Hospital levy unneccesary

On May 27, we the property owners and taxpayers of Boundary County will have the opportunity to vote for or against a property tax levy by the Boundary Community Hospital.

I am extremely dismayed by some of the advertising that has been presented by those in favor of this levy with the deception as to the true impact that this levy will have on the property owners in this county.

One of the statements used is that the levy will “total only $335,000 for two years.” In reality, this levy will cost $335,000 each year, for two years. (A total of $670, 000 over that two years.)

Another statement that was made addressed the cost of this levy to the individual property owner in that this levy “may cost as little as $30 a year.” That figure would be accurate if the assessed value of the house is $100,00 to $150,000 and the property owner lives in and is eligible to receive homeowners exemption.

For every $100,000 of valuation over that base, the tax liability increases exponentially for the property owner. For properties that are not eligible for the homeowners exemption, (i.e., businesses, rentals, vacant land, second homes) the tax liability approximately doubles for those properties at all assessed valuations. (This liability would necessarily eventually be passed on to the tenants of any of those applicable properties.)

If you want to know the true cost of this tax levy to you, the property owner, look at your June 25 assessment notice and look for the figure titled “School Emer.” (That levy was for $328,000 plus.) Take that figure, add an additional 2 percent to that, then add that combined figure to last year’s notice. That will give you the approximate tax figure that will show up on your future tax assessment notice.

In addition to all of this, the advertising referred to, also implied that this levy would significantly enhance or expand services currently provided by the hospital. Based on the information provided, it appears that the greatest majority of expenditure that would result from this levy would apply to replacement of existing equipment currently in use and still serviceable by the facility (new hospital beds, operating table, computer system, laundry equipment, hematology analyzer, anesthesia, x-ray machines and expansion of the rehabilitation therapy room.) It does not appear that any of these “upgrades” would significantly expand the services currently rendered by BCH to the citizens of this community.

With the economic situation that is currently present in Boundary County, (exorbitant fuel costs, increasing food prices, additional property taxes for schools, rising utility fees and etc.) there is very little money left over for the average family to survive on.

I do not believe that this levy is necessary at this time and that upgrades and repairs should not be accomplished through hospital maintenance and operations budget, not by replacing all of these items by further taxation of the Boundary County taxpayers and property owners.

Rick Braun

Bonners Ferry