[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98,110],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":56,"_68":69,"_70":56,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6219995,"mediaKeyId","3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1","parentId",3619344,"title","Board discusses EMS funding, PCC reimbursements and ambulance funding; schedules deeper review on next agenda","audioSeconds",85,"startMs",3092565,"endMs",3178485,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1&start=3092&end=3178","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1/thumbnail_3092565.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6219995/Osceola-County/Iowa/Board-discusses-EMS-funding-PCC-reimbursements-and-ambulance-funding-schedules-deeper-review-on-next-agenda","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6219995-67de1891cf10350307d369a36b032350/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148630&Signature=ix2wl0Nnw-G5CrbKxWsff0GLWC9lycoc~XtIorTxbKiJohWrWxReLsUjBGIYwinEDPEiXj7IQ60xMwWCqbKowdPkT8bi~jSWOeYPYbLtJN72GNpp~~iaCJ1V1c0jNjSnGxvmlJoRk8wDmHbM~f1dEHEs-BmfanYraWoGYl0mKbeF5VBUgpIB0iLfCQQ6DX90O70jQhEsWGy74YD7Gg0WBPpXJakHAHlT4vBwhXioFEDOZbiUC5Amq5JwLAoALiOjrw45875D0Yp1ZwwJEEido9~HPFKa58JLI2mGxPpd2AfgBDXNTK9nuIW6djLofeeE4TnCKPEBZqs~2PVVsK66Yg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Osceola County, Iowa","date","2025-05-30T22:01:40Z","article","Osceola County board members discussed the accounting treatment of Patient Care Collection (PCC) reimbursements and transfers related to EMS operations and an upcoming ambulance purchase.

Members said the state auditor had advised in the past that PCC reimbursements should be returned to the fund that expended the dollars; some members reported that more counties are now running CMS billing and that practices might be evolving. One board member said about $200,000 had been involved previously and that the county had transferred funds into an ambulance fund (for example, a $150,000 transfer referenced) for an ambulance purchase; members clarified that some of those transfers came from the general fund rather than EMS fund balances.

The board agreed the question of whether PCC receipts and related expenses should remain in general or be transferred to an EMS-specific fund required further discussion. Members said they would place the item on a future agenda — the board suggested the June 10 meeting — to decide whether to keep PCC money in general fund accounts or move recovered amounts back into an EMS fund. No formal motion was taken; the item was recorded as a planned future agenda discussion.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","BOS Meeting 5/27/25","oneSentenceSummary","Board members discussed whether certain EMS-related reimbursements (PCC money) should remain in the general fund or be transferred to the EMS fund and noted a planned future agenda item to sort fund transfers and ambulance purchases.","taxTitle","taxId",52056,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":56,"_68":69,"_70":56,"_71":72,"_73":72},6220000,"Board reviews drainage district balances, sets target assessments and plans resolution to formalize changes",1182,1259105,2441115,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1&start=1259&end=2441","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1/thumbnail_1259105.jpg","/articles/6220000/Osceola-County/Iowa/Board-reviews-drainage-district-balances-sets-target-assessments-and-plans-resolution-to-formalize-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220000-928bce843994c9d41317117fecafa33f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148630&Signature=EMcz4b5E0owxNqOEEFbvJsjsNu1Gk0us00OI5TXAyKDCkoqkR2YnRIA4n6Xs6rT-dl1QF27zp7C5O5omNDKokK~EZnnmKei3~mer9UwTKIA9Y8GYZvjk-jRpQ3OobgM9a-VDhXcy~bjRZhGfWNYjYznKt5XUTT9555lV7~KN8EBrVD3TtTwauC-70zbPdpJL7si11ylg1PPhRAQrfxL4aaiTmS19f3a-bGc3KyFK1xaqv0Gxzn20ADUpBF9Qh3NHJ8UElK6u19V3cwSqTqFjoKDwYRvdooeIUHa3HXex2FSbP1KnmhHnvmVbV~Rgw91FMGJlr0ekWbM4Qnj2u1tp0Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Osceola County board members spent a substantial portion of the meeting reviewing balances and recent expenses for multiple drainage districts and set target balances and assessments to be formalized by a future resolution.

Staff presented accounting summaries showing several districts in the red and others with positive balances. The board discussed individual districts (referred to as Joint 1, Joint 2, Joint 3, Joint 6, DD 9, DD 10, DD 11, DD 28, DD 30, DD 39 and DD 43 lateral 2 among others). For example, Joint 1 was discussed as previously carrying a $20,000 target balance; after debate the board agreed to reduce the target to $17,500. Joint 2’s target balance was set at $35,000 and Joint 6 at $24,000. The board also discussed DD 43 lateral 2 (the Feldcamp petition) and designated an assessment of $12,000 to that district. For several other districts staff recommended balances and the board gave direction on target amounts (examples: DD 10, DD 11, DD 28, DD 30, with proposed balances discussed during the meeting).

Board members considered whether to hold separate meetings or involve legal counsel for drainage ditches with outstanding waivers; they discussed the county’s limited ability to reimburse 50% while waivers remain outstanding and the use of stamped warrants (6% interest) where funds are insufficient. One board member asked whether additional historical expense reports could be prepared to inform future assessments; staff noted drainage accounting does not update like regular accounting and historical data is limited.

The board directed staff to prepare a resolution formalizing the assessments and balances discussed and said that resolution would appear on a future agenda for approval. No formal resolution or vote adopting the new assessments occurred at this meeting; instead the board provided direction to staff and set target balances to be included in a forthcoming resolution.","After an extended discussion about numerous drainage districts, the board set target balances and instructed staff to prepare a resolution for formal assessment amounts on several drainage districts, including reductions and increases depending on recent activity.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":56,"_68":69,"_70":56,"_71":72,"_73":72},6220005,"Board approves several appointments and reappointments, including new EMA 911 coordinator",242,748195,990990,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1&start=748&end=990","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1/thumbnail_748195.jpg","/articles/6220005/Osceola-County/Iowa/Board-approves-several-appointments-and-reappointments-including-new-EMA-911-coordinator","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220005-4c4b12df0d45ed44af8a14c276830f6a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148630&Signature=Stz-z-C4T8pkWbhyMBWLwYKN5mUHXSnC5gPOKUHcXIdqzAazDOO7xUaEk4XXf4fpOZEd0qzeZuPlxdRNj~JXi-FEDx3xgZeuH9mXJ-njPiz2HKGZCo8i1nfnRv0Oje6ykr5fFQPM6T44RfZVay-siYq2TGykQZCK7F~LljVF34OTtw6hcT2gNySzjDyI3ZsU8b~npimzjDCxeQgAmb2Zh2x0UXHHH-9yP8VwG3AYHMn2XckAwLEGq9vf1xtvvprQv38qInr6cieU82S1mzL7ZYE19ery~Lnz-AkKVAS~3aKOykuaA2e2yVuuqvjFmkO0CFEi519eGazIsBTmZRUJjw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Osceola County board members approved a slate of appointments and reappointments to county boards and an emergency management position.

The board reappointed John Bender to the board of adjustment for a term expiring May 12, 2030. Members praised Bender’s attendance and service. The board also appointed Nick Schafer to a previously vacant board of adjustment seat; speakers noted Schafer is the owner of a local business and a repeat applicant to county boards. Merlin Sandersfeld and Sue Benz were reappointed to the zoning and planning commission for terms expiring June 23, 2030; both were described as regular attendees who are willing to continue serving.

In a separate item, the board appointed Corey Shearer as the county’s Emergency Management Agency (EMA) 911 coordinator. The motion to appoint Shearer passed on a voice vote with no recorded opposition.

All appointments and reappointments were moved, seconded and approved by voice vote during the meeting. The board did not discuss changes to terms or conditions of service beyond confirming willingness to serve and attendance records.","The board confirmed multiple appointments and reappointments: John Bender reappointed to the board of adjustment; Nick Schafer appointed to a vacant seat; Merlin Sandersfeld and Sue Benz reappointed to the zoning and planning commission; and Corey Shearer was appointed as the EMA 911 coordinator.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":56,"_68":69,"_70":56,"_71":72,"_73":72},6220010,"Board disallows homestead military exemption after assessor review; owner offered to repay credits",252,480470,732514,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1&start=480&end=732","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1/thumbnail_480470.jpg","/articles/6220010/Osceola-County/Iowa/Board-disallows-homestead-military-exemption-after-assessor-review-owner-offered-to-repay-credits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220010-b9b581a5e946238720c0d1018d54e7e3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148630&Signature=bYBHOaOIN0Jomwjlv3Y8E9erptLmxB8V1xcl8Cq9wf1Ap~Ih8aPDF6sMhvvYgMPDM54zLK501jJBH4kcpfhzmP1O2XCcgLAUHuEoj~pMfx3O2fCVnLpVSEHnVt7hl-0lGlgui8gOLI9gf6Py6BMISTPGFH0PFkoBE72iJMlAZw2avb~zc6jT7sohwScacz~3AVC0iKEIjRICVG10dJGZ~0Cfy1EZ2tHEbhMFMIVYBFd3kh23X4LtAjITGjOe-~3x1ZwkuFxtV9xQ2vMOz7QgWuZo0I4cEfxSRw-EbDdpRTIPujyl38uyhjGEM-bP86osKhXjb4pkzCmXBj8nvTbiXg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Osceola County board members voted to disallow a Homestead Military Service property tax exemption for a parcel after the assessor reported the property owner claimed primary residence in Arizona.

The assessor had reviewed homestead and military exemption applications and flagged one instance where an owner had claimed Arizona as a primary residence while receiving the county exemption. The assessor told the board the landowner acknowledged the error, apologized, and expressed willingness to repay any incorrectly granted credits for past years. The assessor recommended disallowing the exemption going forward while the residency situation remains unchanged.

A board member moved to approve the disallowance as presented by the assessor; the motion was seconded by Lauren and carried on a voice vote with no recorded opposition. The board specified that the disallowance would apply going forward and did not take action to retroactively void credits during the meeting beyond the assessor’s comment that the landowner had offered to make past payments if needed.

The board did not cite a specific statute during the discussion; the assessor’s review and the board’s action centered on application eligibility based on primary residence claims. The board directed staff to proceed with the disallowance as recommended by the assessor.","The board voted to disallow a Homestead Military Service property tax exemption for a property where the owner claimed Arizona as primary residence; the assessor reported the owner was willing to repay past credits.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":56,"_68":69,"_70":56,"_71":72,"_73":72},6220015,"Osceola County board discusses $2.50 medical-examiner investigator fee split, plans follow-up with medical examiner",2784,150531,2934640,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1&start=150&end=2934","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3619344-14488f02fde516b992d87d5272218fe1/thumbnail_150531.jpg","/articles/6220015/Osceola-County/Iowa/Osceola-County-board-discusses-250-medical-examiner-investigator-fee-split-plans-follow-up-with-medical-examiner","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220015-d54279fb7475e279390c8a145a068c22/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148630&Signature=TLVNSenmqeHFB4XFRcwmWP0UTYwVOiU~7XBefZjKPp4x2OkN0GpLDKrUu1C3uyQhVAltbT7CpwqsKhcrUrEvdPESfTakF2JViu~cPN6R48KboNA~XXQEFNLgDIps3l1dK2XlhcFOpvVKr3gKtRqxKolM684r-dhHJzEbANnHBuVij3ZqorEPTyAOWYRIuvuLyTJcvWKav85l~3sev12~DaVvcUoaJAafHvj8G63EGASD2HVryUbcnc0Hwe~BjqNK~KPuiIimV3gGCtwoO05hpwc4kWm~4Mkr0Rk5LxEqsqefuqJdnpSfEjX7DoKdp6GVOsFOu6rIaEtAU3ZW~risrg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Osceola County board members spent part of their meeting debating how to allocate a $2.50 fee paid for medical-examiner investigations and agreed to meet with the county medical examiner before making a formal change.

Board members said the current practice has been to split the $2.50 evenly between the medical examiner and investigators. The county’s medical examiner, Dr. Koster, and board members have reported instances where the examiner recommended a different split depending on the workload; board members referenced examples in which an investigator received $1.50 and the examiner $1.00 in certain cases.

Board members expressed concern about making a departmental allocation decision without the department head present. One board member said the medical examiner had submitted case-level recommendations in the past and that some cases were “case dependent on the workload.” Several members said they would prefer discussing the issue with the medical examiner before changing the policy and that an informal conversation or a short special meeting might suffice.

The board asked staff to contact Dr. Koster and arranged for a possible meeting; one member said they would meet with the medical examiner at 12:30 the same day and invited other board members to join. No motion to change the fee split was made; members framed the item as discussion and direction to staff to obtain the medical examiner’s input and return with a recommendation.

The board noted scheduling constraints (many Tuesdays) but agreed it would be acceptable to convene a brief meeting on a mutually available date if the medical examiner preferred to attend.

Looking ahead, the board said it would revisit the matter once they had the medical examiner’s recommended protocol and any case-level examples to inform whether the $2.50 should remain evenly split or be allocated on a case-by-case basis.","County board members debated how to split a $2.50 fee paid to the medical examiner and investigators, agreed to seek input from the medical examiner before finalizing any policy change.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board discusses EMS funding, PCC reimbursements and ambulance funding; schedules deeper review on next agenda

Board reviews drainage district balances, sets target assessments and plans resolution to formalize changes

Board approves several appointments and reappointments, including new EMA 911 coordinator

Board disallows homestead military exemption after assessor review; owner offered to repay credits

Osceola County board discusses $2.50 medical-examiner investigator fee split, plans follow-up with medical examiner