Expense reimbursements, Air-Evac dues added to budget

Even though the Harrison City Council’s Finance Committee last Monday voted not to give out some raises to firefighters and to table discussion of take-home police cars, aldermen did vote to recommend increasing some spending that won’t really affect Mayor Pat Moles’ proposed 2010 budget.

Alderman Wayne Cone told the committee, which consists of all council members, that he’d been approached about increasing the city’s rate of reimbursement for travel expenses.

Alderman Joe Crockett (left) talks with Parks and Recreation director John Phillips following the Harrison City Council Finance Committee meeting.
The city currently pays employees 30 cents per mile for use of a private vehicle for city business.

Alderman Dan Harness said he’d like to see the city’s reimbursement rate be at the state level, which he said is 52 or 53 cents per mile. Even then, he said, it would cost the city little money because so few employees use personal vehicles for city business.

But Alderman Deon Moser said the message of Monday night’s meeting was that there was no money for additional spending. As such, he said he thought it was the wrong time to be increasing spending at all.

Finance director Gerald Ragland said 30 cents a mile doesn’t necessarily even cover expenses of wear and tear on an automobile, so employees are in essence subsidizing the city.

Alderman Mark Fowler suggested city expenses could actually go up if all city employees stopped using their personal vehicles and used city vehicles, but Ragland said city-owned cars aren’t even available in some departments.

Moser again said the points all had some merit, but he didn’t think expanding spending was the message from Monday night’s meeting.

“I can’t support it,” he said.

Alderman Joe Crockett agreed with Moser, although he said he wouldn’t mind seeing the city match Boone County’s mileage reimbursement rate of 43 cents a mile.

The committee did vote to recommend raising the rate to 43 cents per mile, with Moser casting the sole “no” vote.

The final issue before the committee was a move the council took for the first time in the 2009 budget.

Last year, the council voted to pay Air-Evac dues for all employees, but that wasn’t in Moles’ proposed budget.

Ragland told aldermen the city spent $8,145 on the package last year. Only a handful of employees had used the service over the last year, but it had saved them thousands of dollars each in medical bills.

Harness said that with city employees getting no raises, paying Air-Evac dues would at least be something to give them to let them know they’re appreciated.

The council voted unanimously to recommend paying Air-Evac dues, tentatively earmarking some of the $12,500 saved from deleting raises for 15 firemen.

The full council will meet Monday, Dec. 7, to vote on the final budget.

Comments

I agree also that the true intent behind the site/article is self serving and the origin is easily ascertained, BUT it does give the consumer valid questions that they might not otherwise think of. Furthermore if you were being sold one of these and I fully expect that before long we will see an 'Extenz' type informercial touting the benefits of these memberships, you would likely come away thinking that if you were having a possible MI or Stroke that you could dial the number and the helicopter would come. I suspect that the number of people with subscriptions that are flown by the program with whom they have a subscription is less than 4% and I suspect that these subscriptions make up a huge amount of profit for the respective company. Also, I suspect that when an aircraft from one of these programs leaves the area because they've sold all of the subscriptions they can, they don't inform all their members whose annual payment is set up on auto-renew. Forgive the cynicism, I'm feeling rather Scroogy. Happy Holidays, may you and your families never need these services. Fly Safe.

I realize that and I have my own very strong opinions regarding this, and most everything else you read on here, BUT I don't propose to formulate conclusions for anyone but myself. Anyone doing this job is obviously intelligent and can form their own opinions (especially if that opinion recognizes propaganda in the form of news). So I see your point 100% but occasionally instead of censor something I put it out there in the hope of beginning a discussion.

As for the site and again I have very strong opinions on the matter, I do think it gives people some great questions to ask to make themselves much more informed. Buy one, don't buy one, that's up to the individual, but the site (although clearly propaganda) gives the consumer some valid questions that would likely be missed during what some describe as high pressure sales pitches.

In the end I hear ya and respect what you're saying. FLY SAFE.

Michael,

Unfortunately the credibility of the article has to be questioned. If you search for the owner of the website it is linked to an EMS operator who doesn't have a membership program and an unbiased look into the matter should be done instead.

I believe everyone should research anything they are paying for prior to pouring you hard earned cash into it no matter the actual monetary value. The membership program wasn't started here in the US but is mirrored from several "RESPECTED and SUCCESSFUL" providers overseas, the fine print isn't all that fine really. It states in no uncertain terms what you are entitled to as a member and the limits of the policy on the brochure. Your private insurance will pay a majority of the bill "If medically necessary" however, the copay and deductable for many people is still quite high and in this day and age people often don't have that type of cash sitting in the bank. $65 dollars(for example) per household per year is quite worth it given the alternative.

As to the "business practices" I also believe people should do their research prior to providing "facts" on what company "X" does and leave rumor and speculation out of the mix. The world is full of speculators who for their own personal reasons often bash anothers practices without knowing all of the facts and that is poison for our industry.

Great points. Here is a link to a site I came accross that makes some very valid points and gives some valuable questions to ask before making a decision on this subject.

http://www.nomembershiprequired.net/page2.html

Thanks for taking the time to post.

Happy Holidays

The City Council needs to read the fine print on those oh so wonderful air ambulance memberships. 99% of the people that have them never use them. If you have insurance that's gonna pay for the majority of the ride anyway. If AEL transports you for reasons that are deemed "not medically necessary" they will come after you for the bill. It's all smoke and mirrors. Horrible business practices, suckering the uninformed public into buying these crap memberships.

Post new comment

This space is available for advertising. Contact info@emsflightcrew.com for details!

EMS Flight Crew Logo