GoldStar

[Guest guest]

So if the City of Port Arthur started an ambulance service that included

transports, they could make a lot of money? The $50,000 they lost from a

private wouldn't be that much compared to what they would make.

Andy

[Guest guest]

So if the City of Port Arthur started an ambulance service that included

transports, they could make a lot of money? The $50,000 they lost from a

private wouldn't be that much compared to what they would make.

Andy

[Guest guest]

I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably. I

have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy, which

is

in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only " service

and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be demanding

to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can think of

is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are not

" adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

Am I wrong?

GG

E.(Gene) Gandy

POB 1651

Albany, TX 76430

wegandy1938@...

[Guest guest]

I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably. I

have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy, which

is

in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only " service

and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be demanding

to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can think of

is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are not

" adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

Am I wrong?

GG

E.(Gene) Gandy

POB 1651

Albany, TX 76430

wegandy1938@...

[Guest guest]

I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably. I

have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy, which

is

in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only " service

and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be demanding

to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can think of

is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are not

" adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

Am I wrong?

GG

E.(Gene) Gandy

POB 1651

Albany, TX 76430

wegandy1938@...

[Guest guest]

I understand what you're saying. But, fact is, sooner or later, the " powers

that be " will be looking at revenue production and figure out that all that

money that's going to the privates could be theirs.

Whether or not they add trucks, staff, or anything else, depends upon how

strong the EMS management is and how well they sell their needs to a reluctant

city administration.

It is true that a large percentage of transports by a 911 service are

actually non-emergencies, but many of those are probably no-pays. Nursing home

transfers do pay, and if I were a city manager I would want to know why we were

giving that money away.

At the same time, most city services, whether FD or 3rd service, do not work

their employees nearly as hard as the private services do. Think about it.

A private service is in the business for one reason and one reason only: to

make a profit.

If a private service can make a profit, why couldn't a publicly run service

do the same? Who deserves the profits? The private service owners or the

taxpayers who pay for those who cannot pay?

A private service that pays only $50,000 for the privilege of doing transfers

is laughing all the way to the bank.

GG

>

> Well, the problem as I see it from the trenches is that it would merely

> serve as incentive for city government to pile more work on top of what we

> do already, especially if there is a revenue stream to be generated. What

> are the odds that the city will fund more ambulances and more employees to

> handle the additional traffic? 3/4 of what I do already are " transfers "

> anyway, and I'm too old to handle much adrenalin.

>

> Doesn't the City of Galveston operate this way? My understanding of their

> system is that they have dedicated " transfer " trucks. Its not a bad sounding

> system actually, but I think using your 911 units to do txfers mixes things

> that should not be mixed....public service and profit generation. If a city

> wanted to staff 3 or 4 transfer trucks to make some $$$, good on 'em.

> magnetass sends

> Re: Goldstar

>

>

> >

> > I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

> > including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably.

> > I

> > have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy,

> > which is

> > in transfers.   If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only "

> > service

> > and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be

> > demanding

> > to know the rationale for doing that.   About the only rationale I can

> > think of

> > is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are

> > not

> > " adrenalin producing. "    But they are revenue producing.

> >

> > Am I wrong?

> >

> > GG

> >

> >

> >

> > E.(Gene) Gandy

> > POB 1651

> > Albany, TX 76430

> > wegandy1938@...

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

I understand what you're saying. But, fact is, sooner or later, the " powers

that be " will be looking at revenue production and figure out that all that

money that's going to the privates could be theirs.

Whether or not they add trucks, staff, or anything else, depends upon how

strong the EMS management is and how well they sell their needs to a reluctant

city administration.

It is true that a large percentage of transports by a 911 service are

actually non-emergencies, but many of those are probably no-pays. Nursing home

transfers do pay, and if I were a city manager I would want to know why we were

giving that money away.

At the same time, most city services, whether FD or 3rd service, do not work

their employees nearly as hard as the private services do. Think about it.

A private service is in the business for one reason and one reason only: to

make a profit.

If a private service can make a profit, why couldn't a publicly run service

do the same? Who deserves the profits? The private service owners or the

taxpayers who pay for those who cannot pay?

A private service that pays only $50,000 for the privilege of doing transfers

is laughing all the way to the bank.

GG

>

> Well, the problem as I see it from the trenches is that it would merely

> serve as incentive for city government to pile more work on top of what we

> do already, especially if there is a revenue stream to be generated. What

> are the odds that the city will fund more ambulances and more employees to

> handle the additional traffic? 3/4 of what I do already are " transfers "

> anyway, and I'm too old to handle much adrenalin.

>

> Doesn't the City of Galveston operate this way? My understanding of their

> system is that they have dedicated " transfer " trucks. Its not a bad sounding

> system actually, but I think using your 911 units to do txfers mixes things

> that should not be mixed....public service and profit generation. If a city

> wanted to staff 3 or 4 transfer trucks to make some $$$, good on 'em.

> magnetass sends

> Re: Goldstar

>

>

> >

> > I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

> > including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably.

> > I

> > have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy,

> > which is

> > in transfers.   If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only "

> > service

> > and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be

> > demanding

> > to know the rationale for doing that.   About the only rationale I can

> > think of

> > is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are

> > not

> > " adrenalin producing. "    But they are revenue producing.

> >

> > Am I wrong?

> >

> > GG

> >

> >

> >

> > E.(Gene) Gandy

> > POB 1651

> > Albany, TX 76430

> > wegandy1938@...

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

I understand what you're saying. But, fact is, sooner or later, the " powers

that be " will be looking at revenue production and figure out that all that

money that's going to the privates could be theirs.

Whether or not they add trucks, staff, or anything else, depends upon how

strong the EMS management is and how well they sell their needs to a reluctant

city administration.

It is true that a large percentage of transports by a 911 service are

actually non-emergencies, but many of those are probably no-pays. Nursing home

transfers do pay, and if I were a city manager I would want to know why we were

giving that money away.

At the same time, most city services, whether FD or 3rd service, do not work

their employees nearly as hard as the private services do. Think about it.

A private service is in the business for one reason and one reason only: to

make a profit.

If a private service can make a profit, why couldn't a publicly run service

do the same? Who deserves the profits? The private service owners or the

taxpayers who pay for those who cannot pay?

A private service that pays only $50,000 for the privilege of doing transfers

is laughing all the way to the bank.

GG

>

> Well, the problem as I see it from the trenches is that it would merely

> serve as incentive for city government to pile more work on top of what we

> do already, especially if there is a revenue stream to be generated. What

> are the odds that the city will fund more ambulances and more employees to

> handle the additional traffic? 3/4 of what I do already are " transfers "

> anyway, and I'm too old to handle much adrenalin.

>

> Doesn't the City of Galveston operate this way? My understanding of their

> system is that they have dedicated " transfer " trucks. Its not a bad sounding

> system actually, but I think using your 911 units to do txfers mixes things

> that should not be mixed....public service and profit generation. If a city

> wanted to staff 3 or 4 transfer trucks to make some $$$, good on 'em.

> magnetass sends

> Re: Goldstar

>

>

> >

> > I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

> > including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably.

> > I

> > have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy,

> > which is

> > in transfers.   If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only "

> > service

> > and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be

> > demanding

> > to know the rationale for doing that.   About the only rationale I can

> > think of

> > is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are

> > not

> > " adrenalin producing. "    But they are revenue producing.

> >

> > Am I wrong?

> >

> > GG

> >

> >

> >

> > E.(Gene) Gandy

> > POB 1651

> > Albany, TX 76430

> > wegandy1938@...

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Well, the problem as I see it from the trenches is that it would merely

serve as incentive for city government to pile more work on top of what we

do already, especially if there is a revenue stream to be generated. What

are the odds that the city will fund more ambulances and more employees to

handle the additional traffic? 3/4 of what I do already are " transfers "

anyway, and I'm too old to handle much adrenalin.

Doesn't the City of Galveston operate this way? My understanding of their

system is that they have dedicated " transfer " trucks. Its not a bad sounding

system actually, but I think using your 911 units to do txfers mixes things

that should not be mixed....public service and profit generation. If a city

wanted to staff 3 or 4 transfer trucks to make some $$$, good on 'em.

magnetass sends

Re: Goldstar

>

> I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

> including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably.

> I

> have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy,

> which is

> in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only "

> service

> and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be

> demanding

> to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can

> think of

> is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are

> not

> " adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

>

> Am I wrong?

>

> GG

>

>

>

> E.(Gene) Gandy

> POB 1651

> Albany, TX 76430

> wegandy1938@...

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Well, the problem as I see it from the trenches is that it would merely

serve as incentive for city government to pile more work on top of what we

do already, especially if there is a revenue stream to be generated. What

are the odds that the city will fund more ambulances and more employees to

handle the additional traffic? 3/4 of what I do already are " transfers "

anyway, and I'm too old to handle much adrenalin.

Doesn't the City of Galveston operate this way? My understanding of their

system is that they have dedicated " transfer " trucks. Its not a bad sounding

system actually, but I think using your 911 units to do txfers mixes things

that should not be mixed....public service and profit generation. If a city

wanted to staff 3 or 4 transfer trucks to make some $$$, good on 'em.

magnetass sends

Re: Goldstar

>

> I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

> including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably.

> I

> have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy,

> which is

> in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only "

> service

> and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be

> demanding

> to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can

> think of

> is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are

> not

> " adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

>

> Am I wrong?

>

> GG

>

>

>

> E.(Gene) Gandy

> POB 1651

> Albany, TX 76430

> wegandy1938@...

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I am not necessarily pro fired based EMS, I am stating some facts as PAFD's

involvement as first responders. Actually, I prefer the third city service

type of department myself as I am not a Firefighter but Paramedic only.

[Guest guest]

I am not necessarily pro fired based EMS, I am stating some facts as PAFD's

involvement as first responders. Actually, I prefer the third city service

type of department myself as I am not a Firefighter but Paramedic only.

[Guest guest]

I am not necessarily pro fired based EMS, I am stating some facts as PAFD's

involvement as first responders. Actually, I prefer the third city service

type of department myself as I am not a Firefighter but Paramedic only.

[Guest guest]

Ahh yes, I forgot about the Public Health model. Beaumont has a great system.

[Guest guest]

Ahh yes, I forgot about the Public Health model. Beaumont has a great system.

[Guest guest]

My *personal* preferences are as follows

1) Third service (city or county)

2) Public health department (e.g. Beaumont)

3) Hospital district

Of course, there are good and bad services of all kinds. But certain models of

EMS delivery seem to have more problems than others.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

Re: Goldstar

I am not necessarily pro fired based EMS, I am stating some facts as PAFD's

involvement as first responders. Actually, I prefer the third city service

type of department myself as I am not a Firefighter but Paramedic only.

[Guest guest]

My *personal* preferences are as follows

1) Third service (city or county)

2) Public health department (e.g. Beaumont)

3) Hospital district

Of course, there are good and bad services of all kinds. But certain models of

EMS delivery seem to have more problems than others.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

Re: Goldstar

I am not necessarily pro fired based EMS, I am stating some facts as PAFD's

involvement as first responders. Actually, I prefer the third city service

type of department myself as I am not a Firefighter but Paramedic only.

[Guest guest]

My *personal* preferences are as follows

1) Third service (city or county)

2) Public health department (e.g. Beaumont)

3) Hospital district

Of course, there are good and bad services of all kinds. But certain models of

EMS delivery seem to have more problems than others.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

Re: Goldstar

I am not necessarily pro fired based EMS, I am stating some facts as PAFD's

involvement as first responders. Actually, I prefer the third city service

type of department myself as I am not a Firefighter but Paramedic only.

[Guest guest]

Our city (El Paso) still gets its portion of the " gravy " because we have to pay

a franchise fee to run a private transfer service. Above that we also provide

assistance to the 911 service when they are on " overload " . We do not get

compensated for running their calls and most are low priority calls where we

won't get paid for the call anyway. Besides, as I was once told by a city

employee, " Isn't that what you guys are for. Leave the emergency calls to the

'professionals' " .

wegandy1938@... wrote:

I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably. I

have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy, which

is

in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only " service

and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be demanding

to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can think of

is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are not

" adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

Am I wrong?

GG

E.(Gene) Gandy

POB 1651

Albany, TX 76430

wegandy1938@...

Guerrero, LP

Rio Grande Ambulance Services

P. O. Box 9277

El Paso, TX 79995

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential

information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in the

header. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are

hereby notified that any unauthorized dissemination, distribution, copy, or use

of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify me by telephone at .

[Guest guest]

Our city (El Paso) still gets its portion of the " gravy " because we have to pay

a franchise fee to run a private transfer service. Above that we also provide

assistance to the 911 service when they are on " overload " . We do not get

compensated for running their calls and most are low priority calls where we

won't get paid for the call anyway. Besides, as I was once told by a city

employee, " Isn't that what you guys are for. Leave the emergency calls to the

'professionals' " .

wegandy1938@... wrote:

I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably. I

have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy, which

is

in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only " service

and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be demanding

to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can think of

is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are not

" adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

Am I wrong?

GG

E.(Gene) Gandy

POB 1651

Albany, TX 76430

wegandy1938@...

Guerrero, LP

Rio Grande Ambulance Services

P. O. Box 9277

El Paso, TX 79995

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential

information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in the

header. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are

hereby notified that any unauthorized dissemination, distribution, copy, or use

of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify me by telephone at .

[Guest guest]

Our city (El Paso) still gets its portion of the " gravy " because we have to pay

a franchise fee to run a private transfer service. Above that we also provide

assistance to the 911 service when they are on " overload " . We do not get

compensated for running their calls and most are low priority calls where we

won't get paid for the call anyway. Besides, as I was once told by a city

employee, " Isn't that what you guys are for. Leave the emergency calls to the

'professionals' " .

wegandy1938@... wrote:

I would venture to say that if the City took over all ambulance functions,

including transfers, it would improve its financial status considerably. I

have never been able to understand why cities would give away the gravy, which

is

in transfers. If I were a taxpayer in a city that ran a " 911 only " service

and allowed private services to take all the transfers, I would be demanding

to know the rationale for doing that. About the only rationale I can think of

is that the 911 people simply don't like doing transfers because they are not

" adrenalin producing. " But they are revenue producing.

Am I wrong?

GG

E.(Gene) Gandy

POB 1651

Albany, TX 76430

wegandy1938@...

Guerrero, LP

Rio Grande Ambulance Services

P. O. Box 9277

El Paso, TX 79995

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential

information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in the

header. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are

hereby notified that any unauthorized dissemination, distribution, copy, or use

of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify me by telephone at .

[Guest guest]

Just to let everyone know, PAFD responded to almost 8000 calls last year, and

probably less than 30% were NOT medical related calls. The call volume is

already there, so we don't need the city service to boost numbers. If we do go

with the proposal to do inner-city transfers, there would be dedicated " transfer

trucks " to keep the 911 units available. There is supposed to be some mythical

city ordinance stating how many units each service is to have dedicated for

emergencies, but you can tell from all the rollover calls that those numbers

aren't there, whatever that magic number is.

The other good things about fire based EMS is the chance to cross-train the

members, so when they respond to fires and other fire-related matters, they

could be used for manpower, and we all know how important manpower is and the

lack of. Not to mention that's more members contributing to a bigger pension.

The key is to sell it to the city. We are starting to phase out the old-timers

that don't want to run med calls, and our dept. is getting younger and more

motivated. Now all we need is a sympathetic council.....

Troy Irvine

Firefighter/Tactical Paramedic

Port Arthur Fire Department

[Guest guest]

AMEN!!!!!!!!

DANIEL DIAZ EMT-B

[Guest guest]

AMEN!!!!!!!!

DANIEL DIAZ EMT-B

[Guest guest]

AMEN!!!!!!!!

DANIEL DIAZ EMT-B