Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Senior Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advocates urge county to protect senior centers as proposed formula shifts could cut some sites' funding
Summary
Speakers and commissioners debated proposed changes to the county aging funding formula; advocates warned the draft would reduce funding to some senior centers and urged keeping a "hold harmless" approach or moving the senior mill levy to a visible line item.
Seniorsservice advocates and commissioners pressed Sedgwick County on June 3 over proposed changes to the countyfunding formula for senior centers and the need for clearer budgeting and potential hold-harmless protections.
Andre Cisco, speaking on behalf of seniors, said the current county contribution to senior centers totals $575,250 and that Sedgwick County Department on Aging reports roughly 8,83[0] participants across centers; he calculated that current support amounts to under $72 per participant per year and argued costs have risen and more funding is required to sustain services such as meals and classes.
Speakers and commissioners discussed several funding approaches under consideration, including option two (which would cover core operating costs), an attendance-weighted model, and an "equal sociology" (neighborhood) weighting. Cisco and others warned some centers could see significant reductions under some formulas and urged a hold‑harmless approach and clearer public information.
Commissioner H. proposed treating the aging mill levy as a separate line item on the tax bill and county budget so voters and taxpayers could see exactly how aging services are funded. He estimated an additional $100,000 in levy funding would translate to approximately $0.42 per year on a median-priced home and argued voters had approved up to 1 mill for aging services in 1982, though actual levies have been below that cap.
Commissioners voted 5–0 to receive and file public comment on the subject; no change to the formula or appropriation was made at the meeting. Commissioners said staff should return with data on unmet needs and the distributional effects of any proposed formula changes before any final decision.
What happens next: Staff and commissioners will examine the hold‑harmless proposals and distributional impacts and may propose a separate budgeting treatment for the aging mill levy to make debate and choices more transparent.
Quotes are taken from the June 3 Sedgwick County Board of County Commissioners meeting transcript and public comments.
