selectmen were paying the ambulance payments and the enterprise account nowhere near had the funds, didn't they know that town funds would be used?

Some would say "No." We would say "Are you kidding us?"

At least you would have thought that either Cole, or the former rescue chief, Samantha Cole, would've known having been intimate with the billing and receivables from ambulance runs.

We can tell you now that the current board knows pretty much on a weekly basis how the Rescue enterprise account is doing. Why? Because they keep an eye on it!

But, sadly, what they aren't keeping an eye on is the big picture, the safety of the town residents.

We took a ride in both ambulances two weeks ago. Rescue 1, a 2004 Ford, is a bigger truck and much bumpier with fewer medical bells and whistles that could help save a life.

Rescue Chief Jenny Sheriff rode with us. As we were lifted off our seats by modest bumps along West Lebanon Road, she commented that if a patient had a broken leg, it would be exponentially more painful in Rescue 1 than Rescue 2.

Days before the election Selectmen Chairman Ben Thompson was explained this and asked which one he would rather be transported in if he had a broken leg.

"It doesn't matter," he said.

We think that comment makes about as much sense as getting rid of Rescue 2. There's some kind of disconnect here. We also suggest he take a couple of rides, himself.

But what is just as worrisome is that with the onset of winter and bad driving conditions, the town of Lebanon, which is twice the size of Dover, N.H., will have just one ambulance on call. Rescue personnel pleaded their case at a public hearing earlier this fall that multiple calls are common in the winter, and that having just one ambulance just wasn't safe. They also said that Rescue 1, the older ambulance, would likely be driven into the ground when it went into continuous use.

Surrounding communities have mutual aid agreements with Lebanon and will help in a pinch, but when push comes to shove and multiple calls are coming in for accidents with injuries from snowy roads, other town departments have a duty and obligation to take care of their own residents first.

Older town residents will suffer the most, waiting longer for responses, often in more serious, or dire, circumstances. Anyone who is housebound, who is on oxygen, who has a stroke or a heart attack, will wait longer.

Right now we are told Rescue 1 needs five minutes before it can go out the door due to its air bag suspension system.

So safetywise, this is a very bad decision.

So we must be saving a pile of money, Right?

Wrong. We're throwing it away. We only owe $60,000, not $80,000 to finish the purchase, because we'll have to pay $20,000 pro rata for this year.

That's after we - not the Rescue enterprise account - paid four payments totaling about $160,000.

Now, if you had bought a car and paid four of six years payments, would you have it repossessed when it's nearly paid for if you could possibly avoid it? Only if you were a fool.

Plus, once the attorneys from the leasing company and the town begin any possible litigation with the town's liability under the lease agreement, all bets are off. As any attorney will tell you, "anything is actionable."

So is it possible that the leasing company will put the ambulance up for auction, get just $30,000 and saddle us with a $30,000 bill? One would think it a possibility.

Then there's about $30,000 worth of equipment that was paid for within the lease agreement that will also be up for grabs, although Thompson has said the town attorney is confident it's not at risk, since the collateral is listed as just the ambulance, itself.

Still, once attorneys are running the show, which they will be now, you know they love nothing more than to litigate till the cows come home. Cha-ching! By the way, the town attorney is on our dime, too, at about $140 an hour.

So safety-wise and money-wise this is a classic boondoggle. But how about morale-wise? What do you think?

You take away the crown jewel from a department recovering from the debacle of the former regime, a department that suffers ridicule daily from shadowy social media outlets on their performance even as they continue to steadily improve.

What do you think?

Sheriff said department volunteers were despondent with the imminent loss of Rescue 2, but loved doing what they did and would continue to do the best they can with the equipment they have.

Is that good enough for you? We laud Sheriff for her honesty and undaunted dedication in the face of such adversity.

However, we think the residents of Lebanon deserve dependable Rescue equipment as well as dedication from our volunteers.

We give credit to selectmen who are trying to do things the right way after years of corruption and mismanagement in these areas, but is it really necessary to throw the baby out with the bathwater?

Is this what you would call thinking outside the box?

Selectmen sent out a mailer that explained what a YES and NO vote on the ambulance question resulted in. Why wasn't that on the ballot???

When we asked selectmen on Thursday if any of them had heard from residents unhappy with the confusing nature of the question or the outcome of the vote, they all said no, they hadn't.

If you believe, like we do, that there is no positive in getting rid of Rescue 2, we ask you to contact town offices at 457-6082 on Monday and let them know how you feel.

- HT

Read more from:
opinion
Tags: 
None
Share: 
Comment Print
Powered by Bondware
News Publishing Software

The browser you are using is outdated!

You may not be getting all you can out of your browsing experience
and may be open to security risks!

Consider upgrading to the latest version of your browser or choose on below: