COUNTIES: TAX EXPANDS SERVICES

CAPE GIRARDEAU - Agencies serving senior citizens have expanded programs in some counties through funding provided by property tax levies.

As a result, these agencies have been able to reach elderly persons who had not previously been served by such programs.

These new services include: delivering meals to shut-ins living in rural areas; providing transportation services to rural residents; providing assistance for people who are trying to take care of elderly parents or spouses in their homes; and offering programs that focus on helping the elderly to live independently.

"There were just so many people that current programs were not reaching," explained Lawrence County Clerk Bob Bartelsmeyer. "We had a meals-on-wheels program in our cities, but it was not reaching out to rural areas. There was a feeling this tax could help because there were so many people we were not reaching."

Bartelsmeyer explained that the goals of the senior services tax in his county have been: to expand programs to all parts of the county, to begin new programs that are needed, and to enable elderly people to live independently.

Lawrence County, located in Southwest Missouri with a population of a little over 30,000, said the tax increase passed by about 500 votes last August. The new 5-cent levy took effect this year and raised $77,000 for senior citizen programs.

Butler County, which approved the tax levy last April, is in the process of distributing approximately $100,000 raised from the first year of the levy.

Reynolds County has approved a 3-cent levy and Ste. Genevieve County approved a 5-cent levy in November that will take effect when 1991 tax bills are sent out this fall.

County clerks in those three counties agree with Bartelsmeyer about the potential the additional revenue has for assisting elderly citizens who are getting little if any of the services provided now.

Voters in Cape Girardeau County will decide on Tuesday whether to approve a 5-cent property tax levy for services to the elderly. Under a state law passed three years ago, voters in a county may approve a levy of up to 5 cents for services to citizens age 60 and over. The funds cannot be used for buildings or for entertainment, according to the law.

The county commission is required to appoint a seven-member board to administer the tax money. Most counties have appointed boards made up of senior citizens. It is up to the board to establish criteria for distributing the funds.

Most boards meet monthly to make decisions on allocating funds and to monitor senior citizen programs receiving such funding.

In some of the smaller counties, like Reynolds, distributing the money is not a big problem because there are not many agencies seeking funds. But in larger counties, the decision is usually more difficult because there are more agencies applying for funds and often more programs to consider funding.

Butler County Clerk John Dunivan explained that the board there, in deciding how to allocate the $100,000, recently requested proposals from agencies for various services that could be provided/

Initially, Dunivan said, the board tried to allocate money equally to programs dealing with transportation, nutrition, and home health care.

He added that the board's goal was to use the money for expanding services to new areas so that people in Butler County could see how the funds had improved services.

"You always have a problem that there are more worthwhile groups that want money than money we have, but the county commission reviewed the proposals and felt the board did a good job with the decisions it made," said Dunivan.

Bartelsmeyer agreed that there were more requests than funds available. The board in Lawrence County decided to hire a person, at a minimum-wage salary plus mileage, to handle administrative chores.

Programs focused on delivering meals to rural areas, which had not been provided in the past; expanding transportation for the elderly; providing help for home repairs and improving security; helping with housekeeping; and assisting with insurance and utility bills in some instances.

Bartelsmeyer added that the board was working with the Older Americans Transportation Service to provide more help to residents needing transportation to doctors' offices.

"Our services will be better than what we have had in the past, and as long as you meet the needs of the elderly, I think everyone feels it is a worthwhile tax," he observed.

Reynolds County Clerk Mike Harper said that the county levy there generates $20,000 annually, which is being applied so far to expand nutrition programs.

Harper explained that there are three nutrition centers in the county and most of this year's funds were allocated to those centers on the basis of total meals served last year. The funds are directed at getting meals to citizens who are unable to come to nutrition centers.

"It is new and just getting started but everything seems to be working smoothly," noted Harper. "It sounds like this will be a good thing."

Ste. Genevieve County Clerk Darryle Shuh said that nutrition centers in Ste. Genevieve and St. Marys had already made requests for some of the $65,000 that will become available next year.

Shuh said the commission is preparing to set up a board and is anxious to get representation from around the county.

"I'm sure there will be a lot of different groups interested in getting some of these funds," said Shuh. "There will be an effort to share the money as much as possible, to meet all the needs we can."

Shuh said officials in Ste. Genevieve County were surprised that the tax passed last year because there was very little publicity about it. But, he noted that elderly voters turned out and it received 60 percent support.

In Butler County, Dunivan said no one knew what to expect when the issue was submitted to voters, but the public seemed to think it would be good for the county and so it passed.

Bartelsmeyer noted that in Lawrence County, there was a high-profile campaign for the tax. He said there was no organized opposition, but some people were concerned about a property tax increase and also questioned what services would be funded.