Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT  (Read 105775 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #150 on: March 24, 2008, 01:05:17 AM »

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

SWAT team is in fact a duplication. We have a very fine SWAT team in St. Robert.
 
Narcotics, again, if you have the money, but when you are telling the folks that you do not have enough officers on to make general calls.... 
 
Look, it is just some thoughts and conversation. I do not know why it can't be a civil discussion. Everything a sheriff wants to do to expand is great...when there is the money and basic needs are done first. The county roads being patrolled should supersede a narcotics division is my point, not that I am against a narcotics corp.

Offline FedUp

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 242
  • Karma: +7320/-427
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #151 on: March 24, 2008, 01:26:21 AM »
Gary thanks for again pointing out that I was correct.  I agree totally with you on all points.  Even if the LE Tax is passed AND the Sheriff's dept gets all the money they are already getting from the County Budget, there will be a limit on what they can do.  I do not believe it will fund a new jail, increase in deputies, a SWAT Team a narcotics team etc.  That does not mean I don't support LE, just that I'm realistic enough to know funds are limited.  JB and I had a civil discussion on this thread today even though he and I disagree in some areas.  We both stated our case and that's it.  It doesn't make him bad or me either.  We both want the same thing, just have different ways of trying to get there.  We just have to remember we can't eat the elephant in one bite.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #152 on: March 24, 2008, 01:39:42 AM »
Thank you Cowboy.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #153 on: March 24, 2008, 01:44:17 AM »
Thank you Fedup. I agree, JB is a good man. I do not want him to take anything I say personal. I enjoy the discussion on this site when people can debate and disagree without being personally attacked. I think there a lot of good people on both sides of this issue. It is a pleasure visiting with you on here.

Offline okie the thread killer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 4857
  • Karma: +2619917/-766
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #154 on: March 24, 2008, 01:52:41 AM »
Okay Gary, here is a question for you. I called the ambulance for my husband on 2-28. I used 911 of course. It took a very long time, and I heard scanner traffic making me think they were lost. Sure enough, the phone rang and we had to guide them in by phone. The driver turned out to be our ex neighbor. Not to blame him, where were his directions. So much for E-911. We are on the main road, it is not a new road. If I had called the ambulance district directly I could have told them how to get here, but 911 didn't ask. They think they know, and they don't. How is that better than duplicate services?
I have it on good authority that the Hokey-Pokey really IS what it's all about.

Offline okie the thread killer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 4857
  • Karma: +2619917/-766
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #155 on: March 24, 2008, 02:24:52 AM »
And in case I wasn't clear, this is not in anyway a slam to the PCAD, they and you are excellent. My concern is E-911. They don't know the county and apparently the enhanced map is worthless.
I have it on good authority that the Hokey-Pokey really IS what it's all about.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #156 on: March 24, 2008, 03:00:09 AM »
If you will send me a PM with date and information I will sure investigate why this happened.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #157 on: March 24, 2008, 03:01:55 AM »
And thank you, because I need to know these kind of things. I appreciate it very much.

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #158 on: March 24, 2008, 03:11:35 AM »
And thank you, because I need to know these kind of things. I appreciate it very much.

Gary it happens all the time.  Ask your crews for feedback.  I don't have your freq on my home scanner but I heard enough when I was fulltime on our scanner at the office to be able to say this.

Offline jsb66763

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +1007/-5
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #159 on: March 24, 2008, 03:55:19 AM »
Since pennies are being thrown, here are my two cents.  As far as duplications go, I agree. 
1) I have always been an advocate for a central dispatch center [similar to Rolla Central] for all emergency services in the county.  I am not saying I think Comm Center is all that because I am not.  However, each department that has dispatchers has the same problem.  No matter how good their dispatchers are, there is always one or two that leave more to be desired.  Also, alot of the issue is emergency services, as well as other fields, have the opinion, it has always been done this way, why change?
     My way to correct this is begin a central dispatch center,  whether it is comm center or another entity.  For example, Texas County SO dispatches for the whole county but Wright-Tex 911 handles the 911 calls.  If I am incorrect, please educate me.  In order to address the training issue, a director has to be approved by the administrators of all participating agencies and a training manual approved by all the admistrators is used for training.  If someone doesn't cut the mustard, then use the knife.  If the director does not correct the problem, the knife works that way too. 
     In order to allow the dispatchers to dispatch, each law enforcement agency should have full-time MULES entry clerks.  For the SO [as an example], a MULES entry clerk could handle CCW and civil process login if they did not have to answer the phone and dispatch deputies.   
     Right now, there are seven full-time and one part-time position filling the above positions.  If the comm plan was adopted, that elimates three and one-half salaries.  That is at least a deputy and a jailer position available, if not more.  However, that is just a pipe dream.
2) The SWAT team is also a duplication.  I believe the county needs a SWAT team but also think it should include members of all departments that it would serve, after an entry examination.  For instance, physical, psychological, and criminal background checks.  Also, each applicant would need to be sponsored by the administrator for his/her department.  Meaning, the department would fund its own SWAT members.  I believe this would allow departments to participate that normally would not have the opportunity.   
I think having one agency [in this area, at least] puts an added strain on departments with strains already.  Everyone is saying they need manpower but what if there is a SWAT call out.  For the county, that could be disastrous.  Many of our full time personnel are SWAT members.  Who are you going to call to cover the road during the daytime when most of our reserves work should an emergency develop. 
Again this is a pipe dream and will not happen.  The attitude of why change would strike again.  Then there is the status of interdepartmental cooperation [as far as who is peeved at who] and who would be the team leader(s)...
These are just a few of my ideas.  Yes, a LE tax would fix the problem temporarily but crime is going to continue to balloon.  Without a proactive plan on expansion and funding, once the SO gets to where it should be...is that going to be enough.  I fully support the tax but think there are questions that should be addressed. 
       

Offline peon

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: +3378/-154
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #160 on: March 24, 2008, 07:29:58 AM »
in your last sentence your logic completely failed me.  okay, you say that the LE tax would fix the problem, but only temporarily, because crime is going to continue to balloon.  the way i see it, the crime is going to be better controlled, and as the county grows, so does the amount the tax brings in.  at least the way i am seeing it.  as far as the duplication issue, i know bupkiss about the narcotics and swat, but the dispatchers are the only way to go is the county sheriffs department.  i have dealt with and am completely disappointed by the dispatchers and their way of doing things in the 911 center.

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #161 on: March 24, 2008, 02:11:21 PM »
JSB you have a good plan IF the Central Dispatch Center was competent!  That is the problem.  You know as well as I do of all the issues that would have to be taken care of to do that. In face I think you and I have discussed this same issue before.  That is why I have been against it.  Not because of the interagency thing but of the competence thing.

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #162 on: March 24, 2008, 08:35:12 PM »
Gentlemen the issue is much more than dispatch. Granted the 911 center will dispatch us for free. Their mission is to take emergency calls and transfer them to the correct agency and if necessary assist several agencies working on the same incident.
But we are the chief MULES terminal for the county. All circuit court paperwork is entered or checked by us not 911. If you want to talk about savings then please deduct the $50,000.00 or so that the 911 center will charge the county to provide MULES service. Since the dispatch for us runs about $103,000.00 for this year (from memory may be slightly off) you are cut to $53,000.00 in "savings". Last bid by 911 for MULES service to the County was $32,000.00 something in 2004 and since then we have added another 1,500 or more pieces of MULES paper to the mix. In 2007 the Sheriff's Dispatch ran more MULES transactions then the 911 center. I will dig up the numbers if you want them.
And what do we do with the 63,055 people who called the PCSD last year? Who answers the phone?
How about the 20,000 people who asked for service at the front window? What do we do for them? Who talks to them?
At 3AM in the morning who accepts the bond for someone who wants out of jail? And please do not tell me the lone jail staff member on duty, the only good guy in the courthouse at 3AM. Think about that for a minute before you answer.
As the Sheriff I want command and control over my department when the brown stuff hits the fan blades on short notice. I do not want to go through another agency just to tell my people what to do or where to go. Or to get their feedback about a delicate situation relayed through another agency.
I do not see any of this as "duplication of effort". The jobs are not the same and each requires a unique approach.
And yes after 38 years in LE my mind is set in a number of ways. I will consider new ideas but if they fall short in my opinion then I will reject them.
             JB

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #163 on: March 24, 2008, 09:15:34 PM »
SWAT Team Duplication: A SWAT team in a rural area is an elite speciality. The team will practice far more than deploy. It is well known specialized teams who get rare deployment "need" those few deployment experiences to gain knowledge and experience. Our firefighter friends have learned this and that is why we have the development of special teams on each dept.; rather than duplication. The St. Robert JETT team is such a team that did include officers from various depts. I do not know why we need two. That will in fact require money and that money could be used for regular duty officers. Besides, JB calls in the Troop F (I believe it is) Highway Patrol SWAT team anyway. Isn't that your usual policy JB? I know at least a couple of scenes I was at that was your plan.
You know I disagree with you on dispatch. Not a big deal when you have the money. But, when you say no patrol officers, then that raises the question of free dispatch vs a larger budget. As I previously said, when you have money all of these things are great.    But, basics come first. I'd rather see officers on our county roads patrolling and practicing community policing concepts.

Offline crazy horse

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 596
  • Karma: +513416/-1802
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #164 on: March 24, 2008, 09:24:34 PM »
YT, when I comment on here I am doing so as a Pulaski County citizen and (past) county commissioner. But, many people know I am the ambulance administrator. Therefore I feel it would be wrong for me to criticize an organization. This makes it difficult to answer your post as well as I could. I have to be general here. But, I know of one death and more near deaths as a result of poor dispatch and this was not 9-1-1. That is all I can say out of professionalism.
9-1-1 is great from the caller point of view. Elderly people, like my grandmother who can't see to dial all of those numbers, can easily get help. Small children can be taught to dial 9-1-1 if a parent goes unconscious. 9-1-1 saves lives.
 
From the dispatch point of view, I believe all of us should strive for continuous improvement. We should all work together to make 9-1-1 dispatch better.

Offline oldcowpoke

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 630
  • Karma: +716480/-5633
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #165 on: March 24, 2008, 09:50:32 PM »
This should be in large red letters and flashing. Neon would be good:

We are the chief MULES terminal for the county. All circuit court paperwork is entered or checked by us not 911. If you want to talk about savings then please deduct the $50,000.00 or so that the 911 center will charge the county to provide MULES service. Since the dispatch for us runs about $103,000.00 for this year (from memory may be slightly off) you are cut to $53,000.00 in "savings". Last bid by 911 for MULES service to the County was $32,000.00 something in 2004 and since then we have added another 1,500 or more pieces of MULES paper to the mix. In 2007 the Sheriff's Dispatch ran more MULES transactions then the 911 center. I will dig up the numbers if you want them.

And what do we do with the 63,055 people who called the PCSD last year? Who answers the phone?

How about the 20,000 people who asked for service at the front window? What do we do for them? Who talks to them?

At 3AM in the morning who accepts the bond for someone who wants out of jail? And please do not tell me the lone jail staff member on duty, the only good guy in the courthouse at 3AM. Think about that for a minute before you answer.
   

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #166 on: March 24, 2008, 10:37:14 PM »
SWAT: Once again command and control. When you need SWAT the brown stuff is already flying around. My team responding to my orders right now! Besides what if we have two incidents at once and one of them is in St. Robert? Where do you think the JETT folks will go? And that was not a slam on them they are all my friends and they all carry my commission in case of incidents in the county. But this county is changing and I would like to plan for the future. It would also be nice to be able to back the JETT team up if they take on a major case that drags out for many hours.
The cost factor is not as great as you think. Most of the gear was left over from JT's former team and a donor has kicked in the rest of the money that was needed. My only real cost so far has been ammo but we needed that training badly for all officers. The big kicker for us has been the necessary training time.
The training has been spread around and as a result my average Deputy has increased his/her skill level as a result of that training.
Troop F takes hours to arrive and be set up to respond. We very well may not have hours. If a gunman walks into the high school tomorrow with the intent to kill we better stop him in the first five to ten minutes or CNN will love the story. So the first two or three road bunnies to arrive better know what they are doing and be able to do. SWAT training helps build their skill level and their belief that they "can do."  Both are critical issues in such an emergency.
CH in terms you will understand do you want to respond a BLS unit or an ALS unit to an emergency when you do not know exactly what you have but you are told it is serious?
         JB

Offline jsb66763

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +1007/-5
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #167 on: March 25, 2008, 12:24:19 AM »
So it seems I have succeeded in stirring a hornet's nest.  Yankee Trader is saying even the dispatcher's he trained are incompetent since even the county is not qualified to be the central dispatch center for the county.  As far as MULES entry, it would be a 24 hour service by the agency with the warrant or paper which means if the county is not the central dispatch center, it would still have someone at the window 24/7 entering MULES.
As far as SWAT, you could have more than one team if all the agencies participated.  You could also have several officers from different shifts on each team so the impact is not so harsh.

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #168 on: March 25, 2008, 01:43:26 AM »
So it seems I have succeeded in stirring a hornet's nest.  Yankee Trader is saying even the dispatcher's he trained are incompetent since even the county is not qualified to be the central dispatch center for the county. 

Nope JSB....they are not incompetent.  I stand by my statement that the ones that I trained are the best in the region. If they were'nt then they didn't stick around.  But they were trained as Law Enforcement dispatchers.  Only EMS I required was CPR certification.

If they were to be the central dispatch agency they would be required to have EMD certification, 40 hr cert and much more.  I would go as far as requiring them to be certified as First Responders and if had the funds for training even EMTB. The training required is higher then LE. 

But you know it boils down to attitude, professionalism and desire.  No matter how much training and certifications one has it will not substitute for staying on top of things like paying attention to ALL the radio frequencies, the MULES printer, talk on the phone and to people at the window perhaps all at once besides all the assigned tasks that have to be done.  You have to treat it more than "just a job".  And that attitude has to be in the entire center. 

Offline jsb66763

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +1007/-5
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #169 on: March 25, 2008, 02:44:06 AM »
Oh, I see.  Then I would be satisfied with a central law enforcement dispatch center.  Truthfully, [no offense to other emergency services] I couldn't normally care less what they are doing unless it affects me.  If someone is having chest pains, it doesn't affect me.  Unless those chest pains are because they were a robbery victim.  Which the chest pains still don't affect me, but it is another person I have to account for in my crime scene. 
My only thought with a full central dispatch is that maybe we could eliminate some of the conflicts that occur between fire, EMS and law enforcement.  Mainly evidence integrity issues and having everyone and their cousin at a crime scene.
However I still think every agency would have to participate for it to be truly successful.  For instance, a central dispatch center could appropriate large numbers of officers to a situation in a few seconds, instead of having to use the phone.  An example would be the Oasis shooting.  If there was a central dispatch, every agency in the county would know what was going on in real time, making it easier for officers to be where they are needed.  Also, depending on the incident, there could be a central frequency to use besides ones that other agencies in the area may overpower. 
Food for thought. 

Offline jsb66763

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +1007/-5
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #170 on: March 25, 2008, 02:52:06 AM »
And to address the telephone call issue, calls for service would go through the central agency, whoever that might be.  As far as calls for the jail, deputies, CCW, etc..., an automated system would filter the calls and forward them to where they need to go. 
For instance, if I wanted to call Deputy Smuccatelli [not a real guy by the way], I would call the number and press the appropriate number.  If he was unavailable, I would leave a message for him/her to call.  If the deputy did not call, it is awful hard for him to argue that dispatch did not give him the message. 
Now that I think of it, that may be a good thing to have even if there isn't a central dispatch.  If someone needs the police, they dial a certain extension.  But for everything else, a computer will transfer you.  Would make the deputies a little more responsible to the public.

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #171 on: March 25, 2008, 03:16:22 AM »
Don't know what you are getting at JSB.  I never said I was against a central dispatching center.  I believe with proper management and leadership a central dispatching agency would do a good job. 

Offline jsb66763

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +1007/-5
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #172 on: March 25, 2008, 03:48:00 AM »
Apparently, I'm not understanding your statements.  Comm Center seems to be unqualified because they cater mainly to fire and EMS.  You said they are not trained to be law enforcement dispatchers.  So I said I would be satisfied with a LE dispatch center that every LE agency would use. 
However, I believe if it happens, I will be so old and senile that I won't get to enjoy it.  But I don't think it will happen.  There are just too many moving parts for the budget right now.  I just think it would be nice to have.  But it would also be nice to have MDT's [in car MULES and CAD computers].  Oh well, I will quit while I still have some hope that someday my wishlist will be completed.

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #173 on: March 25, 2008, 12:10:57 PM »
Who is gonna cough up the $50K the 911 center will charge for the MULES?  Ooops there goes any savings.

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #174 on: March 25, 2008, 01:33:20 PM »
Apparently, I'm not understanding your statements.  Comm Center seems to be unqualified because they cater mainly to fire and EMS.  You said they are not trained to be law enforcement dispatchers.  So I said I would be satisfied with a LE dispatch center that every LE agency would use. 
However, I believe if it happens, I will be so old and senile that I won't get to enjoy it.  But I don't think it will happen.  There are just too many moving parts for the budget right now.  I just think it would be nice to have.  But it would also be nice to have MDT's [in car MULES and CAD computers].  Oh well, I will quit while I still have some hope that someday my wishlist will be completed.

I guess you aren't understanding.  I have never said anything about Comm Center in relation to EMS and Fire.  Heck you know I am a former Deputy Fire Chief. Our dept. and all others in the county were dispatched by Butler PD.  Central dispatch theory.  If I see you in the office when I come in tomorrow I will explain in person. 

Offline ATSME

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: +11/-2
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #175 on: March 26, 2008, 05:52:20 AM »
Fedup, you are precisely correct. The presiding commissioner is responsible, just as the title suggest, to preside over the meetings. Then, if the two associate commissioners tie the presiding may break the tie. That is actually Missouri state law and correct procedure.
 
ATSME, there are three county commissioners.
Two were Crismon and Thornsberry when the boat was sold, who was the third commissioner when it sold?

Offline Valor7

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2543
  • Karma: +190488/-54
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #176 on: March 26, 2008, 11:40:27 AM »
Farnham was the third Commissioner at the time BUT he was in the hospital and had just had serious back surgery, he missed a number of meetings in a row.

Offline ATSME

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: +11/-2
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #177 on: March 26, 2008, 04:53:07 PM »
Thanks JB.  Where you said, Take all the $$$$ you want from Louie. I expect he will fight back with gold bearing lawyers to protect his interest and in the long run will probably not be worth much to the county.
Does anyone remember last year, louie was interviewed (may have been daily guide) and he said he didn't have a problem with LE tax.....but then JB could be right, I think louie says one thing and does another.

Offline Pete

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1505
  • Karma: +90258/-1279
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #178 on: March 26, 2008, 05:29:37 PM »
And to address the telephone call issue, calls for service would go through the central agency, whoever that might be.  As far as calls for the jail, deputies, CCW, etc..., an automated system would filter the calls and forward them to where they need to go. 
For instance, if I wanted to call Deputy Smuccatelli [not a real guy by the way], I would call the number and press the appropriate number.  If he was unavailable, I would leave a message for him/her to call.  If the deputy did not call, it is awful hard for him to argue that dispatch did not give him the message. 
Now that I think of it, that may be a good thing to have even if there isn't a central dispatch.  If someone needs the police, they dial a certain extension.  But for everything else, a computer will transfer you.  Would make the deputies a little more responsible to the public.

A automated system is not what I want. I want to talk to a person and not press 1 for English. That is just not wrong!!!
If your going to be dumb, you better be tough!

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: TAXES FOR LAW ENFORCMENT
« Reply #179 on: March 26, 2008, 05:56:36 PM »
A automated system is not what I want. I want to talk to a person and not press 1 for English. That is just not wrong!!!

Unfortunately Pete our County is one of the few Sheriff's Depts. that doesn't have an automated system.  Can't afford it.  Even the small County I came from which has a Sheriff's Dept. less than half ours has an automated system AND a Law Enforcement Sales Tax along with a new profitable jail that replaced the old decrepit one.