I would think that you would not want an "EVIDENCE VEHICLE" to ever be driven to a personal residence.  These vehicles carry evidence and therefore need to be held to a higher standard.  

Imaging a picture of an evidence vehicle parked at a police residence in Saratoga County as being presented to a jury

It could be used as a defense in a trial.   Reasonable Doubt to the integrety of a sample.  Would be pretty hard to explain.  

One again - Kathleen Moore emphasizes the points she wants.  The issue re: officers having to commute came up as an additional point of argument, well into the discussion.  But, her story presents the discussion so you would think the main reason had to do with commuting.  Rewatch the Committee meeting and you will see.  

RE: Studs, snow tires - not invalid points.  But, one of the issues with the vans was that they were rear wheel drive.  For the most part, front wheel drive will generally suffice.  But, crime scene techs will need to be able to get to the crime scene in all kinds of weather.  Although, roads made imapssible due to
snow are not uncommon - it has to be considered.  Perhaps, there are front wheel or all wheel drive vans which can be used.

TiB

Evidence is not brought to their residnce.  It would be transported from the crime scene to POlice HQ or a lab.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

If it were up to the cowardly chimp, our police would be riding on skate boards, fire fighters would have to walk with buckets of water to answer their calls and community ambulance services would have to use a wheelbarrow  to transport the sick and injured to hospitals.

DV . when have the taxpayers stated that ambulances should be wheelbarrows?    Huh?   Provide the post where any of us have posted that.

Since these are fiscally tough times, and Schenectady is about the highest taxed city in the whole dang USA, I want you to explain WHY the taxpayers should be mandated to pay higher tqaxes to provide expenseive vehicles for cops to take home far far away from the city.   Explain WHY the cops should be allowed to avoid paying city taxes and ontop of that be given lavish EXPENSIVE vehicles to drive around in?    Why do you think the taxpyaers should pay for it?   Huh?

Money can be SAVED if the cops are ordered to live WITHIN the city limits AND pay taxes just lika the the poor people who pay their lavish salaries.

Since cops get paid over $100,000 a year, , then DV, the cops who CHOOSE to live far far away from the city, they can buy their own vehicles, yes?   The typical family in the city with combined incomes of $30,000 cannot afford the extravagance of expensive cars for the cops on top of their lavish pay and OT, on top of their lavish insurance benefits, on top of their lavish pensions, on top of their choosing to live far far far away from their job.  

Quoted from visitor

One again - Kathleen Moore emphasizes the points she wants.  The issue re: officers having to commute came up as an additional point of argument, well into the discussion.  But, her story presents the discussion so you would think the main reason had to do with commuting.  Rewatch the Committee meeting and you will see.  

RE: Studs, snow tires - not invalid points.  But, one of the issues with the vans was that they were rear wheel drive.  For the most part, front wheel drive will generally suffice.  But, crime scene techs will need to be able to get to the crime scene in all kinds of weather.  Although, roads made imapssible due to
snow are not uncommon - it has to be considered.  Perhaps, there are front wheel or all wheel drive vans which can be used.

WHY? Have you ever owned or driven on these? IS there something the vans would lose by having studded snows put on during the routine fall maintenance? Or do you specialize in eliminating common sense things private sector companies would do in winter weather simply because your education and experience is limited? It sounds like you are a very young man who carries the typical notion that you need a jackhammer to do what a hand chisel will simply because there is more Bang" to it. But I guess I would have to blame your training, and not you personally. Please explain why vans cannot be fitted with winter tires in the winter and why you would think summer or so-called "all season" tires are better. You don't seem to understand tires well.

Quoted from visitor

TiB

Evidence is not brought to their residnce.  It would be transported from the crime scene to POlice HQ or a lab.

Then perhaps they should pick up their own personal car in the HQ parking lot and drive THAT home, instead of a taxpayer provided vehicle.  Schenectady isn't that big - if there's a crime, the officers can drive to HQ, pick up the crime vehicle, then go to the scene, process it and return ... right?  I mean, comon, they all live in schenectady ... well, at least schenectady COUNTY ... right?

Quoted from visitor

TiB

Evidence is not brought to their residnce.  It would be transported from the crime scene to POlice HQ or a lab.

Your missing my point.  I understand that.  However.  If a defense attorney asked the police tech " Where do you keep the Evidence Vehicle when you are off the clock?"  and thats it and asked no more questions, do you understand what impression would be left in the minds of the jury?

They have All-wheel drive vans as well

http://www.chevrolet.com/express/

TiB

That is where I think they will compromise.

Mobile Terminal - Contractually they are authorized take home vehicles.  Your point is certainly reasonable and logical.  

TiB

RE: your evidentiary point - To the best of my knowledge that issue has never been raised, or if so, not successfully.

Quoted from visitor

TiB

That is where I think they will compromise.

Mobile Terminal - Contractually they are authorized take home vehicles.  Your point is certainly reasonable and logical.  

Then it's time to renegotiate the contract and take away PERKS that cost taxpayers money and add 0 value except convenience for the TECH.  Hey, they do hard, great work and I do not take that away, but there is no viable reason (other than Union negotiated it), that they need a take home vehicle to properly do their professional duty.

In the end it will be found that the SUV's -- which are stripped down -- are indeed NEEDED...   Any attempt to use snow tires or some other crazy scheme to go back to substandard vehicles will not be seriously considered by those who CARE about our fine young men and women in uniform

Quoted from Hamburg

In the end it will be found that the SUV's -- which are stripped down -- are indeed NEEDED...   Any attempt to use snow tires or some other crazy scheme to go back to substandard vehicles will not be seriously considered by those who CARE about our fine young men and women in uniform

"Stripped down". How so? Are the premium 12 speaker sound systems, and 3 LCD screens ommited?
That's not "stripped down", that's normal.

Graham Bonnett

You do not seem to be able to read well.  By saying the snow tires with studs are not invalid points is the same thing as saying they are valid points.


Wheer does it say anywhere in that paragraph they cannot be used?

People are starting to find out why their taxes are so high and this proves why these public contracts need to be renegotiated.