Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Discussing the County Home

More taxes needed to fund county nursing homes

September 7, 2013

The financial state of county-owned nursing homes trickles down to the taxpayers....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(18)

notalways

Sep-08-13 8:00 AM

I believe we should work to save our county home. I believe there are options that we have forgotten to look at like selling some of the property to a assisted living provider if we think that is important. We could give them teh gas well if we want to throw away that money. How about a combination of public and private?

Having said that, there are other issues for our future and I believe Ron Johnson provides a fresh approach as he has experience in many area and has not been a part of the past decisions made by government that he would now have to defend. Fresh leadership that has a plan to look at everything from all angles to make an educated decision is what we need.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Sep-08-13 7:56 AM

commentor..."I'm still waiting for Judeye to answer how much govt money comes to her house??? "

You mean our ss?

It is NONE of your business.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DKexpat

Sep-07-13 9:24 PM

Let's see...

(1) The cost of a pizza versus making families drive to Irving or Hamburg - and you know elderly friends won't be able to drive that far.

(2) IGT funds that simply will go elsewhere if not used for the CCH.

(3) Edwards trying to leave office (early) "with a bang" to try to make up for years and years of bad decisions.

(4) "Sell" legislators in the same boat as Edwards and using the sale proceeds to get reelected.

(5) And frankly - go ahead and hit 'disagee' - a callous disregard for senior citizens who've spent their life living and working - and paying taxes - in Chautauqua County.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoliticianPENNYWISEDOLLARSTUPID

Sep-07-13 7:58 PM

By the way Fred how do you figure that at 100% you pay $0.50 per $1000, and at only 20% in pomfret at 20% your paying $2.50 per $1000. By my calculations @ 20% you would only be paying $0.10 per thousand.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Sep-07-13 6:02 PM

If it's true that the home is losing $7,000 per day as alleged by Edwards, is it accruing a deficit, or are the IGT funds being used to cover these expenses? If so, then it's really not costing local taxpayers anything, or very little. Of course the truth might prevent Edwards & the CCLeg from getting their hands on a quick $16.5M.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoliticianPENNYWISEDOLLARSTUPID

Sep-07-13 6:02 PM

excuse the typo* Note the decimal point.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoliticianPENNYWISEDOLLARSTUPID

Sep-07-13 6:00 PM

a 5 Year period would have LOST a AVERAGE of -341,909.20. Not the decimal point and check the FACTS Read the Budget and Read the reports in OPEN BOOK NEW York.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoliticianPENNYWISEDOLLARSTUPID

Sep-07-13 5:58 PM

FredoniaFred what part of if the IGT money isn't accepted it goes elsewhere doesn't register with you. Yes the county home get government assistance. I do not dispute that however with the assistance the County Home is in the BLACK, not the RED. numbers obtained are found in Greg Edwards budgets. IGT Money is not free, I get that. We pay for that in the long run, but isn't it a good thing to be getting a service for all the taxes you pay.If you think your taxes will decrease by selling the Home you are sadly mistaken. If you think a $8.3 million profit for selling a Nursing Home is a wise idea, when with government assistance ( that will go somewhere else if not here) can turn a profit that is helping to off set other county expenditures, you are wrong. Not to mention Check my numbers I said nothing about 3.8 million. The average revenue is 656,449 per year over 5 years. Where as the County Overall revenue is Only 314,539.80. So again without the home and IGT money the county over

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FredoniaFred

Sep-07-13 3:26 PM

The CCH has received $19.8 Million in IGT subsidies the last 6 years. Deduct the $3.8M that Politician claims the CCH has in surplus during this period and there is a $16M loss over 6 years.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoliticianPENNYWISEDOLLARSTUPID

Sep-07-13 12:58 PM

somewhere else. If you'd like to fact check these please do. You can find all the bottom line Chautauqua Budget info on the county's website in the finance departments icon under the budget. Also use the website see through New York, look for the open book Icon. Also used for current stats search Wikipedia CHAUTAUQUA County.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoliticianPENNYWISEDOLLARSTUPID

Sep-07-13 12:54 PM

A couple things to keep in mind, as of 12/31/12 the county still owed on a capital improvement project at the COUNTY Home The amount still owed was 8,430,000. By a current estimate the county should still owe 8,110,000 as of 9/1/13. That being said after you take that into account the left over money from the sale will only be 8,390,000. That comes down to $62 a person. or about 18 cents per day per person for one year. Now on a 5 year average the county home has been in the Black a total of 656,449 per year (5 year average). While the county bottom line has only averaged 314,539.80 in the black for 5 years. That means without the county home over 5 years there's a average debt of -341,909.20. Those of you who say well IGT money is bailing out the home, you are correct money must be spent in the IGT to get money from IGT. IGT money will continue to be spent if not here in Chautauqua County then somewhere else, its the simple fact about all government, if it doesn't go here it will go

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

tigger9m

Sep-07-13 10:40 AM

commentor, your taxes will go up approx. $1.76 a month. Just about the cost of 1 pizza per year. It's sad that some people don't feel others who need their help are worth that cost.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notalways

Sep-07-13 10:16 AM

Do we really believe that all or any of our problems will be solved by selling? Remember using this money to support other operations instead of spending down the capital project money invested in the county home will just prolong that debt. Also if it is private they will recieved state and federal help at a higher rate and that is tax money. Take a look at the tax payer money that went into their last purchase in the way of tax breaks and IDA. They didn't ask for it till after the deal. If this is our standard then why do we support departments that run on all local share taxes such as the county ex office? At one leg meeting it was stated that it would cost the average tax payer $18.00 per year to keep the county home. Dumping 16.5 into general will not make Edwards look like a winner except to people that don't get it or don't care. It is interesting we will pay for what we want,but not care about others.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FredoniaFred

Sep-07-13 9:09 AM

The $3M or more per year that the CCH loses translates to about 50 cents per thousand of assessed valuation where the locality is assessed at 100%. In Pomfret where the assessments are at 20%, this translates to more than $2.50 per $1000 assessment.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FredoniaFred

Sep-07-13 9:06 AM

The county home will still be there taking care of the needs of the elderly after it is privatized. Private homes like Heritage, LSS and Tanglewood take care of the county's elderly very well.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Sep-07-13 9:05 AM

You are asking the wrong question. The question you should be asking is...How much will my taxes go UP if the Home is NOT sold???? I'm still waiting for Judeye to answer how much govt money comes to her house???

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Sep-07-13 8:55 AM

Edwards says: "...the CCH is losing money b/c it takes direct taxpayer subsidies to keep it operating." However, he quickly points out that Medicaid & Medicare payments are available to everyone? Where does this money come from, Mr Edwards, anonymous donors?

Edwards then tries to defend the sale by stating: "...there's no mandate (forcing the county) to provide skilled nursing." I interpret this indifference to mean that since we (as a county) aren't obligated to take care of those who actually need it, why should we?

Regardless of whether it's costing us a relatively minor amt or making a small profit, I believe the real reason why Edwards & those in the CCLeg who favor selling the home is b/c they want to use the proceeds towards next year's budget. Without this $16.5M, the anticipated tax hike will be even more staggering, proving to everyone just how incompetent our elected reps are at running county govt.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Sep-07-13 8:48 AM

How much are we DIRECTLY subsidizing the County Home? Exactly how much would our..MY...taxes go down if they sell this HOME?

If we do not take the IGT funds, will our taxes go down?

Not much if at all...and NO....I answer both of my questions.

They are misleading us once again with all this mumbo jumbo trying to convince us that we need tax relief and therefore must sell the County Home. Yes, would love some tax relief..but I am realistic and KNOW that my taxes will not go down one cent even if they sell this HOME.

What will go down is the use of my taxes on services that help those most in need, something I fully support. Tell me, what exactly is a better use of my tax dollars than to care for our most vulnerable citizens, those who are my neighbors, family and friends?

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 18 of 18 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web