View Full Version : Put a MAPS sign in your yard



Pages : [1] 2

Spartan
11-26-2009, 10:17 PM
Keep OKC Moving - Vote Yes for MAPs on December 8! (http://www.yesformaps.com/email.html)

You can go here and give them your name, number, and address, and they'll put a MAPS sign in your yard for you. It won't cost you anything and it will help defeat the chronic ignorance that we're up against. Show your neighbors that not everyone is saying 'Not this MAPS' and maybe it will catch on.

blangtang
11-26-2009, 10:50 PM
" Put a MAPS sign in your yard"

OR...You could put a turkey carcass in your yard.

iron76hd
11-27-2009, 08:53 AM
If you would like a NOT THIS MAPS sign. Just go to this website and fill out the info. In the suggestions portion, just say. I can't volunteer and don't want to be contacted in the future, but I would like a sign in my yard.

Or call 506-2720 and ask for the sign that way.



Home (http://nomaps3.com/)

gmwise
11-27-2009, 09:26 AM
Fair and balance...

sroberts24
11-27-2009, 10:15 AM
Got 3 in my yard 2 in my parents 2 in my sisters got 2 of my neighbors some and my roomates parents! I'm dong my part!

kevinpate
11-27-2009, 10:53 AM
Got 3 in my yard 2 in my parents 2 in my sisters got 2 of my neighbors some and my roomates parents! I'm dong my part!

I thought about getting one of each, if only to confuse some of the driver-bys down here on my busy street in Norman.

nik4411
11-27-2009, 11:40 AM
does norman count as okc?

iron76hd
11-27-2009, 11:44 AM
does norman count as okc?
Really. Why don't you start a MAPS1 there in Norman?:bright_id

soonerguru
11-27-2009, 12:00 PM
I guess Iron76 wants a MAPS sign for his yard. If not, why else would he be commenting in this thread?

Spartan
11-27-2009, 02:25 PM
If you would like a NOT THIS MAPS sign. Just go to this website and fill out the info. In the suggestions portion, just say. I can't volunteer and don't want to be contacted in the future, but I would like a sign in my yard.

Or call 506-2720 and ask for the sign that way.



Home (http://nomaps3.com/)

If this is you just post a sign advertising your rock bottom IQ in your front lawn. They have bumper stickers, too.

CuatrodeMayo
11-27-2009, 02:27 PM
If this is you just post a sign advertising your rock bottom IQ in your front lawn. They have bumper stickers, too.

snap.

kevinpate
11-27-2009, 02:35 PM
does norman count as okc?

Nope, was just a funny that turned out not to be.

Though lots of us spend a fair amount of time, talent and treasury in OKC, we don't participate in the actual yeas and nays there.

On matters where we can vote, it's not uncommon for the household adults to lean different directions. We've canceled each other's votes a number of times over the years.

iron76hd
11-27-2009, 03:45 PM
Though lots of us spend a fair amount of time, talent and treasury in OKC, we don't participate in the actual yeas and nays there.

Well, why don't you work on some worthless initiative in your own city?:bright_id
You don't even live in this one.

I guess Iron76 wants a MAPS sign for his yard. If not, why else would he be commenting in this thread?
Maybe you should have someone read the threads title real slow for you. It said, "Put a MAPS sign in your yard"...so if you want a NOT THIS MAPS sign..i was giving the info..:doh:

If this is you just post a sign advertising your rock bottom IQ in your front lawn. They have bumper stickers, too.
Yes. I've seen a couple of them. That's about it though. There must be a shortage...mmmmm nope...no one wants them. That's why they are still sitting at the chamber. They are a soft pink and lime green color and they say "Yes Maps".

Spartan
11-27-2009, 08:21 PM
Yes. I've seen a couple of them. That's about it though. There must be a shortage...mmmmm nope...no one wants them. That's why they are still sitting at the chamber. They are a soft pink and lime green color and they say "Yes Maps".

Well I'm sorry I have no idea what the designers of the MAPS signs were thinking. Soft pink and lime green color? OMG, how gauche? The "Not this MAPS" signs, now that's fabulous.

Or how about this: The city isn't forcing people to put the signs in their yards, like the fire and police unions?

iron76hd
11-27-2009, 11:01 PM
Mayor explains the true cost of MAPS3 per person and family a lot better than I can.



Leaving Facebook... | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/l/bc482;www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHAd1PjYLSE)

kevinpate
11-28-2009, 08:25 AM
Mayor explains the true cost of MAPS3 per person and family a lot better than I can.



Leaving Facebook... | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/l/bc482;www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHAd1PjYLSE)

Hmmm, actually a piece of satire, not the mayor. Not even a surprise, considering the source of the link.

It is often said a mark of a desperate man is putting forth a lie to bolster an otherwise weak position.

Spartan
11-28-2009, 02:30 PM
mayor explains the true cost of maps3 per person and family a lot better than i can.



leaving facebook... | facebook (http://www.facebook.com/l/bc482;www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhad1pjylse)

lmao.

FritterGirl
11-28-2009, 02:37 PM
I have 2 YES for MAPs signs in my yard, having picked up about a dozen to distribute to family, friends and co-workers. Will pick up some more this week for others who have requested them.

Also have a bumper sticker. Husband's comment? "You'd better watch out how you drive. You might get pulled over just because of that sticker." Sadly, he's probably not far off course.

We have friends who put two "YES FOR MAPs" signs in their yard. They were the only ones on their block to have anything. Apparently, a group of NOT THIS MAPs campaigners went canvassing their neighborhood one day last week, at least according to my friends' neighbor, who was at home when they came a 'knocking. Ironically, when my friends got home from work that night, not only were their "YES FOR MAPS" signs gone, but "NOT THIS MAPs" campaign information was stuck to their front door.

Circumstantial? Yes! But what a coincidence...

betts
11-28-2009, 03:19 PM
Haha! I too have a "yes for MAPS" bumper sticker. A policeman was behind me today, and I was very careful to drive the speed limit and signal properly.

Spartan
11-28-2009, 03:20 PM
They aren't worth the trouble. I would not suggest getting a bumper sticker, but by all means, make sure everyone you know who supports MAPS has a yard sign.

eef
11-30-2009, 01:28 AM
If you have a bumper sticker, everyone who drives behind you sees it. Maybe that's better than just having your neighbors see your sign. I've got a sign though and it's not green and pink. Was that guy who said they were green and pink trying to be funny? The no sign is hard to read which is a good thing I think.

oneforone
12-01-2009, 11:59 PM
I have always been a regular voter not matter how large or small the election I have always voted.

I am just not into the advertising side of a candidate or proposal. I think when you do it you turn yourself into a target for wingnuts out there who may disagree with the advertising.

It is bad enough I have had vehicles vandalized because I was a random target. The last thing I need is the yard destroyed or the car keyed/egged because somebody does not like the way I am voting.

Not to mention, all those signs for against will still be littering the landscape six months from now.

If I had my way, we would take the advertising out of political campaigns. Both sides of the issue would argue their case through debates and unsolicited campaign websites and flyers. Make the voters do their homework on an issue instead of just trusting a cheesy slogan of vote for me or vote yes/no.

flintysooner
12-02-2009, 05:59 AM
I have always been a regular voter not matter how large or small the election I have always voted.

I am just not into the advertising side of a candidate or proposal. I think when you do it you turn yourself into a target for wingnuts out there who may disagree with the advertising.

It is bad enough I have had vehicles vandalized because I was a random target. The last thing I need is the yard destroyed or the car keyed/egged because somebody does not like the way I am voting.

Not to mention, all those signs for against will still be littering the landscape six months from now.

If I had my way, we would take the advertising out of political campaigns. Both sides of the issue would argue their case through debates and unsolicited campaign websites and flyers. Make the voters do their homework on an issue instead of just trusting a cheesy slogan of vote for me or vote yes/no.All good points I think.

Plus it seems to me that everyone has made up their minds by the time the signs are placed.

LordGerald
12-02-2009, 02:22 PM
Haha! I too have a "yes for MAPS" bumper sticker. A policeman was behind me today, and I was very careful to drive the speed limit and signal properly.

Same thing happened to me. Thought he would pull me over and beat his one percent raise out of me! But no, it was 5 p.m., and so there was a shift change, and he had to get back to HQ.

dmoor82
12-02-2009, 02:33 PM
man guy's!I've seen thousands of notthismaps sign in the city and very few Yes/MAPS signs!and I've seen quite a few notthismaps signs in Yukon and Mustang!!!!<WHY?

OSUFan
12-02-2009, 02:46 PM
Iron,

I guess then by your own words the union heads (who don't live in OKC) should stay out of this also. I mean why don't they worry about fixing Norman and Newcastle and leave OKC to the people who live here?

circled9
12-02-2009, 03:30 PM
everyone should know that maps will pass if there is no real controversy about it. those who are for it will get out and vote for it while those who are neutral or maybe leaning against it will stay home unless there it is part of a regular election. those who want the measure defeated need to make it look as if it is one of the worst things which has ever happened to okc to get people to get out and vote against it. therefore exposure through the lawn signs and bumper stickers is vital. personally, after hearing all the arguments for and against, i am leaning towards for. if it was an extra penny out of my pocket, i would probably vote no but doubt if i would even notice not having to pay the extra penny and some of the projects are pretty cool. if we want to keep our best and brightest in okc when they grow up rather than moving to texas, california or who knows where, we need to make this a fun city.

FritterGirl
12-02-2009, 03:36 PM
I really get a kick out of this, from the NOTTHISMAPS link in Iron's post:


In the past, neither the police or fire departments have opposed the MAPS initiatives, but MAPS 3 has gone too far. Out of of a billion dollars, not one dime is being spent on education, roads, bridges, infrastructure or emergency services namely police and fire. This site outlines the numerous reasons why the informed voter will have to vote NO on December 8th.

The part about "informed" voter really cracks me up. Does nobody remember the GO Bond issue passed just in December of 2007. The total of the bond package is nearly $800 million, almost $500 million of which is dedicated towards ROADS.

ROADS$497 million: This proposition finances resurfacing, widening and rebuilding of more than 750 lane miles of streets, mostly in residential areas. Walkers will also benefit from the construction of 350 miles of sidewalks and trails.

BRIDGES $19.7 million dedicated to bridge improvements that are UNDER CITY PURVIEW. Many of the bridges, such as I-40 crosstown, are under ODOT. But, why not, let's mislead the public by instilling fear in them. Nothing like "informing" voters.

INFRASTRUCTURE $32.8 in Drainage, $89 million for Parks & Recreation, and the list goes on.

FIRE is getting close to $15 million for new stations

As for EDUCATION, have you heard of MAPS FOR KIDS? The City, as in City government, is NOT responsible for basic education funding. THAT is taken care of through the STATE.

MAPS has and never will be INTENDED for BASIC NEEDS. It has always been about building the types of projects that go well above and beyond what is part of the "basic services package" for the City.

The misinformation is just laughable.

Spartan
12-02-2009, 03:38 PM
if we want to keep our best and brightest in okc when they grow up rather than moving to texas, california or who knows where, we need to make this a fun city.

How about this for a marketing pitch (similar to my "Embarrass the Stimulus" argument, reaching the same crowd):

TV commercial voice-over
"Would you kick your children out of your house on December 8th, tell them to go to California or Texas, and that you never want to see them again?"

[show scenes of moving vans with kids going to college or something]

"Well that's what you're doing if you don't vote Yes on December 8th."

kevinpate
12-02-2009, 07:34 PM
... The misinformation is just laughable.

Just a suggestion, but lots of people out there have short memories, and selective memories. It's not hard to lay out a lot of truthful, though irrelevant, shots at MAPs, and many are in that list.

Yet it would be a mistake for the YES contingent to treat their opposition's inaccurate information as laughable.

As close as this election can likely get down to, it seems far more important to attempt to mobilize YES voters to offset every vote that is based on incorrect information. That is after all, the game plan of the opposition, secure as many NO votes as they can garner, with hopes it will be enough.

Wambo36
12-03-2009, 07:15 AM
on.

FIRE is getting close to $15 million for new stations

The misinformation is just laughable.

As long as we're discissing misinformation, the bond you're talking about was 2007. Since they still haven't built the two fire stations approved in the 2000 bond package, I wonder how long we'll be waiting on them to do anything with the 2007 bond money. You see this is the citys track record that you conveniently choose to ignore. 9 years and waiting on the 2000 bond election.

And you're right that is laughable.

iron76hd
12-03-2009, 07:22 AM
Does nobody remember the GO Bond issue passed just in December of 2007.
What's your point? Why haven't the city leaders you trust so much built the two fire stations from bond issue previously?

Where did the money go? What's the hold up?

The handling of those bond issues are why VOTE NO. Maybe you better get your facts straight first.

Architect2010
12-03-2009, 10:48 AM
I could of sworn she said 2007 GO Bond. And as far as that is concerned. They have kept true to rebuilding and repaving roads and all other infrastructure promises. I don't think Frittergirl ever mentioned the 2000 Bond and the irresponsibility of the city to build those two firestations. Her facts are straight. You just threw in irrelevant information not even pertaining to what she said. That makes her facts scewed? I guess.

The information on that site really is, to put it bluntly, stupid. And last time I checked fire fighters and police forces get a permanent percentage of taxes collected by the city and they're trying to get more money out of a temporary tax? How pathetic.

Wambo36
12-03-2009, 12:18 PM
You just threw in irrelevant information not even pertaining to what she said.

And last time I checked fire fighters and police forces get a permanent percentage of taxes collected by the city and they're trying to get more money out of a temporary tax? How pathetic.

What is irrelevant about them collecting money to do something and 9 years later they still haven't done it? Now that they have waited the costs have more than doubled. Sounds a little irresponsible to me, but I don't know how you do business. Maybe this is par for the course for you.

You're right that police and fire are supported by a permanent sales tax. Where your mistaken is that they are asking for more money from a temporary tax. That is your mayor suggesting that, to try to defuse the loss of manpower issue in the debate.

You're right, that is pathetic.

jbrown84
12-03-2009, 03:32 PM
Well, why don't you work on some worthless initiative in your own city?:bright_id
You don't even live in this one.

Quite a thing for you to say when 2/3rds of your union lives outside OKC.


Where your mistaken is that they are asking for more money from a temporary tax. That is your mayor suggesting that, to try to defuse the loss of manpower issue in the debate.

That's funny because I distinctly remember the unions making a huge fuss about how that was THEIR idea given to the city. Of course when the city agreed to it they wouldn't accept it.

Wambo36
12-03-2009, 05:53 PM
That's funny because I distinctly remember the unions making a huge fuss about how that was THEIR idea given to the city. Of course when the city agreed to it they wouldn't accept it.

I believe the union did bring up the fact that they had approx. 37 million in the fund and wondered why it wasn't being used to alleviate some of the citys problems. The city decided they would offer to use it to fill positions for 2 years. After 2 years those people would be gone if the city decided they couldn't afford to keep them. In our dealings with the city there is no doubt that this was going to be the case. That's why they couldn't accept it.

betts
12-03-2009, 06:03 PM
Simple solution for the firemen: stop sending an entire fire truck full of firemen to each 911 call. If I were the city, I'd combine EMSA and the fire department, and no more than 2 people would go to any medical call. More could go to MVA's if necessary. Between sending less people out on each call and having EMSA as part of the fire department, no additional personnel would be needed.

Wambo36
12-03-2009, 09:09 PM
Simple solution for the firemen: stop sending an entire fire truck full of firemen to each 911 call. If I were the city, I'd combine EMSA and the fire department, and no more than 2 people would go to any medical call. More could go to MVA's if necessary. Between sending less people out on each call and having EMSA as part of the fire department, no additional personnel would be needed.

Betts, that all sounds well and good until it's your child or parent having to wait for an extended period because the FD decided that ems calls were optional. The reason they send the FD is because we are almost always closer and often times much closer than an available EMSA unit. At my station it's not uncommon to wait 10 to 20 minutes on an ambulance after we've arrived on scene. Sometimes it matters, sometimes not. We never know until we arrive. I've been dispatched on difficulty breathing calls only to find a person in full arrest upon arrival. I've been dispatched on a possible full arrest call only to find someone sleeping off a drunk. The point is we never know. We choose to err on the side of caution. The fact is, that if you need someone there is 2-4 minutes to start life saving intervention, that's usually going to be the FD. The way you would have us do it is simply not acceptable. It may sound good in theory, but it loses some of it's luster if you or someone you care about are the ones waiting for help.

betts
12-03-2009, 09:20 PM
The 2 people would be firemen in my plan. EMSA would be absorbed by the fire department and they could dispatch 2 firemen in an ambulance type vehicle. That would save manpower dramatically, solving your manpower issues. With the exception of automobile accidents, there should virtually never be a need for more than 2. Sending an entire firetruck full of firemen plus EMSA personnel is a ridiculous waste of manpower.

Chef
12-03-2009, 09:40 PM
Betts we have tried to take over the ambulance service. The city continues to to say NO. They would rather subsidize EMSA at an ever increasing rate per year. We also have an agreement, which the city bargained for is paramedic engines will have 4 FF, and others will have 3 FF. After reading several of post not only here but others places, you are really not seeing or hearing that the city government is not being frugal taxpayers money. No matter what anyone says you will probably not change your mind.

Wambo36
12-03-2009, 09:54 PM
So in your plan every station would get an ambulance with two people to ride it?

betts
12-03-2009, 11:21 PM
So in your plan every station would get an ambulance with two people to ride it?

I would expect that the EMSA personnel would, if they qualified, be distributed to any fire departments that needed personnel. The two going out on 911 calls would not be additional personnel, but rather existing personnel......wo of the five or so that are already going. There are clearly plenty of firemen available for 911 calls, if you're sending out a full truck right now.

jbrown84
12-04-2009, 10:17 AM
I believe the union did bring up the fact that they had approx. 37 million in the fund and wondered why it wasn't being used to alleviate some of the citys problems. The city decided they would offer to use it to fill positions for 2 years. After 2 years those people would be gone if the city decided they couldn't afford to keep them. In our dealings with the city there is no doubt that this was going to be the case. That's why they couldn't accept it.

Exactly why this issue is not related to a TEMPORARY sales tax and needs to be solved another way. But you just gotta have that penny back or your kids are gonna starve! :omg:

Wambo36
12-04-2009, 10:26 AM
Exactly why this issue is not related to a TEMPORARY sales tax and needs to be solved another way. But you just gotta have that penny back or your kids are gonna starve! :omg:

That is exactly why it wasn't accepted. That, and they wanted about 10 other concessions to go along with it.

You might want to read my posts a little closer, so when you throw out your little barbs, you might actually be talking to the right person.

I've never said that I care about the penny one way or another. My kids will be just fine either way.

jbrown84
12-04-2009, 11:25 AM
Then why do you oppose this tax when it in no way could be used to get you more manpower on a permanent basis?

Wambo36
12-04-2009, 12:00 PM
Because I do not have the blind faith trust in our city officials that some others seem to. In almost 20 years of dealing with them, they haven't done much to inspire trust. Actually they've done just the opposite.

I believe the ballot was set up, in the vague way that it was, expressly to avoid accountability. Nobody has shown with any certainty that this ballot form was necessitated by law.

I think the senior aquatic centers were put in to garner the votes of the most dependable voting block out there. I also think they will be the first casualty of underfunding, when that comes to pass.

Bikes trails and sidewalks, I feel the same way about them.

Fairgrounds, gets their own money from the hotel tax.

Convention center, I couldn't care less either way about it. But, this is going to be built come hell or high water because the CC supports it.

Central park, I like the idea and would have voted yes on it.

Light rail system, this is the only thing on the ballot that I completely support.

On seperate ballots I would have voted for 2 of them for sure. On this ballot I'm forced to vote against all of them. With all that being said, until they can come up with a way to support the crumbling city sevices they've let slide for the last 15 year or so, I'm a no vote.

BOBTHEBUILDER
12-04-2009, 12:09 PM
Because I do not have the blind faith trust in our city officials that some others seem to. In almost 20 years of dealing with them, they haven't done much to inspire trust. Actually they've done just the opposite.

I believe the ballot was set up, in the vague way that it was, expressly to avoid accountability. Nobody has shown with any certainty that this ballot form was necessitated by law.

I think the senior aquatic centers were put in to garner the votes of the most dependable voting block out there. I also think they will be the first casualty of underfunding, when that comes to pass.

Bikes trails and sidewalks, I feel the same way about them.

Fairgrounds, gets their own money from the hotel tax.

Convention center, I couldn't care less either way about it. But, this is going to be built come hell or high water because the CC supports it.

Central park, I like the idea and would have voted yes on it.

Light rail system, this is the only thing on the ballot that I completely support.

On seperate ballots I would have voted for 2 of them for sure. On this ballot I'm forced to vote against all of them. With all that being said, until they can come up with a way to support the crumbling city sevices they've let slide for the last 15 year or so, I'm a no vote.


Ditto...

mugofbeer
12-04-2009, 05:13 PM
Then why do you oppose this tax when it in no way could be used to get you more manpower on a permanent basis?

Because the police and fire unions, and therefore other diehard unionists, will sabotage something that would be overwhelmingly good for the city to get their point across. One has nothing to do with the other except the point of it all.

soonerguru
12-04-2009, 10:12 PM
Those of you who support transit but are voting no will be dooming any possibility of transit for a generation. I know, it sucks, but if you win (and I'm hopeful that you won't), there will be no do-over for public transit.

If you think things are bad in the city now, just wait a few years after MAPS fails.

iron76hd
12-04-2009, 10:30 PM
We don't need a MONEY PIT rail system. Tell Devon to build it if it's going to make so much money.

soonerguru
12-04-2009, 10:35 PM
We don't need a MONEY PIT rail system. Tell Devon to build it if it's going to make so much money.

Public transit isn't about "making money." It's about providing opportunity and alternatives for citizens and making our city a more attractive, environmentally responsible place to live.

I doubt you've ever lived anywhere where public transit exists as a powerful alternative to driving, but it's very nice.

Not to mention, we have many poor and elderly people (and a legally blind person I met today) who would directly benefit from public transit. The blind person told me, "I'm praying MAPS passes. I cannot drive and the possibility of an improved transit system gives me hope for the future."

Larry OKC
12-04-2009, 10:48 PM
...Not to mention, we have many poor and elderly people (and a legally blind person I met today) who would directly benefit from public transit. The blind person told me, "I'm praying MAPS passes. I cannot drive and the possibility of an improved transit system gives me hope for the future."

Doesn't that depend on where the (to date) unannounced routes are going to be? While there are definite advantages to a fixed rail type system, there are also some drawbacks. Does it go where you want to go, and does it come where you are?

mugofbeer
12-04-2009, 10:51 PM
Fixed rail attracts development and attracts those to live near access points. There are dozens of the blind who use the one in Denver because the school is near the rail.

tehvipir
12-04-2009, 11:00 PM
have you heard of the mayor wanting us to go on a diet and the news talking about how obese we are. do you really think two people can lif t a 300-500 dead wieght person whom doesnt fit on the cot. secondly if yo uthink BUYING new amublance and putting them in every station, the spending mechanics to keep them running, then having billing to get paid, then hiring more people so we have a good NIMS and iCS for the medical side and since problably oh maybe 255 of EMSA could actually pass to get on fire we would have to hire even MORE people because you cant take 2 people off and enigne, put them in a ambulance and expect that first engine in on a house fire to, stop at a hydrant, hook up, have the dirver drive to the fire get out hook up there, then that first person would be running up and have to a do a scene size up which includes a 360 degree tour around the fire, then come and pull hose, stretch hose, the driver would then charge it, then do to NFPA standards have to wait until someone else arrived before going into the build because you have to have a two in two out rule would save more money and provide better service to the citizens then you really have NO CLUE what you are taling about. sorry. but you dont. its not your fault. the general public has a lack of info what actually happens. go to your local firestation and ride out. they will treat you good. see what they do.

soonerguru
12-04-2009, 11:02 PM
have you heard of the mayor wanting us to go on a diet and the news talking about how obese we are. do you really think two people can lif t a 300-500 dead wieght person whom doesnt fit on the cot. secondly if yo uthink BUYING new amublance and putting them in every station, the spending mechanics to keep them running, then having billing to get paid, then hiring more people so we have a good NIMS and iCS for the medical side and since problably oh maybe 255 of EMSA could actually pass to get on fire we would have to hire even MORE people because you cant take 2 people off and enigne, put them in a ambulance and expect that first engine in on a house fire to, stop at a hydrant, hook up, have the dirver drive to the fire get out hook up there, then that first person would be running up and have to a do a scene size up which includes a 360 degree tour around the fire, then come and pull hose, stretch hose, the driver would then charge it, then do to NFPA standards have to wait until someone else arrived before going into the build because you have to have a two in two out rule would save more money and provide better service to the citizens then you really have NO CLUE what you are taling about. sorry. but you dont. its not your fault. the general public has a lack of info what actually happens. go to your local firestation and ride out. they will treat you good. see what they do.

Your post is really hard to understand. The mayor didn't talk about us being obese. Numerous national publications did. That hurts our image as a city. Then the mayor announced his diet promotion to try to put a positive spin on all of the bad news. It's not that complicated and it's certainly not controversial.

tehvipir
12-04-2009, 11:18 PM
i understand and i am sorry it is hard to read the point i was making. the point is two grown men cant lift 300-400lbs person of dea body wieght. thats where i was getting at. now does it make a little more sense,

soonerguru
12-04-2009, 11:32 PM
i understand and i am sorry it is hard to read the point i was making. the point is two grown men cant lift 300-400lbs person of dea body wieght. thats where i was getting at. now does it make a little more sense,

I think I understand, but I can't be sure. You're describing the difficulty firemen face. My friend's fiancee is a fireman, whose father and grandfather were also firemen, so I do hear these stories first hand.

You're right, though, that those of us who are not firemen can never really understand what it's like to be a fireman.

Similarly, it would probably be hard for a fireman to understand, for example, what goes through the mind of an entrepreneur when he's trying to decide where to locate his company -- or where he/she decides to begin their business.

I'm not entirely sure how this relates to MAPS, though, because if MAPS fails, there won't be any new firemen hired.

betts
12-04-2009, 11:42 PM
i understand and i am sorry it is hard to read the point i was making. the point is two grown men cant lift 300-400lbs person of dea body wieght. thats where i was getting at. now does it make a little more sense,

The question is, how often do they have to? And, do we really need a 2 EMSA personnel AND a firetruck full of firemen to deal with most 911 calls?

I'm doing a bit of research on the question of how often 911 calls are true life or death situations, as I think we have WAAAY too many personnel working these calls. Firemen say they need more employees, but perhaps, if as you all said 90% of your calls are medical, if we reduced the number of responders per call, you wouldn't need more employees at all.

Here's one article that demonstrates the problem. If we're having this many frivolous calls, then it's frivlous to send this many personnel, and we need to calculate just how many really are needed. If an obese person needs multiple people lifting him or her, you could always call for back-up. It it's a true emergency, you have to stabilize the patient before transport anyway, so there's time for people to show up to help lift. If it's not an emergency, you've got all the time in the world.:

http://www.emsresponder.com/web/online/Top-EMS-News/Emergency-Calls--But-No-Emergency-/1$11086

EMILY NIPPS, Times Staff
St. Petersburg Times, Fla.

A man at a bus shelter drank 10 beers and had a stomachache. A barber felt nervous and wondered if it was his blood pressure medication. A homeless guy needed a trip to the hospital - his fourth in three days. It was a typically frantic Friday night for the firefighters of downtown St. Petersburg's Station 5 as they hopped from one medical call to the next - at a cost of more than $300 a trip.

In the heated national debate over health care reform, this is the public option no one talks about: health care by firefighter. Each year, an estimated tens of millions of local tax dollars are spent in the Tampa Bay area on calls that are anything but emergencies. It is a huge but hidden expense that costs local governments nationwide billions of dollars a year. Firefighters now spend far more time on medical calls than fighting fires. Sometimes it's a heart attack or a shooting, but more often it's someone wanting an aspirin or a ride to the hospital to get out of the rain. "We've become the indigent care provider for the city," said St. Petersburg Fire Rescue Chief James Large. It's worse during tough economic times, when unemployment is high and fewer people can afford doctor's visits. For those who take advantage of the system, it's free. For everyone else, it's anything but.

St. Petersburg Fire Rescue responded to 47,006 calls last year - 85 percent of them medical. Officials estimate about 35 percent of those were life-threatening situations, and an additional 25 percent came in as potentially life-threatening calls.

The rest? Stubbed toes, common colds, panic attacks and everything in between. In many of the cases, the caller could have visited a clinic, gone to a drugstore or waited in an emergency room for treatment.

The same is true in Tampa. Last year, firefighters there responded to 66,422 calls, 84 percent of which were medical.

And it's not just the Tampa Bay area.

Nationwide, firefighter medical calls have tripled since 1980, according to the National Fire Protection Association. Actual fire calls, meanwhile, fell 56 percent from 1977 to 2007, thanks to better building codes and firefighting technology.

"The 'fire department' has become a catchall phrase for something we rarely do anymore," said Lt. Jake Nyhart of St. Petersburg Fire Rescue. "I think our profession is becoming something so different than what it once was, I'd like to see them come up with a new title for us."

Calculating the actual cost of firefighter medical care is tricky, and each fire department uses its own formula. Some simply divide their total budget by the number of calls received. Others have more complicated formulas. St. Petersburg estimates the average rescue call costs taxpayers $332, which includes staff time, equipment, fuel and vehicle wear-and-tear. In Tampa, the cost per call is about $218. In large county departments, the cost can be more. Taking someone to a hospital is even more expensive, with the average ambulance trip costing around $400 to $500. Local governments typically won't bill someone when firefighters respond to a 911 call, but will for an ambulance ride. Collecting is a challenge, though. Pinellas County (which also serves St. Petersburg) gets about 65 percent of its bills paid, which is considered high compared to other areas.The rest is covered by taxpayers. "It is a well-known belief within EMS and fire departments that socioeconomic class has a lot to do with call volume," said Seminole Fire Department EMS Chief Terry Tokarz. "From people who are homeless to people without health insurance or with Medicare or Medicaid. People call 911 and get taken to the ERs, thinking it's a free clinic."

tehvipir
12-04-2009, 11:43 PM
if maps passes it wont creat jobs, just lose less job. if it fails we hope the city will address staffing both fire and police. your right i dont know about entrepreneur and i hope to learn because i would like to start my own business as well. and i havent gotten a clue where to begin, but if you came up to me and asked that we NOT support a plan that would TAX small businesses because you cant afford higher taxes and will have to lay people off i would understand that you are in the boat and know what you are talking about and would agree with you and vote against it.

tehvipir
12-04-2009, 11:47 PM
thats fine betts. so what happens when a life threatening call comes in and EMSA HAS no free ambulances. then what. who responds? it happens. i go home and look at my EMSA pager which says when they are short on ambulances and almost everyday i see that sometimes they are begging crews to come out of the hopsital because they have 911 medical calls on hold. however the fd paramedics gives the same tx EMSA would when they got on scene.

There is a plan with the FD and EMSA to take some of the calls away. we agree fire should not be going on EVERY medical call. such as a nursing home when the nurse calls EMSA cause the x ray taken 3 days ago show a broken pelvis now the pt needs to go to the hopsital. It also puts EMSA at risk for running lights and sirens to a call like that. The powers to be are looking at those things to try and help cost. on a house fire however is where the numbers are needed. granted it is the less common call. count how many fires there have been last 2 months. its been busy. i know of 2 commercial fires today 2 apartments on fire at the same time. like i said. come ride with the fd. let them show you their job.