Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 13 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Levy ‘answer’ still has flaws
Published Wednesday, January 20, 2010
It looks more and more likely that Lawrence County voters are going to be asked to vote for a tax levy to fund the continued operation — and even growth — of the Southeast Ohio Emergency Medical Services.
The county commissioners have asked the auditor’s office to certify the amount of revenue it will generate and this will be discussed in upcoming weeks.
Although Lawrence County citizens are certainly going to have to pony up more money at some point if we want to maintain the quality of life and services we enjoy, this particular answer seems to have too many problems.
First, it appears unlikely that it will be approved by voters. Lawrence County voters have been pretty clear they do not want to support additional taxes, even to maintain important services like ambulance and the sheriff’s office, which is what this would do.
The commissioners need to be clear with the public exactly what the alternatives are if this isn’t adopted. It will likely mean the ambulance service may become less efficient and the sheriff’s office will be remain undermanned, as the other money problems mount as well.
The second major flaw is that this levy requires property owners to foot about 45 percent of the bill for a service that most will never utilize. This is unfair and inequitable. While the county did raise SEOEMS rates last year to address this problem, we feel that it should be funded more by those who utilize the services.
A third concern is that there is already a funding source in place for SEOEMS: the half-cent sales tax. That was pitched to the public in the 1990s as being for emergency services and the plan was clear that it would be used for ambulance systems.
Over the years, as revenue dropped and expenses — especially the cost of fighting crime — increased, a portion of this money has been diverted to the sheriff’s office and other general fund needs.
To maintain the quality of life we value here in southern Ohio, tax payers are going to have to decide what they are willing to sacrifice or to step to the plate and pay more but we aren’t convinced that this ambulance levy is the right answer.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by RabidTiger (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 11:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
FORGET ANY LEVY...!!!
You gave away our ambulance stations, and sure enough
you say we NEED MORE. Why? so you can build them an sell
them and rent from other county groups. And let Mo Money slide into
corrupt politicians pockets.
NO MORE TAXES...!!! NO LEVY'S...!!!
We the taxpayers of Lawrence County are
TAX POOR AS IT IS...
LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS...COMMISSIONERS...!!!
We the citizens have to or we loose our homes.
CUT THE FAT OUT, CUT IT TO THE BONE...!!
We have had to do without. We do this so that
WE CAN SURVIVE...
You have to CUT..CUT..CUT TILL IT HURTS..!!
That is IF YOU WANT LAWRENCE COUNTY TO SURVIVE.
I havent seen ANY OFFICE HOLDER or COMMISSIONER
even offer to take a salary cut. But you want Mo Money...Mo Money...
Mo Money from the citizens.
FORGET IT... IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN..!!
Put the ambulance service out for bids.
And quit trying to scare the taxpayers like you try to do.
Most Citizens have this month received a notice from Social Security
that they are being required to pay an ADDITIONAL $35+ for their Medicare
benefits. And this year, they DID NOT even get a 'Cost Of Living' increase.
So this has hit the taxpayers two times already THIS MONTH & THIS YEAR
an approximate loss of nearly $100 in monthly income.
Wish someone would put a 'RECALL THE COMMISSIONERS'
on the upcoming elections, I know how I'd vote.
Kick - Moe, Larry & Curly out!
VOTE THE BUMS OUT..!!
Posted by osu (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Watch out, Rabid Tiger, you're gonna hurt the new Commissioner's feelings! LOL.
A county ambulance service should be investigated. It has the potential to bring in revenue. A couple of years ago, there was once a brave commissioner who sought to investigate SEOMS, but SEOMS showed its "muscle" and shut down any reforms.
Posted by CommissionerStephens (Jason Stephens) on January 20, 2010 at 12:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would like to counter some of the points made in this editorial.
First, the assumption that voters are unlikely to approve such a levy is just that, an assumption. Most fire levies throughout our county routinely pass, and in Athens and Jackson Counties, voters have always passed EMS levies easily. In fact, fifteen years ago, the last time it was on the ballot, Lawrence County passed the EMS Levy 57-43.
The alternative to the levy not passing would be at best to maintain the financial status quo. Although in the short term, we have stabilized our financial situation, over the long term financial pressures will continue to mount, regardless who is commissioner. Every year, it will be a debate about: “how much to cut the budget,” “the sheriff is under funded,” etc. I am sure most people get a little tired of the same story every year, and I do as well.
Second, I believe the Tribune makes another assumption that most people will never utilize EMS. Who can control or predict when and where emergencies happen? Whether it be an elderly family member, an injured child, or even a car wreck, know one knows exactly when, where, or to whom an emergency will happen. The question is: how much is it worth to know that someone will be there to answer the call?
Third, the concern of funding already being in place for EMS is an understandable argument; however, I would counter that the problem today is that the situation has changed over the last dozen years.
In particular, prescription drug abuse and all the crime associated with it did not really exist in 1998, like it does today. Also, the state government was much more generous to local governments back then, as well.
Finally, the editorial points out the perceived flaws without presenting an alternative. Do I think property tax levies are the best way to fund local government? Absolutely not!
Actually, I really like some of the ideas that have been posted on this forum on other stories, but that debate is for the state legislature and the governor. Unfortunately, the fact is, in the State of Ohio a property tax levy is the only option communities have to fund its services.
It is not perfect, but the proposed levy is a solution that will make a difference and improve our county. Hopefully we will all honestly evaluate this proposal.
Each of us will have the opportunity to decide if paying a little extra on our property taxes is worth ensuring and improving the overall public safety of our community.
If you have any questions, or would like for me to send you the proposal, please email me at stephens.jcs@gmail.com
Sincerely,
Jason
Posted by jonferguson (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 1:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks for your comments Jason. I think this literature may be helpful for everyone, the commissioners included, to read concerning alternate ways to fund EMS services:
http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/downloads/pdf/pu...
Looks like there may be some good ideas in it. I haven't read it all yet.
Posted by hdm1903 (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
They would only use this money for other purposes if they did get it.
The first thing you would see is they all would give themselve a pay raise.
This was already funded. RE-DIVERT the funds BACK where they belong!
Posted by jonferguson (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
An excerpt from the above mentioned Document:
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA) is a compilation of Federal programs, projects,
services, and activities, which provide assistance or benefits
to the American public. It contains financial and
non-financial assistance programs administered by the
various departments and establishments of the federal government.
Included in the CFDA’s listings are a number of
programs of particular interest to fire/rescue departments
as well as EMS agencies. These include direct financial
assistance, such as grants and loans, as well as funds for
training, technical assistance, etc. The CFDA is available
online at www.gsa.gov/fdac. Through this site it is possible
to search the CFDA for programs specifically related
to the fire service.
Posted by ordinarycitizen (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Is it law to have ambulance services if not lets just do away with soems and not have one at all, just get to the hospital however you can. cut cut cut till it kills you!!!!! no new tax levies NO helping seniors NO helping children No helping anything but myself.
Posted by chazz (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 8:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ordinary Citizen: No there is no law requiring ambulance service. I moved away from Lawrence county several years ago, and the city I live in in Northern Ohio is about the same size as Ironton. We have three private ambulance companies that cover the city and pretty much the whole county. A couple of the county fire departments (volunteer) also run ambulances. The fire departments have levies, but there is no public money for the ambulances otherwise. SEOEMS is an excellent service but the people of Lawrence county can decline to fund them. One of the private companies will step up, but you may not get the level of service you have with SEOEMS. The private services may be tied up taking granny to the doctor when you are having a heart attack, so bear that in mind.
Posted by wakeupamerica (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 9:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
When are people and tax payers going to wake up!!!! Levies are never the answer. Here's a thought .... quit mismanaging our tax dollars. Why are elected officials not held more accountable for the way that they mismanage our money?
Posted by Shooter (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 10:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I still prefer a service fee for each 911 address. Make it fair for all. Not just property owners. Stop the misuse of SEOEMS. I hope something can be done without more taxes.
Eat a bean.
Posted by Shooter (anonymous) on January 20, 2010 at 10:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Vote no.
Posted by osu (anonymous) on January 21, 2010 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would like to add my two cents into the claim that renters are getting by free. This is just a cop-out to make some people feel better when voting against levies.
Think about something. A landlord is in business. And part of the costs of a business are the taxes. So, if the school district, township, or even county passes a tax levy, the costs of doing business to that landlord will increase as well. So, if the landlord is a good business person, he will pass these increases onto his customer. Quit using the cop-out that renters are getting by scott-free.
Now to the point at hand...it is time to get rid of SEOMS and investigate other possibilities. We used to own the stations until the Commissioners made a "sound business decision" to sell assets and then pay rent on them. But we still do own the squads (until they give them away), so maybe it is time we looked into a county-wide ambulance service.
If anything were on the ballot to support SEOMS, I would urge people to vote no.
Posted by Shooter (anonymous) on January 21, 2010 at 3:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OK OSU we'll agree to disagree on this one. I'm no cop-out,
just sick and tired of my taxes going up to let addicts ride free to get a fix.
Eat a bean my friend.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)