did by chance anyone from patch contact warwict warwick and get their side of the story?

Thank God for good journalists!

Lisa - If the house you mention 800 meters west is the old Briggs farmhouse, we have discussed this before. It is in this condition because the owners want it that way. It was rented, but if it's rented it must meet living standards. If it's vacant, no rules apply and the town can/will do nothing. It's the land valued by the owner, not the house. Speculation! And yet it is an historically significant house and if it were in the village, it wouldn't be allowed to happen. Still, I would hate to see it picked apart as they are doing to that little ranch house you mentioned by 1149 restaurant.

I am sorry - but what house are you talking about on Division west of 1149? The old yellow house, 1727 Division Rd? Why would you encourage them to "practice on that house that is falling down and is therefore truly a fire hazard"? First of all that house is in EG not Warwick and second that house has been historically recognized. The owner, who runs an architectural and design firm, is letting it fall down by demolition by neglect. Apparently they want to access the property behind it which is in West Warwick. There's no reason to rid EG of this home. As far as property values, I think it's highly improbable that house is affecting them too much, I'm thinking the economy.

But let's also not sidetrack. What IS the deal with this evidently-not-happening dispatcher merger with the WK and EG fire departments? One has to have two brains to understand why simple things like this are almost impossible to pass. We are becoming very mediocre people. I fear for the future.

The future is getting short shrift, like Yogi Berra said, "The future ain't what it used to be!" I've been introducing recycling technology that takes waste plastic and turns it back into home heating oil for as little as 25 cents a gallon and after 2 years my fellow RI'er are happy paying $3.79/gal, plowing their plastic into the landfill and apparently have no interest in the multitude of jobs this new system will create. Used to be cool to be on the leading edge of new growth technology but it seems to be a quaint notion these days, so much easier to point fingers at peeling paint on the neighbors house and blame them for vanished equity. The nation's equity went over the fiscal cliff and funneled over $32 trillion in cash into a few hundred private bankster Cayman Island accounts. 6,000 of the 99% protesters were arrested and beaten cuz they made some noise about it, well, it certainly shut them up! Now we can focus on the things at hand, neighbor's peeling paint!!

Renu and Alan,
I had been unclear about what house Lisa was talking about and, like you, thought she was referring to 1727 Division Road. We can all exhale. I went out today and found the house Lisa referred to. It's now pictured above and while it doesn't have a number, it's across the street from 1560 Division Road. She's right, it's a mess!

Why, thanks Renu! Great info.

I submit that house might be in East Greenwich. The line takes in quite a bit of area north of Division Road out there. This is across from Signal Ridge where Division veers south but the line continues straight and includes Crompton Road, which is north of Division. Right: Crompton Road, not Crompton Avenue. My, we are wandering, aren't we!?

This is what I wrote two years ago on that place. Download it from DropBox with this URL:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/22464453/EGT%26N%20156-3.pdf

Hey Lisa, as a reporter would you agree that you have an obligation to at least investigate a story before writing it? The house is in Warwick, and the fire department has been training in it. Second, East Greenwich has been charging Warwick $360,000 for responding to the Potowamut area of Warwick. Henrickson wanted Warwick to dispatch for him and he would reduce the bill by $100,000 freeing up one of his dispatchers so they he could put his second rescue on full-time without cross-manning it. Warwick intends to build a fire station in Potowamut and do their own calls and save themselves $360,000. Henrickson knew this months ago and yet this still comes up, he lies. He knew at least as far back as July, if not sooner, by the way this is the second time the voters of my city have approved a fire station there. So you ask why hasn't the Mayor returned calls? Why does he have to? This may have been a good deal for Henrickson, but Warwick was getting a raw deal here. If he truly does have equipment in Warwick, go get it, do you think they're holding it hostage? Further, and yet another reason, Warwick has upgraded their radio system through federal grant monies, which he also knew. Now the question becomes, why has he been lying about this for so long?

T,
Alan is correct – Lisa is a columnist. The fact she's asking these questions makes me realize I have more work to do on this story.
Alan,
The mayor HAS returned my calls but left me messages. The ball is in my court now. More to come!

Let 'em have it, Alan!

So the mayor has returned calls? Already the story is changing. I agree Ms. McNamara you do have some work to do, but be careful you may not like what you see. In the end I think you'll find this is a self-generated story on the part of Henrickson. Again, Alan, I understand you may not have all the facts, but, no I don't believe the Mayor should return a phone call that doesn't require an answer that everyone knows. Columnist: a journalist who writes a regular feature in a newspaper: a gossip columnist (dictionary.com) Moreover, I am not trying to be hostile a rude to anyone here,however, just remember one thing people, seek the truth not the answer.

T: you have me at a disadvantage. I use my true identity and you use an initial. Fine. Most people understand that sometimes the nuances of a definition prohibit a dictionary from giving a full and proper explanation. The definition of the word columnist is one of those things that cannot be explained by one sentence. Well, perhaps a better sentence than the one you provided. Gossip columnist indeed. And if everyone knows the answer, why are we discussing it? I also question your last statement. Perhaps say it this way: People seek the truth because truth IS the answer. Oh well, enough already!

Here is a question that no one seems to answer. Why did the Fire District spend close to $200,000 of taxpayer's money on dispatch with Warwick without having legal counsel draw up a contract or agreement??? I wonder why!!! Here are the facts!!!
The East Greenwich Fire District (Chief Henrickson) approached the City of Warwick with this several years ago and spent taxpayer's money trying to get this to work. The City of Warwick looked into it to see if this could work but no promises was ever made to the Chief. Yet Chief Henrickson and the Fire District continued to spend money and sell it to the taxpayers that this was going to happen, and they continued to spend that kind of money without having anything in writing. Warwick is not to blame here due to the fact that they are unable to do it. The Fire Chief and the District should get their equipment back and be held accountable for spending that kind of money without any guarantees. This is why I feel the town should be in control of the fire department and not the fire chief or the board of commissioners.

Elizabeth, maybe you can get an answer as to why the fire chief did not get anything in writing from the City of Warwick or the Mayor. It would be very interesting to hear what he has to say.

Yas, yas, and I want to know why Lisa Sussman is measuring stuff in meters, as in "can they move another 800 meters or so west on Division"? I wanted to switch over to metric (what?) in the 60s when there was a big push to do it. But no! So since I was a printer, I used picas and points instead. Phooey! But Lisa, we are metric-challenged and it's no wonder I got the wrong house. I thought it was 800 gas meters and that would put in out in western Connecticut.

Whew - that's the last time I go away for a computer-free weekend! I don't think I have much to input here since Alan has so ably said what I would have had I been online (thank you!). However, since being succinct has never been my forte, a few comments:
1) Alan is correct - I am not a reporter. And as a columnist, I see my role as being the "huh?" person who hopefully asks the question or makes the point that the person on the street is asking or thinking. Yes, I may sometimes sound uninformed or - as I am sure some of you would put it - stupid, but I am ok with that if what I am asking is generating discussion and, hopefully, answers. Which certainly seems to be the case here.
2) I was being provocative when I suggested a demo of the decrepit house. I hoped to get some attention paid to the fact that there is a perfectly good - and historical - house going to waste. I have to admit that I am a bit hazy on where the town border is in those parts but that doesn't lessen my irritation and frustration over what seems to be an official acceptance re the state of the house. It kills me when I see land razed for new housing while we have homes which have withstood most of the vicissitudes of time standing empty and going to waste - but that is a rant for another day.
3) Why meters? Because they make sense - so there!