Ambulance fees are insurance for rural residents

If you live in the unincorporated area of Benton County outside the area served by Northeast Benton County Emergency Services District No. 1, you will be affected by Benton County Ordinance 0-2013-68 of Sept. 30, 2013. This ordinance, passed by the Benton County Quorum Court, establishes an EMSD No. 2 for the purposes of funding EMS ambulance services to residents of rural Benton County, who are not covered by EMSD No. 1, and imposes an $85 per residence fee to pay the Class 1 and Class 2 cities of Benton County to provide this service.

A referendum petition was successfully circulated and more than 2,000 signers were in favor of referring this item to a popular vote -- now scheduled for Feb. 11, 2014. Numerous town hall meetings have been conducted by members of the Quorum Court to answer questions regarding the ordinance and how this EMSD No. 2 will function once established.

Pat Adams, the Justice of the Peace for District 6, which includes Pea Ridge and the surrounding area, will be holding a meeting at 6 p.m. Jan. 28 in the Community Room in the Pea Ridge Fire Department Building. If you have questions about the ballot issue or the future of rural ambulance service, I would suggest you try to attend the meeting. The daily newspapers have done a very good job of following this issue which goes back several years. Some of the editorials have been a bit "off the wall" or irrelevant to the issue and show a lack of study of the long-term issues, but apparently they were not written by rural residents. It is my opinion that what is so frequently overlooked in issues of this kind is the motivation of people to live in the rural ares of any state, rather than in a municipality. How many growers at a Farmers' Market live in a city? How many chicken farms exist inside the city limits? How many dairy farms or beef cattle farms can survive with the regulations imposed by municipalities? Consider where our food comes from!

The real issue that must be dealt with is how much a rural household should pay for an "insurance policy" to provide ambulance service, in case they need it. The method of determining a reasonable dollar figure to meet the proposals of the various cities requires some soul searching by the members of the Quorum Court -- whose members are primarily city residents. When a member of the Quorum Court says it is only $7.08 per month, it tells me they need to seek a better understanding of those whose economic situation is different than their own. We have families affected by the outcome of this vote to whom the $7.08 means two gallons of gas -- not two cups of Starbucks. Some people are paying for their car on a weekly basis and that amount is almost one-third of a $25 car payment. The people who will pay this will see either a yearly tax increase on their property or an increase in their monthly rent. These figures are not life threatening, they just need to be considered. The actual costs of the ambulance service by the cities is going to require some serious study and negotiation. Insurance companies generally pay for ambulance services when they are needed, but that amount does not seem to be adequate for most cities.

There are more unanswered questions regarding this ordinance than we can ever settle in the space of this article. Every case is unique to the individual and you can express your views at the meeting January 28th and by voting on February 11, when the referendum is on the ballot.

My first question to anyone who will listen is simple. How many ambulance services am I expected to subsidize? I pay $100 per year to NEBCO's EMSD No. 1 because I have property in their district. And we pay $48 per year to the Pea ridge Fire Department and their ambulance service even though we are not in the city of Pea Ridge. (As Pea Ridge upgrades from basic life support to advanced life support, the fee for their maintenance will quite reasonably go up.)

Once EMSD No. 2 is established, how long will it be before the Quorum Court raises the fees to satisfy the cities? There are too many questions not to pursue this issue further.

It is possible that Pat Adams can answer questions that will change my mind, but at this point they have not convinced me to vote in support of the ordinance.

Why should I be expected to contribute to still yet another service and may never use any of them?

•••

Editor's note: Leo Lynch is an award-winning columnist. He is a native of Benton County has deep roots in northwest Arkansas. He is a retired industrial engineer and former Justice of the Peace. He can be contacted at [email protected].

Editorial on 01/22/2014