A statement Green County government is required to publish before its Oct. 6 tax referendum throws a new wrinkle into the Pleasant View Nursing Home discussion. It also points to the need for county leaders to clearly spell out to voters what their options are before they go to the polls.
In less than three weeks, voters will decide whether to allow the county to collect extra property taxes (about $50 a year on property valued at $150,000) to bridge the nursing home funding gap that will surpass $1 million this year. When the Green County Board voted Aug. 25 to go to referendum, supervisors said the nursing home wouldn't be closed regardless of the vote's outcome. There have been no substantive, public discussions about the possibility of shutting down the facility.
That changed on Monday.
The state requires a governing body to publish an explanation of a referendum's details and consequences. In the explanation to be published, the public is told Pleasant View "may have to be closed or sold" if the referendum is defeated.
Green County Corporation Counsel Brian Bucholtz said the county has to make the public aware of the possibility.
Green County Board Chairman Art Carter said "it's never been an absolute that we wouldn't close it," but said it's not what county leaders want to do.
This development makes an already murky question even less clear for voters.
Before, the question was whether voters wanted to pay more to fund the nursing home or force county leaders to fund it with budget cuts.
Pretty simple, except that voters have no way to know what kinds of personnel or service cuts might be necessary. County supervisors don't seem to know, let alone the public.
But now voters also must contend with the possibility their decision "may" result in closing the nursing home.
A voter might wish for the county to continue operating Pleasant View, but prefer leaders find ways to fund it other than with additional taxes. That person probably would be inclined to vote "no" ... unless there was an even greater concern such a decision would result in closing the nursing home.
Essentially, the county will be giving voters two choices on the ballot when there really are three options.
County supervisors could provide some clarity before Oct. 6, by going on the record in a public meeting on whether they'd vote to close or sell the nursing home before making budget cuts elsewhere. They'd also be doing themselves, and most importantly the public, a service by determining what kinds of specific cuts they would make to equal the $890,000 annually in taxes the referendum would allow the county to collect. It would be helpful for the voters to be able to determine how.
That's unlikely to happen, given the short amount of time before the vote.
So, voters aren't likely to have a clear picture of what their choices are when they vote. Whether that helps or hurts the referendum's chances remains to be seen.
In less than three weeks, voters will decide whether to allow the county to collect extra property taxes (about $50 a year on property valued at $150,000) to bridge the nursing home funding gap that will surpass $1 million this year. When the Green County Board voted Aug. 25 to go to referendum, supervisors said the nursing home wouldn't be closed regardless of the vote's outcome. There have been no substantive, public discussions about the possibility of shutting down the facility.
That changed on Monday.
The state requires a governing body to publish an explanation of a referendum's details and consequences. In the explanation to be published, the public is told Pleasant View "may have to be closed or sold" if the referendum is defeated.
Green County Corporation Counsel Brian Bucholtz said the county has to make the public aware of the possibility.
Green County Board Chairman Art Carter said "it's never been an absolute that we wouldn't close it," but said it's not what county leaders want to do.
This development makes an already murky question even less clear for voters.
Before, the question was whether voters wanted to pay more to fund the nursing home or force county leaders to fund it with budget cuts.
Pretty simple, except that voters have no way to know what kinds of personnel or service cuts might be necessary. County supervisors don't seem to know, let alone the public.
But now voters also must contend with the possibility their decision "may" result in closing the nursing home.
A voter might wish for the county to continue operating Pleasant View, but prefer leaders find ways to fund it other than with additional taxes. That person probably would be inclined to vote "no" ... unless there was an even greater concern such a decision would result in closing the nursing home.
Essentially, the county will be giving voters two choices on the ballot when there really are three options.
County supervisors could provide some clarity before Oct. 6, by going on the record in a public meeting on whether they'd vote to close or sell the nursing home before making budget cuts elsewhere. They'd also be doing themselves, and most importantly the public, a service by determining what kinds of specific cuts they would make to equal the $890,000 annually in taxes the referendum would allow the county to collect. It would be helpful for the voters to be able to determine how.
That's unlikely to happen, given the short amount of time before the vote.
So, voters aren't likely to have a clear picture of what their choices are when they vote. Whether that helps or hurts the referendum's chances remains to be seen.
