Washington County, again, preps EMS levy ballot measure

WASHINGTON — Washington County Supervisors have once again taken early steps to prepare a ballot measure that would establish an Emergency Medical Services levy. Officials have long said the property tax could help fund area ambulances and rapid-response volunteer groups amid rising training and equipment costs.

The county hopes the third try’s a charm, after previous efforts to put the property tax question on a ballot in March of this year and November of 2024 fell through.

In a vote Tuesday morning, elected officials approved the language for that ballot measure. The question posed to voters would ask for approval to impose a property tax at a rate “not to exceed” 75 cents per $1,000 of valuation, bringing in no more than $1.584 million a year.

The levy, however, would not necessarily be set at that maximum. It would start at 50 cents, according to the ballot language, and would fluctuate from one year to the next as needed, at the discretion of the board of supervisors under advisement from the county’s EMS council, according to County Supervisor Jack Seward Jr.

“We’ll have the authority to do 75 cents if we need it, the first year is only going to be 50 cents, the following years are going to be, basically, just what we need,” Seward said. “The best due diligence that (the EMS Advisory Council) had, was that 50 cents was needed. We think that they’re underestimating that, so we want the authority to do 75 cents in the future, if we need it, but we’re only going to do what we need.”

Previous attempts to put the question on ballots fell through, once because supervisors declined to approve under-75-cent ballot language, and once because the county fell short of state-imposed deadlines to prepare and publicize ballot measures. County Auditor Tammy Stewart said the language approved Tuesday morning had already been sent to public notice outlet for publication.

The proposed measure would give voters a chance to declare ambulances and volunteer quick-response groups an “essential service,” one that local governments are obligated to provide in much the same way that state law requires certain law enforcement and fire department coverage to every resident.

If it passes with at least 60% approval, the measure would authorize a new countywide property tax levy to pay for those services, as well as local emergency communication infrastructure. Advocates say the money is essential to keep the system running effectively as costs for training and equipment rise.

“The days of having to flip pancakes so you can make a difference in the outcome of somebody’s medical condition (are) past,” said Washington County EMS Association President Toby Hancock, also a higher-up at Riverside’s emergency response service, in an interview last summer. “It’s not feasible for … volunteers who get out of bed in the middle of the night to have to rely on donations to have the equipment they need.”

It’s not yet clear how much support the proposed ballot language will get from those emergency medical response groups, however.

Members of the Washington County EMS Advisory Board — established in 2021 to help guide development of the proposed ballot issue — recommended a levy of 50 cents per $1,000 of valuation back in August, saying it would bring $740,000 to emergency response assets across the county, and strike a balance between tax savings and needed funding.

Advocates have previously worried ballot language allowing up to 75-cent levies, as the supervisors continue to pursue, might prove unpersuasive to voters. Some townships in Washington County already tax residents with a levy of up to 54 cents to pay for bundled fire protection and EMS services.

EMS Advisory Council Chair Jim Lester said in a meeting last year that those residents, under any new levy exceeding 54 cents, would pay more than double for services they already help finance.

“If you’re all of a sudden asking taxpayers to pay more than they’re paying now, for a service they’re already getting, we have to be conservative and go slow in that approach,” Lester said. “We don’t want to just go, ‘The code says we can get 75 cents per thousand, so we’re going to get 75 cents per thousand.’”

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com