Item 1: Future Ambulance Transport Funding

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT A (at the expense of other public services) was the least favored option. Numerical details regard- ing the responses are given in the appendix. Altogether, 116 responses were received and rec- orded. We recognize that this is not a statistically valid sample, but it does represent the views of those interested enough to participate. We considered the public response in the same light as public testimony received on any issue, and we are confident that the full elected bodies will do the same. CONCLUSION With the political will already expressed to continue emergency medical transport as a core pub- lic service, and with the existing revenue streams no longer adequate, there is little question that additional tax support will be required. The only questions are as to the form and magnitude of that additional tax support. Some of the measures recommended above can provide a degree of financial relief and/or service improvement. To directly address the larger and more critical central issue, however, we are compelled to report that General Fund support will probably be required to bridge the gap over the short to mid-term, and we conclude further that some new form of general tax support is the best solution for the long term, both from a fiscal and service standpoint. We recommend that further analysis of that option begin without delay. Please contact any member of the Task Force, or staff in the respective fire service agencies, if you have questions or would like any additional information. APPENDICES A.Media clippings B.Flier announcing public forums C.Factsheet and ballot provided at public forums D.ASA map E.Financial graph presented at public forums F.Public input results and comments G.LCOG overview of district alternatives 9