Rural Ambulance Service

This issue has been taking up quite a bit of the county government's time and energy, not to mention a fair bit of reserve funds. Last night I attended the quorum court meeting to hear the 3rd reading and observe the vote. It was interesting. There were over a dozen people in attendance, with a handful that made their public comment. Each expressed a different opinion on what tax should be raised to support the ambulance service. The court itself was considering two options: a small millage increase for everyone in the county, and/or a  $40 fee for property owners in unincorporated areas. The jp's themselves couldn't agree on what to pass, as those representing incorporated areas wanted only the fee, and those representing rural areas wanted the millage. The end result was that neither proposal received the votes needed to have the issue on the ballot. I couldn't help thinking that even before the vote, all this energy was being wasted. People don't want their taxes raised. Either issue would have most likely failed at the ballot box in November. The quorum court can still get this on the ballot if they can find the votes needed in an early or special meeting next month, after that it'll have to wait another year. Again, I don't think it'll matter.
The voters are unlikely to pass a tax increase they feel is unnecessary, and rightfully so.  We pay an awful lot in taxes. So far, the county has not done a good job informing the voters why a tax increase is needed. I think we can all agree ambulance service is necessary, here's what the county needs to answer if they want us to pay more for it:
1. Explain why those using the ambulance in rural areas don't just pay for the service as needed. This is, after all, what insurance is for. Are there a lot of non-reimbursed ambulance runs? If so, what is the actual cost of those non-reimbursed runs. What is the added cost to the cities for just the rural runs they make?
2. If the cost is for the establishment and maintenance of the service and not the cost of the service itself, what is that cost and how is it calculated? Furthermore, how is the county's cost separate from the incorporated city's cost determined. The cities have submitted "bills" that the county is paying from reserve funds now, but how were those amounts arrived at? Is it reasonably a fair share? Can a better price be negotiated? If the county is paying for a certain percentage of the establishment, what percent of control would the county have in administering that service? How would that be determined and implemented? Doesn't the county have the right and responsibility to oversee and control costs for a service it is partially establishing?
3. What would it cost for the county to establish its own rural service? Or take over all service in the county, cities included. Is "renting" service from the city the most cost effective way? Is a private for profit service more cost effective or available?
4. Why do we need new taxes to cover this? Are there any other areas of the budget that can be cut
in order to provide this service? If so, what are they?  How much are we currently spending in each area of the county budget? Can all those expenditures be justified as necessary to the point of raising taxes for ambulance service?
These all need to be answered, made public, and most importantly, become common knowledge, before any tax hike is likely to be approved by the voters. Print this information in the local papers, a guest column shouldn't cost the county anything and it might help newspaper circulation. Publish the information on the county's website so anyone with internet access can read it. Have the JP's go to public meetings in their districts to get the information out and receive feedback. It doesn't have to be a special town hall; go to council meetings, farmers markets, organization meetings, churches, etc...
If it is determined that a tax increase is the best option, give the voters more than just two choices to choose from. Beyond the considered fee or millage increase, consider increasing sales tax, voluntary dues, pursue grants or private donations,  or anything else someone might come up with. This again would have to become public and common knowledge. Clearly explain the benefits, drawbacks, and costs for each option.  Listen to what tax option(s) the people are most agreeable to, and put that/those on the ballot.