Letter to the editor

I think the cause of Kingfisher’s issue over transport of non-emergency patients lies in the second paragraph of Mr. Stewart’s response:

In 1969 “ ... the community voted in a non-earmarked, one-cent sales tax to support an emergency ambulance service.”

Creating new, non-earmarked taxes creates a political grab bag where there will be many more losers than winners and where critical services can easily fall into the loser category.

It would be interesting to see how many tax dollars that one-cent created in 2018 and how many of those dollars actually went to the emergency ambulance service.

Perhaps Mr. Stewart should promise to fix the problem if the Kingfisher citizens and/or government would earmark the dollars to support it.

With the significant increase in tax dollars due to the oil boom one would have to question why the city can’t afford another ambulance and crew.

If they can’t, perhaps one should re-read the headline article in today’s paper.

Is ambulance service more or less important than trails?  Just sayin .....

Tom Edwards

Grand Rapids, Mich.