ShareThis Page

Shaler commissioners vote for Shaler-Hampton EMS formation

| Monday, Feb. 26, 2018, 12:01 a.m.
Shaler-Hampton EMS Medic Michael Diebert, EMT's Jessica Bigley, Kristopher Kurzawski, Manager Joe Johnson, Supervisors Cindy Kolupajlo and Brian Mitchell.
Louis Raggiunti | For the Tribune-Review
Shaler-Hampton EMS Medic Michael Diebert, EMT's Jessica Bigley, Kristopher Kurzawski, Manager Joe Johnson, Supervisors Cindy Kolupajlo and Brian Mitchell.

The Shaler commissioners voted Feb. 13 to enter into an intergovernmental cooperative agreement with Hampton to form Shaler-Hampton EMS.

During a Jan. 24 Hampton Township Council meeting, the council approved its portion of the agreement and to reimburse Shaler more than $39,000 for December staffing costs.

Although Hampton had voted to no longer use the former Hampton EMS as its preferred provider, the organization unexpectedly stopped providing emergency services a month earlier than expected on Nov. 30. Shaler EMS became the township's preferred provider as of Dec. 1.

Shaler Manager Tim Rogers said that he, Hampton Manager Chris Lochner and their solicitors had discussed Shaler's original intergovernmental cooperative agreement, its revisions and amendment the day of the commissioners meeting.

Hampton Council is expected to vote on the amendment at its March 7 meeting and the Shaler-Hampton EMS board members is expected to review it, as well.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me