Q Why has the city not looked into setting 1 or 2 mills of the budget aside for the fire and police departments instead of putting those budgets into the general fund?
A Setting aside a few mills to operate police and fire departments would require significant money from property taxes, according to information from City Manager Matt Zimmerman.
“If 1 to 2 mills were reserved for police and fire, then other costs would still require a certain amount of property taxes,” Zimmerman said. “Of note, it would require 29 mills to fund the police department and 24 mills to fund the fire department in 2008 with only property taxes.”
Though the two departments require a total of 53 mills to fully fund with property taxes, the actual mill levy for city government was a total of 42 mills for 2008.
“So, as you can see, other revenues help pay for these critical public safety services,” Zimmerman said.
He said that the General Fund, which finances many city operations, uses multiple sources for revenue.
“These include property tax, sales tax, utility franchise fees, fees for services, money from the state for various projects and services, and license and permit fees.
“The city commission balances the budget each year by determining the appropriate level of services and expenses, then calculates the amount of property taxes needed after figuring in the other revenues. That way, the entire General Fund is balanced with the minimum amount of property taxes.”
Q How much money does the city receive from the public’s use of the ambulance service? Could that be used to fund the fire department instead of putting that money into the general fund?
A The city estimates that, after bad-debt write-offs from ambulance clients, revenue from the ambulance service will be about $950,000, Zimmerman said.
“The cost of ambulance service is anticipated to be $1,998,342 in 2008, so the ambulance fees are not enough to pay for ambulance service,” he said. “Otherwise, the city could put it towards fire protection.”
The ambulance write-offs are due, in part to nonpayment by patients.
“...(B)ut, mostly, the amount Medicare authorizes, which is much less than the cost of the service,” Zimmerman said.
• Readers with questions of local interest may send them to: BYA, in care of The Gazette, Drawer C, Emporia KS 66801. Questions need to be signed, but names will not be revealed. Anonymous questions will not be answered.
jayhawker (anonymous) says...
Although I believe that taxes are too high and depress economic development, we have fine police and fire departments who are worthy of our support. Taxes are justified to support these two good departments.
July 25, 2008 at 9:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dhcc66 (anonymous) says...
well put.
i just hope that the way zimmerman and the current commission are handling things is enough to keep the city on the right financial track, which is pulling our city out of the bog that steve commons sunk us into during 20 years of mis-guidance.
let me be the one of the first ones here to say that i think zimmerman, when dealt the horrible hand of trying to turn this city and it's financial woes around, has done a more than decent job of guiding things into a more workable state. remember, he's only been here a little over a year. true, he's not that popular because he has a habit of saying "NO" when he needs to, but hey, somebody has to do the right thing.
look back 10 years from now and see where things are. if things continue on the right track, hopefully emporia will see much brighter days.
July 25, 2008 at 11:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jayhawker (anonymous) says...
Although I support the budgets of the Police and Fire Departments, dhcc66, I do not share your optimism about where we will be in 10 years unless we get control of runaway taxes which have suppressed economic development. We must have economic development of a kind that generates new wealth. Retail stores are nice, but they bring not a penny of new money into our economy, merely recycling existing resources (after the initial construction phase). The kind of economic development that I speak of requires substantial capital. High taxes will not be an incentive to bring capital to us. I don't know Mr. Zimmerman, although apparently you do. I hope that you are correct in your assessment of him, but I will say that the current proposal to raise the sales tax, which I understand he supports, does not bide well.
July 26, 2008 at 12:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jayhawker (anonymous) says...
Retail stores take our money and the profits derived from the sales typically go to investors in other states. We need to start thinking about what will save this community's economy. We need to look to businesses that make something that will be sold out of state, so that the money (or at least a part of it) comes back to us; in other words, creates wealth. Our governor opposed a large capital intensive electrical generation plant in part because electricity generated from the project would be sold to Colorado. I couldn't believe what she was saying (of course, I think that she had a personal agenda that she was not admitting to). Selling Kansas made products to others is how we convert another state's wealth into Kansas wealth. Right now, it goes the other way, and we continue to get poorer. Some apparently believe that we can tax our way to wealth. I suspect those people may have their own agenda, too, because it is patently ridiculous. I hope that Mr. Zimmerman is not one of those.
July 26, 2008 at 12:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
I have had a few conversations with Matt Zimmerman and have come away with a positive sense of the man. I think he's competent and caring. He has been stuck with a terrible situation.
Right now he's trying to balance the 2009 budget. If the news report is right he's brought it from a $3MM deficit to a small surplus. But it looks like the commissioners are going to fight him tooth and nail on it. I think it's fair to ask him questions about the line items he's eliminating or slashing, but he is trying to move the ball in the right direction.
Our biggest problem is that we've gotten right behind the eight ball. The world's economy changed and our city leadership clung to an outdated model of development. I can give you an example. When I was running for office I spent an afternoon at the sheriff's office. While there the sheriff showed me a hardware/software package that the county uses to track fingerprints, etc. With it, law enforcement can get data back on suspects in a flash. It wasn't especially costly and was paid for from the proceeds garnered from drug busts. The package itself was developed by a small startup company. When the company was in its infancy the owner approached small Kansas communities, including Emporia. Our leadership wanted nothing to do with the guy. Too small! Our development model was stuck on big, low wage manufacturers (Tyson, Menu, etc). The owner landed in Pittsburg, KS. Since the early days his company, which started with about 10 employees has grown to about 150. The line jobs typically pay about $18-$20 per hour. The techincal jobs, which constitute the bulk, pay on the order of $50K or higher to start.
It's incredible. We have a potential pipeline (the university and FHTC) that could provide the labor for these types of companies, but since there is nothing for them here in Emporia, they fly the coop.
There are all sorts of companies like his out there, but we don't want anything to do with them. So, we give the huge incentives to Tyson, Menu, et all and we get stuck with a low wage base and the low median incomes that follow. This city/county has about the lowest median incomes in the state and about the highest total mil levy to crown it with.
Until the development strategy of the commissioners changes, Matt is going to be between a rock and a hard place, trying to balance budgets while the commissioners fight him tooth and nail.
July 26, 2008 at 7:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jayhawker (anonymous) says...
netloafer, I enjoy your posts because you have good insight. I would suggest, however, that unless we want to turn into a buffalo commons that we do two things immediately: 1) get taxes down, and 2) assist any capital venture, of whatever kind, that shows any remote interest in us. The days of being able to pick and choose are gone. Our leadership needs to shift gears, and maybe they are. I am discouraged, however, when I see them propose an increase in the sales tax, which is precisely the opposite thing that we need to do.
July 26, 2008 at 10:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
esu42 (anonymous) says...
I personally think that Emporia should court employers who would be attractive to recent graduates. Right now, ESU students, even those who are from Emporia, have absolutely no incentive to stay here- there are simply no jobs for them. Getting a young, college-educated population to put down roots could do wonders for this town.
July 26, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
Jayhawker
I agree with you. Taxes need to come down. The county is proposing a one cent increase in the sales tax. The rationale was so that property taxes wouldn't increase. I suspect the increase will pass at the ballot box. Interestingly, the county commission was looking at an increase in the county portion of the mil levy of somewhere on the order of 2 mils, down from the five mil increase in the first pass. It's a kind of municipal bait and switch. I don't think we can realistically expect the school district to decrease its mil levy, nor can we the city. Thus it appears in all likliehood that we'll get a sales tax increase and an increase in the mil levy. In addition, I spent some time recently with the county appraiser. I was told that residential valuations had increased in the past year by close to three percent. I suspect the same is true of commerical valuations as well. That means we could get a triple whammy - an increase in the sales tax, an increase in mil levies which will be compounded because of increases in valuations.
You may be right about shifting gears. In fact, it could even be that Emporia may have passed the point of no return. And once you get behind the eight ball or the curve you've got real problems. I think there may be some sort of development continuum. For example, about three years ago companies like Toyota began selling hybrids. Our big three were on a roll and kept on their merry way. Then, a small number of risk takers began buying the hybrids. Then a few more who saw their viability and bought hybrids as well. The two groups may have constituted 20-30% of the purchasing population. Now many in the middle, the masses, are trying to buy them because of the cost of fuel. The development problem came about when the big three continued to market to the masses rather than paying any attention to the forerunners of where the economy was going. I just saw yesterday that G.M. and Ford are hemorhagging billions of dollars each month with no end in sight. I wonder how different things might now be for them had they tuned in to the trend that was bubbling just beneath the surface. Unfortunately, the cost of re-tooling, etc is also going to be in the billions. Had they gotten ahead of the curve they might now be in a far better position. The billions of investment up front may have meant economic survival or profitability.
I think the same may be true for Emporia. We may be too far behind the curve. We may be down to our last swing, our last strike and we don't have Lou Gherig or Babe Ruth at the plate.
I used to hear in times of bad economics that it was best to "hide and watch." That's basically what I'm doing.
July 26, 2008 at 11:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jayhawker (anonymous) says...
netloafer: Once we start spiraling downward, it is tough to recover. I have no doubt that the demand for local government services, if fully provided, would require the additional taxes. The problem is that to do so steals from the future, causing the spiral to increase in velocity. We need, somehow, to get out of that spiral, and we are very late in the game. Of course, the largest consequence is that our children and grandchildren will have to leave the area for jobs. We were too short sighted and did not take advantage of past opportunities.
July 26, 2008 at 11:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jayhawker (anonymous) says...
Several posts have mentioned the need to strengthen our infrastructure, such as education and fire and police services. I agree. That does not mean higher taxes necessarily. What it does mean is that the local governing bodies need to prioritize these programs, even if it means cutting other services. We cannot have our cake and eat it, too. I know that decisions of that kind will be painful, but if we want out of this spiral, we're going to have to tighten our belts and make the hard choices. I know that every proposal stems from a good idea. Unfortunately, there is a surplus of good ideas but a shortage of ways to pay for them.
July 26, 2008 at 1:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )