On Thursday December 16, 2010 I learned of a proposed Township vehicle policy which requires Fire Department rescue/emergency response vehicles to be parked at the Township Hall property, rather than with the trained first responders assigned to the vehicle, resulting in emergency response times being increased.
Does this board believe that medical services will be provided in a faster, more efficient and safer manner by this policy? Apparently four of you do – the Board voted to immediately enforce the new parking requirement pending a Board vote on the new proposed policy. This new policy will be considered for adoption at a "Special Board Meeting" scheduled for Monday December 20, 2010 at 11:00 AM, instead of a usual 7:00 PM starting time.
Does this board believe that the residents that you are supposed to be serving will hear about this special meeting, called during Christmas week, and be able to attend at 11 am? Apparently 4 of you do. Would any reasonable person consider this a coincidence, especially when current use of these trucks has been in force for many years?
Currently, there are three pickup-type trucks which are assigned to, and stay with, certain Fire Department first responder personnel. The purpose of this practice, should it not be obvious, is to quickly respond to any emergency experienced by our residents within our Township. This has been a policy for years because there is a life and death component to time delay: heart-attack, stroke, accidents in the home or vehicle, children in danger of injury, or the initial stages of a fire where an immediate response may mean the difference between life or death, or permanent injury.
It should be obvious that any emergency response time is shorter when a trained-first responder can proceed directly to the emergency site without stopping, changing vehicles, and driving out of the way to do so.
The Board could have a list prepared from over the last 10 years of calls answered by these vehicles where an immediate response (prior to arrival of the large Fire Department vehicles, or police or EMS) provided critical help to any resident. It will be apparent that this new policy, which removes the immediate use of an emergency vehicle, puts township residents at risk.
If any resident suffers harm as a result of this new policy, then it appears that the Township will be liable for damages if the Township Board knowingly approved a policy that could result in such harm. Furthermore, if it is found that if such Board action was deliberately taken that falls within a pattern of on-going actions against certain fire fighters, then it appears the Township could also be liable for punitive damages. Fulfilling vendettas and ruling personal fiefdoms does not make good governance. It only makes for liability, and ultimately, it is the residents that are harmed.
I hope that the four Board members use this letter to recall their higher purpose of serving the public well, and vote in the best interests of the people of Salem Township. Please forward a copy of this communication to the Township Attorney who needs to be aware of these concerns and the potential liability to the Township.
Sincerely,
Fred Roperti
Comments