![[Marshall Democrat-News]](http://www.marshallnews.com/images/nameplate-small.png){kind=small}
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (72)The site was one of three put forward by the city of Marshall as possible sites for the new centralized dispatch center.
The 9-1-1 Commission last week chose the site adjacent to the new Shirley Martin Community Center/Nicholas Beazley Aviation Museum as the location of the proposed center.
The selling price set by the council is $38,352 per acre. The property price is the same the city paid for the property in 2007, according to Latimer.
Latimer said there are four acres of land there, but she believes "they are not going to need the whole thing."
With the airport just west of the property, the center will not have to build its own landing pad for helicopters, one of the features the commission is considering for the new facility.
She said she received a phone call Wednesday morning confirming that the commission "has accepted the offer."
The decision was made by the 9-1-1 commission in closed executive session Tuesday night, May 6, at a special meeting held at Marshal's Municipal Court building.
At the council meeeting Monday, Gabe Ramsey, Ward 2, and Barbara Utlaut, Ward 1, made the motions Monday night to send the council into executive session to discuss legal actions, causes of action or litigation and confidential or privileged communications between the city and its attorneys and the purchase or sale of real estate.
Latimer said the purchase agreement is for three years, so the 9-1-1 commission would not pay for the property until the end of the third year.
"This will give them the opportunity to get the center built and everything up and running," she said.
Contact Rachel Harper at marshallcity@socket.net
FYI..........
Finally, someone who makes complete sense. I agree with everything you said. It will be an uphill battle, but this center will work reguardless and I can guarantee it will be equipped with the best of everything........INCLUDING AN EXHAUST FAN!!!!
aneditor: Thanks for the response and I will take the olive branch with gratitude.
While we've been at this discussion, I've been looking at poynter.org for other opinions on reporter blogging and found it's a mixed bag, some opposed and some in support, which is about what I expected to find.
One of the reasons for posting is to answer questions our readers raise that I didn't think to ask in a particular story. In the particular instance of this story, there has been a lot of misinformation and plenty of confusion on a sensitive topic. Rather than try to run another story in our limited space, I've tried to answer those questions or comments more immediately, I suppose, in an attempt to be helpful. Although I do occasionally lapse into personal comment, overall, I'm really just trying to get the accurate information out there quickly. I'm a very, very curious person and I love doing the research when I have time.
Thanks for your comments. The invitation to critique is still open. :)
Kathy... there is no level of discourse. I should not have attacked your writing skills in my attempt to convey my belief that you nor any other reporter or editor should comment on a reader forum/board about an issue when that issue is news and your paper is covering it.
It's your Web site, do with it what you will. I just feel, as a journalist, it behooves ALL newspapers to do what they can to make sure ALL newspapers look credible. I don't think posting responses on a message forum is the best way to go about that. If there's a follow-up to a story, do a story. If you weren't able to tell the whole story in one installment, do a follow-up story. But posting a few paragraphs here and there on a message board isn't reporting, it's posting and it's confusing for a reader. They're in the habit of looking on page 1 for their news, not on a message board.
For the paper bag comment, I'm sorry. It was uncalled for. There, my olive branch for the day. And on this issue, I've made (I think) my point.
aneditor: One of the failures of email, blogging and other means of electronic communication is that emotion either does not register or is easily misinterpreted. My post to you regarding critique of what I write was sincere. I'm an old dog being taught new tricks in the newspaper business, and I would welcome another learning opportunity. Since you are an editor, and plainly interested in correcting our mistakes, I thought you might welcome the teaching opportunity, if only in the interest of improving our level of discourse. Obviously, I was wrong.
Now see, Eric... I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. Then an employee and a cheetah go all postal. And off topic. And the latter gets insulting. After you told me not to. Odd, no?
Ms. Fairchild, I'll pass on the invite to read your stories and columns and have an email party regarding my thoughts on the mistakes you might have made in them. I do that for a living where I am. I do it just for fun where you are.
In my original post, what I SHOULD have said is that I don't agree with a newspaper reporter, regardless of whether he or she wrote the story or not, weighing in on a blog or a conversation board with their opinion or reaction to other opinions. It kind of kills a tad of credibility, IMHO. We're supposed to make sure we stay clear of even a hint of bias. Put the news in the news story and let the natives sort out their opinions. I see others have stated on other posts with other stories and on the "Speak Out" board that they feel the same.
Oh, yes...geez, cain't believe I almosed overseed dis:
aneditor, while you were proof-reading, did you happen to notice that little note about staying on topic? dat b da hippokrice i b blabbn bout.
aneditor,
Your parents should have invested in ethanol.
Please don't use your high opinion of yourself to justify your hypocrisy. It is you, after all, schooling others in vocabulary. Once again, as you are an anonymous poster, your credibility is about as valuable to me as a tattoo on my eyeball. Your very screen name would lend one to believe you have at least *some* leniancy--two words, no space, no capitalization; or.......do those rules of grammar not apply to clever, self-absorbed screen names backed by condescending anynomity? Guess we're lucky you're not THEeditor:)
I guess us dumb hillbilly folk in these here parts are jest darn tootin' lucky to have edjumicated fellas like youins to go round ta hunerds a papers a day fillin in folk on talkin good.
aneditor: You've made clear you believe my writing is substandard. I have neither your 20 years of experience in the news field nor your education in journalism. My college education was in business and in the legal field, my work experience in information technology.
I invite you to read stories and columns I have actually written. Then feel free to contact me at my email address ( marshallhealth@socket.net) with constructive criticism of stories and columns I did write, instead of an anonymous blast about my "inability to write her way out of a paper bag," tied to a story I did not write. FTLOG
Got it. I'll be more careful or at least less obvious.
Cheetah, please don't attempt to school me in the "protocols of journalism." My parents paid for those classes 20 years ago and I've made a career of it since.
One might argue that "protocol" doesn't allow for reporters to cover an issue (regardless of whether or not she's the author of this piece, she's covered the issue) to then get on a comment board and hash out their opinions on an issue he or she is covering. We're supposed to report the news, not be it.
Mr. Crump.... I'm well aware news comes in "doses" in a daily newspaper. It just seems to come in smaller and more often than not incomplete doses in yours.
In closing, I'm sure Ms. Fairchild' talents are perfectly suited for the "news"paper at which she's employed. Enough said.
Differences of opinion (example above): Fine.
Insults (see below): Not acceptable.
So many points to make, so little space:
FYI--Kudos, congrats, and AMEN.
aneditor--Kathy and Eric (along with every other editor and/or reporter--including you) have a voice on issues beyond the confines of reporting the news. If you are, in fact, an editor you should know there are protocols of journalism that don't necessarily allow for personal, biased opinion in the article itself. Are these folks not privy to the luxury of personal opinion that you and I enjoy? I'd point out at this time, not only to they offer personal opinion on issues outside of their responsibilities to the news, they do so using their real names--further objecting themselves to scrutiny. Frankly, I think they do an excellent job reporting factual information that isn't tainted by their own personal bias or agenda.
To everyone else--my apologies for yesterday's satire. I hope you found it entertaining. The point was, there is too much "trying to make news" where none yet exists. I would have loved some reference to an actual conversation about any tower or costs of one; I'd gladly offer discourse on the issue. As of yet, it isn't an *issue* in the news; it was an imaginary mark to attain in the unnecessary peeing contest.
prd123, I believe I heard that no police, fire or other emergency services could be located with a specified distance of the 991 center.
First, Kathy didn't write this story -- and this story is focused on one particular moment in a long process and isn't intended to cover every angle -- but she has covered the 911 commission and has done as much research as time allows to find answers to questions people bring up here. Finding answers to questions is her job and she does it quite well!
Second, anyone who's familiar with newspaper publishing knows that space limitations prevent full explorations of any issue in any given story. A newspaper isn't a magazine. It isn't a book. We add to stories incrementally with followup stories or, as is the case these days, with posts to web forums.
Finally, you're welcome to your opinion about Kathy's writing. I disagree. I've worked with her for some time and she routinely astounds me with the quality of her work. Still, not everyone likes every writer, no matter how good she might be. Even the likes of Alice Walker or Eudora Welty or Molly Ivins, etc., leave some people cold. So it goes.
prd123-no I am not on any of the boards, and I am from Marshall and proud of that fact. This has turned into an ugly situation when it didn't have to be that way. All that is happening now is "pitting neighbor against neighbor". The people that ran in April were NOT elected by the public whether that is good or bad. It's a done deal. What I see us dealing with is CAVE people. That is, Citizens Against Virtually Everything.
To FYI I say AMEN!!!
If Kathy Fairchild could write her way out of a paper bag, she wouldn't have to post every 15 minutes here to explain what her story should have made clear in the first place.
I have sat quietly and read the blogs posted on Saline County's new 911 and the issues pertaining to the ELECTED 911 Board Members with gritted teeth for far too long. I have finally reached the point where I feel that I had to put some information on this blog that many of you seem to be oblivious of.
Why the need for a centralized 911 Center? Though the 911 center will not provide tours of its interior due to new security measures after Sept. 11, "tea Parties" or allow the public to walk off the street and walk into the actual dispatch room, it has to be centrally located to allow the public access to come into the addressing department and get their new 911 address information. I helped my parents when they recently moved into another county with 911, and was advised that we had to go, in person, to the 911 center there in order to get their new address. When I asked their mapping department if we could take care of it online, he calmly..and intelligently..informed me, their policy was to have the individuals wanting 911 address information, bring two forms of indentification with them in order to obtain their 911 address, to protect individuals themselves, and the 911 entity providing personal physical living location information of a citizen, to an unidentified individual. He proceeded to tell me that doing so prevented someone from emailing them, giving them false information in order to track someone they intended to cause physical harm to,stalk, or otherwise harrass, and also, it assisted in making sure, by showing the person who needed their new address a map, that they, the 911 Center, were getting their address correct.
What does it matter what zip code it is in? Is the center going to bring one city a particualr esteem or bring in loads of money from drawing people from all over to come see it or work in it? No!!!
I think it ridiculous to even think that some people are even thinking the public has an input, as if the general public has the training or first hand knowledge on how the building should be built for security measures, how the building should look..and who should run the place. How would any of us know what equipment is needed, or how many people are needed to work there or why it doesn't need to be located next to a particular type of business such as an industrial plant without us specifically being trained to identify such "suitable building sites"..??? Maybe once it is all built, some of you then think you will be able to tell everyone inside the place how to do their jobs, too?
Were the board members NOT voted in by a public election that all the citizens of Saline County got to participate in if they so chose to do so? Did all the people who are complaining on this blog not vote them in?
I cannot understand for the life of me what it matters where it, the 911 Center, is located as long as whenever I need to call them because my baby is not breathing or that my house is on fire and my children are trapped in their bedrooms, or someone is trying to break into my house and they answer the phone to help me that the dispatchers answer the phone and send help to me..I don't think the zip code the 911 Center is in will mean a thing to me at that moment when or if I ever have to make that call.
And as far as the money issue is concerned..I work hard for my money and pay taxes as well...but I would sleep better at night knowing the new 911 center is being put in with the best equipment money can buy, has the best people out there answering the phones to help me if I ever need it and is available to ALL the citizens of Saline County or anyone traveling through our county. What is peace of mind worth to you??? It's priceless to me. I bet you all that when the new 911 center is complete that phones won't ring into that new center, any different no matter what zip code in Saline County or otherwise, you are calling from.
Just my opinion but I think we elected the 911 Commission members to ensure that All citizens of Saline County would receive a 911 Center, no matter where it is located, that it would be staffed with trained and knowledgable personel. Lets allow them to do their job instead of holding them up with ridiculous banter that most of us don't have the 911 training to be voicing our opinions over in the first place..I guess what I am saying in conclusion is that WE have chosen BY PUBLIC VOTE the people to represent us and build this new center and though we may not be privi to all the details, WE CHOSE for these people to be in the positions they are in to meet as a group of minds and make the best decisions for all of us.
It seems that the 911 board or the majority of them have caused quite a bit of dicussion and some of the thoughts are not very nice. After researching this issue, it does appear that the 911 board had guidelines they requested, but changed them to suit themselves, this is not fair, and for two of the board members who voted for the marshall site made some very dumb remarks, and the chairman is far from a chairman of anything, just a pawn. I feel they were not fair, but what is done is done, I don't believe it will change. So the best thing to do is drop the issue and everyone get on with business, what goes around will come around. So lets all try to get along and make the best of the issue. Those who voted for the site will have to live with themselves. They were elected to do a job and they done it, although I do not agree with it, its over. so lets all work for the good of the order, and continue to make Saline County a great place to live.
River Ratt- I don't think it's so much of "Slater" didn't get their way- or just 2-3 people. I believe they just wanted a fair leveled playing ground, and that in my eyes didn't happen. I honestly could care less about where the 911 center is located- however after reading the many articles and attending some of the meetings....things did not go as planned. Guidelines were not followed, guidelines were changed after the fact, the being able to "pick and choose" what sites to vote on, etc...and I don't agree with that. I'm not saying it should have went to Slater- there were a couple of other sites on the proposal that were good sites- no they didn't meet all the critera. BUT then again- neither did the site chosen.
stinkypinky- It has been said that the highway patrol will be in and out of the center, people building in the county will be in and out. It has been mentioned that an EOC will be in the building. So, yes- there will be traffic. As far as Slater having "competant dispatchers"....how about Marshall Fire dispatching for themselves and not using Marshall 911. Marshall's not competant "according to Rieves".
spareme- You must be on one or both of the boards, it appears that the 911 board is agreeing easily- 5-2 on the site, 6-1 on the cost, should be 6-1 on most issues whether it's in the best interest of all. The board can at least appoint a secondary board that represents the county for input. There are some that ran for the board in April that I am sure would serve. Also that original committee that got 911 on the ballot had a very good group. Of course this group didn't get appointed by the commissioners. How about them. The public is paying for it, they should have some input, unless it's going to be a "Build what Marshall Fire wants", a new truck sitting in it is looking more likely.
Also, when checking, Slater has water, sewer, electric, T-1 and fiber lines just like Marshall. I still think 38,000 an acre is too much, Mr. Fletcher....would you personally give that for your operations?? The City of Marshall caused much contraversy when they purchased it, now the 911 board is bailing them out at the entire county's expense.
Smokin' Cheetah:
ROTFLMAO
Holy crap (pun intended),
In my spew about the exhaust fan, I neglected to point out that there is also a CFM (cubic feet [of air] per minute) requirement, taking into consideration the ratio of the size of the fan to the area to be ventilated. Trust me.
The idiocrity of the human species is sometimes compelling...sometimes interesting...but always evident.
saline mo,
Wow! I give up on a good belch by this point and just deal with the stomach ache. But I must just be in one of those moods today.
I don't challenge your estimates. In fact, I could care less. I asked for a credible link to any discussion had by the commission on a tower. Your many references to the "tower" and the "cost" of one led me to believe I had missed some article outlining the discussion. I am thoroughly convinced otherwise at this point. You are the one who brought it up. You don't even have the decency to say "I don't have a link, I'm just saying...in my opinion....based on my experience.." But given that you are as anonymous as the rest of us, your personal knowledge and/or experience is about as credible as John Gotti on a witness stand. Again, no offense.
Basically, you have identified a possible need and you have decided to make it a topic of discussion, though it hasn't made the news in any way, shape, or form. Perhaps you are just trying to raise awareness. Kudos, but at this point here's what that amounts to:
I once stood next to John Reives when he accidentally let one slip. Stunk to high heaven. Now, I'm going to take this opportunity to raise awareness that this new facility is going to require a restroom--preferrably one with an industrial duty exhaust fan. Now, I can tell you from my many years in the business that said fan will be required to meet various building/electrical codes, and could even require a NEMA 4 Explosion Proof Enclosure that is Underwriter Laboratories tested and approved. Further, said fan cannot emit a frequency higher than XmHz (megahertz) and cannot have an audible noise level above XDb (decibels). Further, because of the possible close proximity to a water source (they have water in bathrooms you know) the circuit supplying power to said fan may require a Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter, as outlined and specified by the National Electric Code. You do care about this, right?
At this time I cannot provide you with a value for "X". You will have to rely on my many years of expertise on this matter.
I am jumping on your wagon, saline mo. I know for a FACT a bathroom will be required at this new dispatch center and I OPENLY OBJECT that said bathroom and associated costs have not been made public consideration on the part of the commission to the citizens of Saline County. I am outraged.
And to answer your question, NO. Probably Smokin' Cheetah signals:)
Stinky Pinky:
I am not real impressed with the reaction that has come out of Slater. But I also am convinced that the fuss is being made by only one or two or three people who didn't get there way. Slater is a good comunity and a lot of nice people and talented people live there. You don't need to be so unkind to the whole town just because a few people are throwing a fit about not getting thieir way.
Hey Saline Fire:
Does that mean that if there is a need, the water tower is not available now. That kind of reminds me of the grade school playground.
Would it be easier for the people around Sweet Springs to see the smoke signals from Marshall or Slater?
Saline Mo:
I am still dazed by this whole conversation. is there a water tower in Slater that is 200 feet tall. Last I knew there were two of them. Neither of them looked like they were more than a hundred feet tall. Do they allow antennas on top of the tanks? Don't know, and if you mounts your antennas below the tanks you're maybe 80 feet in the air. Again where does the 200 feet come from?
Why not check with "geo com" the company that is contracted to get 911 up and running. When reps from that company visited Slater, they said the site would be "excellent" and met all criteria. Of course, this statement was not presented in writing. However, there is a need for radio communications and a tower or some type of facility is needed. But why would the commission discuss such issues; they are not worried abour spending $100,000's on land so a few HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS more won't be a big deal. I am confident in my estimates and have spent over twelve years, early in my career,working with communication towers industry.I challenge you to prove that these estimates are incorrect. Find your own links and do your own research. How do you think they are going to communicate with the entire county, with smoke signals?
Sorry River Ratt...didn't mean to leave you out of the response:)
SalineFire pretty much answered that question. Again, I've seen where a tower was offered. I have not seen or heard any discussion of building one, or even that a tower is required for that matter. I don't even know if a water tower meets the design criteria. No clue...and so far, no one else is willing to provide any information (media reporters notwithstanding...you guys can only report what you know. I'm talking about the other bloggers).
I'm really having trouble understanding why this is such a complicated request.
SALINE MO--SHOW US A LINK TO ANY DISCUSSION ON BEHALF OR ON PART OF THE COMMISSION REGARDING ANY DISCUSSION OF A TOWER BEING BUILT AT ANY HEIGHT FOR ANY COST. Please?
Nanadot: That is exactly my point, and the very reason I keep asking who is talking about building a tower. So far the only printed word I've seen on the issue is from saline mo.
Kathy: That, as well, was exactly the point. I'm willing to concede there may be some foolishness involved, but as you can see from that link the placement of a tower is a great deal more than "just put it over there". For the construction of a tower to be such a complicated issue, why has there been no mention of it (as Nanadot pointed out) in any of the regulations/specs/criteria that have been discussed thus far?
Honestly, the only reason I ask is because saline mo has made such a big deal about this, I was beginning to think there may be some merit. No offense, saline mo, but I'm beginning to wonder.
The 'Atkinson Reporter' reported their town was looking at a 180" communications tower with a reported cost of $250,000.00. The $1000/ft price was quote by a sales rep from a tower construction company. Show me somewhere in print that you can get a lower price. We won't mention the yearly costs of inspections, maintenance that will be required; which would have been eliminated or very limited by using an existing facility. Of course you are welcome to contact some of these companies yourself and get some prices but I am not doing your research for you.
Cheetah - I followed your link and found the information interesting, but IMHO, what I believe this link shows is the circumstances under which the the commission must notify the FAA for permission to construct a tower at that height or higher, and includes a discussion of how that process works. It doesn't look like a ban on construction of a tower that size at all, at least to me. The figures shown illustrate the particular points of the discussion.
And what is the rationale for building a helipad? As noted earlier, there are already two in close proximity. Who's going to build all this? "Follow the money..."
Hey River,
The city of Slater gave the board an option of useing the water tower next to the property for the placement of the tower at no cost
Interesting link, Cheetah - I can't find any mention of these regs in the required site characteristics - were the airport authorities not consulted?
Smokin,
Do you know where the tower that Slater was going to give away is? Did they offer to build a tower? If they did the commission was nuts not to take the offer? I can't find out where that discussion started.
Smokin' This is a very important question thats needs to be addressed very soon! Thanks for the link
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_...
The above link will take you to the FAA's website. This page has a link to a PDF file, "Advisory Circular in PDF Format". I reference page 3, FIG. 3 with regard to tower limitations near airports.
If I'm digesting the information correctly, a 200ft tower is absolutely not going to happen. Still, I'd like to see some information on where this has been discussed.
stinky, this is a central dispatch center for the county. Nothing says it has to be central in the county! these things called repeaters send the traffic a long ways. The people outside Marshall dont apperciate the comments that they cant run a central dispatch. how do you already no the dispatchers will all live in Marshall?? You seem to be ahead of the game so far what do you see for the future you wise one? Also the marshall Folks are the one saying this should be open to the public for their addresses to be set up..its not the outsiders in the county we dont want anyone in there but well qualified personel with state of the art equipment. The people working there doesnt need to deal with the public.
River Ratt,
saline mo keeps making reference to a "tower" costing $200 Grand. I'm wondering where to find a credible source for this information. Most recently, saline mo "heard" this tower was to be nearly 200ft tall. I will point out again, with the close proximity to the airport, if this is even remotely true, someone better do some homework...
We did ask that question, and were told by commissioners that a helipad would provide a way to move dispatchers in and out of the 911 Center in the event other means of entry are not available. If, for example, Highway 65 became impassable due to storm damage and dispatchers couldn't drive in, a helipad at the center would be helpful.
Once again,
A bunch of koolaid drinkers that think this dispatch center is their's for the crumpet and tea parties. Believe me...YOU WILL NOT GET IN THAT PLACE!! Unless you have a bomb!!!or a tank. You people need to get your "stuff" straight and join the real world...Central location.....central dispatch......all locations covered by one number 9-1-1. Good god people...who wants to drive to the "end" of the county to go to work? All will benefit from this...of course the "closed minded" special interest groups that have nothing better to do but "bitch" about their being left out of being "important".....this thing better be built with the state of the art equipment and have "competant" dispatchers...none of which exist in Slater or ever will...........
What tower are you talking about?
HAHAHAHA HEHEHEHE
It was a simple request. I'll try it again.
LINK. TOWER. CREDIBLE. ANYONE?
I want to know the vote on excepting the acres in Marshall at the 38,000 plus an acre. Who voted with it and who didnt? Its amazing how this information has to be begged for. I also think its a great idea for everyone to see first hand what each site had to offer. Also what about the airport interfering with the dispatch? Just interested to know I would really like that firemen or ems personel to be able to hear where i live clear all over the county or even worse someone trying to invade my house and the officer responding can't get back up due to the fact hes in a hole in the county where interference stepped in, is the airport equipment going to interupt this?
I will return for a short observation, comment, and question about the 911 commission that I do not understand.
Why was the commission even considering a helipad for the facility? If I am not mistaken, there is a helipad at the Saline County Sheriff's Department and at Fitzgibbon Hospital.
What need would there be to have a helipad there?
Thanks saline mo. You're right, they do discourage visitors. This is not a place for social events, it is what is commonly known as Central Dispatch. Go to Columbia and see how "welcome" their center makes you feel!
prd123-I realize we won't agree on the site even though according to Mayor Latimer, there will be ample parking, use of the airport, etc. available to the center, besides the fact of fiber optic being at the property. These are all important considerations as well. However, if you don't realize the absurdity of your statement about letting the public decide the design the building, etc. you should probably think about that long and hard. If you have ever served on a board with more than 10 members, you know how hard it is to reach an agreement. While the public is trying to decide what kind of building is needed, there will certainly be enough time for Hell to freeze over. Have you seen the new ambulance building on the inside? Did you ever see the old building on the inside? I agree the new building is quite large, but in order to accomodate the larger trucks that are in the district's future, it has to be large. The building is full of "creature comforts" but after the old building, the staff deserves to have those things while they "live" there.
Kathy - I DO belong to my rural fire department. I DO support the bake sales/dinners/etc. I DID vote. I HAVE tried to learn and participate in the public discourse. The first time, I was told to my face to "go back where you came from". I have heard other newcomers of less than a decade who have had similar and worse experiences. I have been told "not to rock the boat, cause bad things can happen out here and nobody's the wiser"... And you wonder why the county is losing population?
I have learned a lot from John Q, Smokin'Cheetah, prd123, saline mo and others. I enjoy the conversation. I like where I live. I like my neighbors. I think it is important to participate in civic life - but trust me, if I am not welcome, I won't beat your door down.
When I moved here two years ago, I was pleasantly surprised at how welcoming people were, so my experience was different from yours. I didn't come here to work at the paper, by the way - that was a later development.
In pointing out how few people vote, I was trying to show that voter apathy leads to unsatisfying results at all levels, and probably should have said so plainly. For as much comment about the 9-1-1 center as I've heard while I'm out in public as a reporter, and as a private person, I was disappointed beyond words at how few people actually made their wishes known by voting. They are either apathetic in general, or apathetic in particular about the call center's location. Either way, that's bad.
Well- I couldn't take it anymore and had to go visit all the proposed sites and see what a $38,000 acre looked like. First off- Not Impressed.
With all things being considered, I can see why Slater is not happy. Their site has no highway traffic, no manmade disasters, ample space for expansion, parking, offered use of tower for antennas, has water, sewer, concrete streets and last but not least, no cost vs. $38,000 per acre.
I would like to suggest that some other tax payers do the exact same thing and visit the sites, attend the 911 meetings and hold the board accountable. I do think the board should re-evaluate the 911 sites with cost being a factor. Mr. Allred scored the 240/0 site with train tracks on both sides of it, but didn't score Slater's site...one is also the same train that goes through Slater. That makes no sense. By looking at the scores in the Democrat, Slater scores were high enough to be considered by ALL Board members and appears it could save us all a lot of money. Could it be Mr. Allred knew Slater would score high and was afraid that it might actually go there? Or was this done after the fact.
Initially, if this site is final, I think the 911 board should keep the public included, and informed on the next steps. The total detailed estimated cost for site prep, utilities, building construction, tower construction, etc... Also, the public should have input on size and design, so another mishap such as the ambulance building doesn't shock us at our expense.
I realize these members were elected by the public, but that doesn't make them superior to the rest of us. It is the County's 911 center and I think the county should have some input on it.
This is what other dispatch centers have experienced and what most recommend. They would rather/prefer to handle matters via telephone or Internet to avoid disruptions at the center.
What does other sites and experiences discourage visitors mean?
No. It was because Marshall was the best, most logical location for the health department.It should be near the hospital, medical clinic and doctors. That was the reason Slater did not bid or make an effort to have it located there. The fact is 911 could be located anywhere and function. The explination that it should be in Marshall was for the public to have easy access for addressing needs. However, looking at other sites and their experiences, all DIScourage any visitors. Addressing can be done via telephone or internet. The Saline County Ambulance does not serve Slater, as it has its own Ambulance District.
Saline mo- just because there are "estimates" of the costs involved doesn't make that gospel. There are other factors involved in the location that I believe still make Marshall the viable site. Saline County Ambulance (that serves the entire county) and the Health Department (which serves the entire county)are taxing entities just as the 9-1-1 Center will be and they bought their land. What justification is there in not charging for 9-1-1 land? Slater didn't want the Health Department?
River Ratt: What "group" are you referring to? From what I have heard it was a single councilman that made the majority of the remarks. But the figures don't lie and I still have not found anyone that can explain or justify spending that amount of money without examining all options available.
The facts about the Slater proposal are that the land is available for development and it is up to city officials how to handle its disposal. Slater has used similar tools to attract businesses, homes and new residents for several years and the citizens of the community overwhelmingly support these programs. As for the costs that were quoted; the original selection criteria stated: "be four acres or more...". Using the stated price per acre and assuming the commission did not lie about site criteria that comes to $38,352 x 4 acres = $153,408.00. The price of a tower is estimated at $1,000/ft and a 200' tower has been discussed: $1,000 x 200 = $200,000. The fact of the matter is this boondoggle is going to cost tax payers over $300,000.00 in NEW SPEDNDING!! It could have been acquired for NOTHING ($0.00).
Ms. Fairchild: There were meetings conducted and votes taken (on financial matters) without a proper quorum. They may have suspended meetings at some I did not attend; but I witnessed this in person. But of course it is what should be expected...they have ignored their own guidelines, advertisements and conducted business in a manner unbecoming of public officials.
One other matter. This article says that marshall will sell up to 4 acres at 38,000 plus per acre. Ms. Latimer says that they probably won't use that much. If they use three acres that makes the cost around $115,000.00. Where does the group from the Slater city council get the other $135,000.00 of the "minimum of $250,000.00
If the city of Slater was going to give the 911 organization land for the 911 place, that doesn't make it free. It has value and if the Slater city government wants to give something of value away to the rest the county, maybe the 911 board should have taken them up on it. But it still doesn't make it free. It just changes who is paying the bill. It just means that the people from Slater are paying the cost of the land on behalf of the rest of the county.
modemocrat: I am defending no one and have no preference as to where the call center is located. Where I think people have misconceptions, or I think we were not clear enough in our stories, I'm trying to make it clearer. We have, in fact, pointed out when meetings did not have a quorum, and pointed out, too, that business was suspended in those meetings for just that reason.
Voter turnout does matter. The people who are on the commission were put there by the voters, were they not? I am not "Trying to blame the citizens for the fiscal irresponsibility of elected officials." I'm pointing out the absurdity of a voter turnout of 20%.
NanaDot-Do you not realize that the citizens of Marshall will also be paying this tax? Also do you not realize that the citizens of Marshall are currently paying surchage fees for 9-1-1 service and also now paying tax for countywide 9-1-1? When I hear how unfairly everyone else in the county is being treated I wonder why no one thinks that Marshall didn't have to vote for countywide service.....they already had theirs. Seems to me they are being bashed without just cause.
First, let me say that I do not personally agree with the chosen location for the 911 center. However, the commission elected by the citizens of Saline County has made their choice and we will have to live with that. It is our privilege to groan and complain as much as we need. This call center will serve all of Saline County by providing 911 services that were only available in the 831 and 886 exchanges.
The "rest of the county" is covered by one of three Ambulance Districts. These tax-supported districts have stations in Slater, Sweet Springs and Marshall. If not provided by the communities, law enforcement for the "rest of the County" has been, and will continue to be, provided by the Saline County Sheriff and Missouri State Highway Patrol.
As part of the preparations for the 911 center for Saline County, the rural fire protection agencies have redrawn their boundaries so everyone in Saline County will have fire protection coverage. This is a step in the right direction but still provides very inadequate coverage for most areas of the county. Most of the County is covered by membership-based fire departments. Back in 2002, membership rates were estimated at about 40%. These memberships provide the funding for trucks and protective equipment for the fire fighters. Once again, the minority taking care of the majority.
I realize that most people live in the rural areas of our County by choice. Now those areas will have 911 services but if you have a medical emergency or if your house was on fire, let alone someone is trapped inside, it would not be very comforting to know that the nearest ambulance or fire station is up to 15 miles or more from you.
Kathy Fairchild is consistently defending the decisions of the commission and 'nit- picking' at a lot of blogs. Look at the demographics of the county.... over 50% live in Marshall & the rest elsewhere; isn't that about the same ratio of candidates? Meetings without quorums?!?! Why was this not reported in the paper? What about the bidding/negotiation process that was going to be "advertised"?
According to the logic I read here; the citizens of Saline County deserve to have tax money wasted because of low voter turnout? Trying to blame the citizens for the fiscal irresponsibility of elected officials, that have given a public trust, is absurd.
This commission has decided to spend in excess of ONE QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS when the opportunity existed to get the exact same thing for FREE!! Just because you have the funds does not mean it has to be spent. In these tough economic times, why not try to get the best deal possible and use some economic common sense? This might allow the tax rate to be reduced in the next few years. But of course I don't expect that will happen.
I do have to comment on "stacked with Marshall residents."
Of the 10 candidates for the recent 9-1-1 Commission election, just 4 were not from Marshall: Jefferies, Webb, Griffith and Bird.
Of the 17,000 eligible voters in this county, fewer than 20% bothered to cast a ballot. That is a dismal turnout by any measure.
The only way to make your voice heard is to vote, and if you are so inclined, to run for office.
Election Day was not a very pretty day, but no excuse not to show up for the only opportunity that really counts.
Could someone please post a credible link about the estimated cost and size of this tower that is being discussed? I'm trying to educate myself on this. I will say this: With the close proximity to the airport, if there is a tower going up it better be damn short. FAA restrictions.
Once again, I want to emphasize that the rest of the county will not have to "make do." The call center will serve the entire county. All emergency calls will be received at the center and appropriate emergency workers from locations around the county will be dispatched to wherever they're needed. The center is *not* just for Marshall.
SalineFire - We did, in fact, do exactly that, as you'll see here:
http://www.marshallnews.com/story/1398976.html
Before I wrote that into the story, I spoke with Mayor Allegri.
Here's what I wrote:
"City officials in Slater have missed no opportunity to insist their city be given 'at least fair consideration,' and 'a level playing field' with other sites.
"Mayor Stephen Allegri and Assistant City Administrator Gene Griffith have been very outspoken in promoting their town as a good location for the center. The Slater site was offered to the commission at no cost."
How about Marshall News call Gene Griffith or Steven Allgeri and ask hey the land you offer was at a no cost plan correct, publish it and let everyone quit wondering the mystery. I think its a good idea to solve this problem.
So, the City of Marshall just sold the 9-1-1 Commission, which is stacked with Marshall residents, land which they owned and which will now be paid for by the whole county, so that the tower can be built and paid for in Marshall by the rest of the county even though Marshall residents were already covered by the City Municipal Fire and Emergency Services and the rest of the County just struggled along however... and it sounds like the rest of the county will continue to fund Marshall's 'progress' while the rest of the county makes do?
YES!
Without trying to be contentious in saying so, here again is one of the reasons for the confusion about prices. It sounds as if you're saying the land offered by Slater would have been free and that the use of the existing Slater tower would also have been free. Do you know for certain if that's the case?
Let me think.................hmmmmm........
$153,408.00 plus tower cost estimated at $200,000.00 vs. $0.00. Which one would be a better deal for the taxpayers of Saline County? But why quible of a few hundred thousand dollars; after all there were criteria & guidelines to decide which site was........oops that didn't happen either. The citizens of Saline County should be outraged!!