DW: Westport area EMS levies pass

9 Responses to “DW: Westport area EMS levies pass”

• Sorry I mispoke. I was thinking of an EMS Utility which would be separate. And Yes, Hodges was looking to do that. However, there is nothing to stop the legislature from creating it either. They currently are thinking of street utilities. It was in committee last year. Every which way they can separate something from the general fund is how they will work to increase taxes.
  All the rest of what I said is straight from the Washington State RCWs, MRSC, and Washington Fire Commissioners Assoc. In fact, the WFCA has better written examples of levies.

  As to the money from EMS being separate from fire, we mingle the money by having individuals with cross titles. As good as our accounting is currently, I am surprised we know where any of the money goes.

  The point here, which was totally missed, was that just stating the levy amount is only half the story. I know that people try to hide the truth by doing that, but you need the whole picture. You also need to compare what we are doing to other communities that have the same financial issues. One community or tax base is not supporting a regional service. They have all set up EMS Levies for multiple years and Amulance levies for one year that cover the cost for a regional service. The one year levy is a true up to meet the changes in the cost of providing the service each year.

  We are not doing that. That is why the Fire Union says we are covering 160 square miles in a city that only has 8.6 square miles of land. The other community serves 8900 permanent residents and has a 40 square mile service area. It does it for a little less than 504K dollars. We want 733K per year. We have just under 5000 people and as stated before, 8.6 square miles.

  Written by: AlwaysWatching on Tuesday, Aug. 25, 2009 at 3:12 PM

• I feel the need to clarify that there is No Such Thing as a Fire Utility in Washington State.
  In regard to all municipalities EMS utilities are allowed but $$$$ collected may only be spent on what it costs to provide EMS Service.
  I would like to see the people who spew on and on with their comments to really research their info as it applies Washington State Law.

  Written by: finnegan on Tuesday, Aug. 25, 2009 at 2:22 PM

• Not a bad idea . . . maybe . . .

  Written by: Tom Scanlon on Friday, Aug. 21, 2009 at 9:40 AM

• Tom,

  State Law says they have to be separately accounted for. Here is the County Auditor website that shows all the assessments for 2008 that apply in 2009.

  http://www.co.grays-harbor.wa.us/info/assessor/Docs/LevyPacket2008For2009Tax.pdf

  It makes for a good read. It shows every city basic levy and all the fire district levies too. It even shows the library and any other levy imposed on citizens and also shows the revenue generated by the levy. That is the key to all of this. The property valuation times the levy amount and the resulting revenue generated. Then these are adjusted based upon the 1% rule each year and also any new construction or other impacts to the tax rolls.

  Confusing the issues is not the best thing for the reader. We are voting on an EMS Levy and not a Fire Levy. They are two different things in Washington State. EMS pays for EMS services and Fire pays for Fire. If you try to mix them, you muddy the water. The issue before Ocean Shores is EMS. Also, they are not “mixed” there, because it is a private entity, South Beach Ambulance Service that is providing the EMS service. The individual areas have Fire Services via their Fire District or City Fire Departments.

  That is the same process here. Our Fire Department is one thing and EMS is the other. We allocate salaries accordingly. That is the only mixing.

  The ballot is for EMS and not Fire. I can not say it enough times. That is what the citizens need to understand. The reason I say this is because our Fire Chief wants to create a Fire Utility which then would be similar to the Water Utility. That would make it independent from the General Fund too. Then they could charge based upon their own budget and not be constrained by the limitations the General Fund presents.

  The reason I put forth the EMS for District 7 and 8 was to show you how much they collect for their services. Maybe we should charge them at least that amount for our services.

  Written by: AlwaysWatching on Friday, Aug. 21, 2009 at 9:11 AM

• I should have wrote “emergency-related levies” not “EMS-related levies”

  Written by: Tom Scanlon on Friday, Aug. 21, 2009 at 7:59 AM

• I’ll have to do a little research, to see how much Westport (and others around there) budget for Fire Dept. The apples and oranges are already mixed, here, and in many other places (even if funding for the two is not “supposed” to be mixed together).

  Written by: Tom Scanlon on Thursday, Aug. 20, 2009 at 10:56 PM

• Tom,

  First off, the EMS amount of .4552 is a combination of two EMS Levies that expire in 2012 and 2013. I did state that the new levies, aka “Ambulance 1 Year Levy” were replacements of the existing EMS Excess “Ambulance 1 Year Levy”. I also stated that they were in addition to the existing EMS Levy.

  So, the Westport one did increase to 32 cents from 29 cents, but that is because they wanted a little more money to cover Westport’s share of the shared service.

  It should also be noted that the other Levy items you quote, Fire Engine 1994 and Pumper Truck 2004 are Fire Levy items and not EMS Levy items. One must not mix apples and oranges.

  The issue, which still eludes you is the property valuation portion of the formula which is directly linked to the per 1000 dollars of valuation statement in all of these. That tells you the dollars generated. The use of the firt part of a formula without looking at the rest of the formula makes no sense.

  My numbers show the new revenue generated and the old revenue generated from both the Ambulance 1 Year Levy. As I explained, the new one replaces the old. they are therefore not additive. Therefore, as stated above, you would have the .4552 amount added to the proposed .32 amount for a total levy of .7752 times a property valuation amount of $347,153,101 Therefore, the total of $269,113.08 is the EMS portion of the City of Westport levies.

  You have to keep EMS separate from Fire. Just like our ballot measure is for a Lid Lift for EMS Services.

  You can do the math for the others. The key still here is that the property valuation makes any amount used in the cents per thousand calculations relevant. Without property valuation, your cents per thousand means nothing.

  So, to do the same for the others, giving a total EMS funds generated you will find the following totals:

  City of Westport $269,113.08
  Westport Rural FD#3 $37,497.00
  Grayland FD#11 $122,557.00
  Ocosta FD#14 $74,550.00
  Total of ALL EMS $503,717.08

  Fire services in Westport come from the General Fund, just like Ocean Shores.

  Fire services from the Fire Districts are separate Expense and in some cases Bond costs for equipment.

  However, the discussion here is EMS service. That is what is on our ballot.

  Fire services in Ocean Shores will still be provided out of the General Fund similar to our Police services.

  That is until our department brings forward the idea of creating a Fire Utility. Then we will free up more money from the General Fund to spend elsewhere while increasing taxes overall.

  Written by: AlwaysWatching on Thursday, Aug. 20, 2009 at 7:02 PM

• Thanks, Always.
  Now, to make them even more relevant, would you care to add the “1 year ambulance” levies that were just passed to all other EMS-related levies in each city/district? For example, Westport has:
  EMS .4552
  Fire Engine 1994 .0565
  Pumper Truck 2004 .0638
  1 year ambulance .2902 (which appears to have just been bumped up to .32)
  . . .which, if I’m correct, totals to .8955, or just under 90 cents per thousand.
  I believe Ocean Shores has just the one current EMS levy of .1919, which the City hopes to “trade in” for a .50 (50 cents per thousand) “lift” on the basic levy.

  Written by: Tom Scanlon on Thursday, Aug. 20, 2009 at 4:56 PM

• Tom,
  I called the County Assessor’s Office today to get some clarification about the numbers you published.

  First, these represent the EMS Excess Levy that they call “1 Year Ambulance” on the County Assessor web site.

  Second, these represent the additional amount each entity pays South Beach Ambulance Service above their normal EMS Levy that lasts two to three years or more.

  Third, these represent an annual event for these communities once South Beach Ambulance Service establishes a budget.

  Fourth, these support three (3) ALS (Advanced Life Support) and one BLS (Basic Life Support) ambulances. The BLS is for sale.

  Fifth, The amounts generated by these levies are as follows:

  Westport-$110,500 to replace the current $99,993.
  Westport Rural FD#3- $17,530 to replace the current $28,733.
  Grayland FD#11 – $70,000 to replace the current $74,981.
  Ocosta FD#14 – $32,536 to replace the current $31,607.
  TOTAL $230,566 to replace the current $235,254 or
  $4,688 Less than Last Year.

  These were not increases in the current levy. They were an annual practice to true up a multiple community service.

  Sixth, Ocean Shores currently has a $261,360 EMS Levy based upon the County Assessor levy amount of 19.19 Cents per $1000 dollars of assessed value. The proposed levy of 50 cents per $1000 will generate $680,980.18 For EMS Services based upon our current assesed value.

  Seventh,
  Fire District 7 has a 33.04 cent per thousand levy that generates $58,221.
  Fire District 8 has a 29.40 cent per thousand levy that generates $66,899.

  Now these numbers have some relevance.

  Written by: AlwaysWatching on Thursday, Aug. 20, 2009 at 4:10 PM