Remarks by Elizabeth Robbins
54 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 2 of 3
And then the other question is, when the station was closed, in a typical closure, I would expect that the savings would be all of the employees salaries are saved because that station is no longer open, but in this case, all of the employees in the raw station were transitioned to another station is that correct that's correct so. Is it could you say that Ross is still paying for all of these employees, even though they're no longer ross's employees.
I just want to say that I think that it's disappointing that this reallocation effort didn't take advantage of a total reallocation. the cost sharing hasn't been evaluated at all since 2012. And while the group that negotiated that contract in 2012 agreed that that initial agreement was fair, it doesn't seem fair based on parcels, based on population, based on service calls. And I think it's disappointing that this current reallocation didn't, wasn't a broader discussion into what each town should be paying.
Julie, I think I deserve a chance to comment after that. I certainly have never had any intention to malign Jason Weber. I simply pointed out that he had assured the Ross community on multiple occasions And in and in multiple PowerPoint presentations that if the raw station closed Ross would have essentially the same. Medical emergency response for 85% of the calls, because the ambulance would be present in Ross well the data, even before the station closed from a full year 2023 as written in the 2024 city gate ambulance study. showed that the ambulance response time was already 9.9 minutes,…
I have a question about the whole process. I mean, you're coming to us with your work and asking for council direction. I mean, I don't know that, I feel like we should be working more closely with Gensler asking the CAC for direction because I think that they're more expert and they can get better answers to some of these questions. So I wonder if there's a way to work more closely, you know, to have Gensler figure out, make their recommendations, have the CAC give their recommendations because I think those are our experts and I don't feel like I'm an expert.
I thought we had already heard from Gensler that to incorporate everything and leave room for a fire station, that that was going to be the plan. So I thought we were basically already there, that we've already discussed that there would be shared spaces, because that's how Gensler could make the fire station and the paramedic and the administration space work. So are we not there?
Well, I'll very quickly. Oh, I agree. There should be shared space. Done. Okay. For the CAC plan.
There's just one clarification that each town for the fire JPA is expected to build and maintain its own fire station. So we wouldn't expect other towns to contribute to our fire station. The paramedic authority building is different. I think it's very generous and great that Ross is building a beautiful paramedic authority building for the eight entities that will be using it. No one else has offered to do that so I think I hope that that will you know that in the integration will go over well with the paramedic authority it's going to be a beautiful building and as mentioned the paramedic…
I don't see that as a roadblock, actually. I mean, I think we've all agreed that we should be moving forward on this CAC plan, which integrates the fire and paramedic facilities. And I think Chris is just suggesting that we discuss in closed session what would it look like if we move ahead with that and we have some way of knowing what amendments to the lease might be needed. And I do agree that it would be nice to have that to know where we stand legally before we announce our plan because it isn't what the paramedics are expecting. Well, maybe they are because they've watched the meeting,…
So, you know, backing up a little bit, we can either call a special election or we can appoint someone. I think I think that we all agree that calling a special election is simply not feasible because that would be March, which means our council will have four people until April or May when the next person is sworn in. So that leaves us appointing someone. I really don't understand the timing of this. I think we'd heard way back in May Councilmember Kershaw was interested in resigning and had he resigned then there would have been time to put this seat. the two years remaining on the ballot,…
I'm surprised that you're saying that. City Council Chambers, You know that this that you're making a comment about the transparency or openness it, of course, having applications is transparent and open.
similar language yeah right may I ask a question about the process so the interviews occur in public and then is there is there do members of the public have the ability to comment on the applicants or is it just a council discussion about who we select it's a standard public comment that we would normally have for items so it would be an appointment item you get public comment So we'd have all the interviews and then public comment at the end of the interviews, if there is any, and then we discuss and choose?
You know, at some point, I know, of course, you have a lot to do, but at some point, it would be nice to hear an update about the Branson traffic situation. You know, we haven't heard for well over a year how that's going. So I think it'd be nice just to hear what Branson says about how their traffic and, you know, crossing monitors are working out.
I I would wonder if you might withdraw your second in part because the the community is moving forward with the CAC plan which is similar to what friends had had started and it feels like this sort of is divisive it and moves us back to where we were whereas I feel like City Council Chambers with with Gensler working on the CAC plan where we have something that that works for most people in the Community, because it. It leaves room for a fire station, but doesn't require the operation. And we can come together on that, as if we're debating basically suing friends.
I just have one comment. I think it would be really helpful if the project updates were more concise. For example, Chris, it was really helpful towards the end when you said, here's the direction I need. But I felt like we were in the weeds for the longest time about all these project details. And we only heard at the end, specifically, here's where we are. So I just wonder if there's a way to have the updates more concise. That's all.
City Council Chambers, I didn't understand you said something about reverting to the baseline program what what is baseline I don't see baseline here yeah.
And so but that that baseline is not an option the baseline is not an op well again the baseline is an option it's it's one that we feel is more difficult unless we reduce the program and you know I I know at one point it seemed like a lot of the program it was everyone's wish list but maybe it could be reduced is is that a possibility to reduce some things to make it fit
City Council Chambers, And then the. City Council Chambers, Study one. is doesn't have a fire station up front it phases the buildings in is that correct.
So there's space, but it's not actually intended to be used as a fire station until a whole separate phase.
Okay. And then study two is the one where you've added administration to the current town hall, and then kept all of the public works in the existing building. We're recommending rebuilding public works, but all of the public safety.
Mayor Mrakas, So i'm not quite sure why, why are we talking about phasing isn't it less expensive to build everything up front all at once.
Okay, any, Elizabeth? Shouldn't we also be looking tonight at the question that's come up, do we really want to keep trying to put this entire full program into this site, or should we consider what tradeoffs we might make to keep everything in one building and not phase? That's not really sort of on the table right now, it seems like. You've been given a program and you're trying to fit that program into the site, but I don't think we've had a chance yet to talk about, well, if we want to keep the site more or less as it is, and it may be just as one building, a one-time construction, where…
And you've been given a much bigger program than I think we have right now. And so it's not fitting. And with the council and the community haven't really talked about that yet. Understood.
I think it would be helpful to hear what community members think about where should we move. Do we make some inquiries about the program before we settle on a study plan? Or, you know, I would be interested in what community members think about this.
City Council Chambers, Is the speaking of the base, are we talking about the same size fire engine going forward as what we have now, or is there something different.
Okay. So I have a couple of comments. I mean, one is I don't understand where staff got the idea that we shouldn't, that we should be looking at a no fire station option. I thought the whole point of this was there are differences of opinion. Friends presented something plausible in December and January, and then the CAC presented a plan, and the council unanimously endorsed it, supported it, and it had a fire station, and it was never decided how the operations would be funded, but the entire council agreed that this CAC plan brings the community together, works for everyone, there's an…