Less than half a million dollars.

That could spell the difference between keeping local authority over Coos County Public Health or turning it over to the state. County officials hope voters will see enough value in keeping the department under county control and pay the tax levy amount for three years, starting in 2009.

The Coos County Commissioners have approved placing the measure on the November ballot. It would add 9 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value for a total of $1.35 million over the three years from property owners.

“We are looking at just a minimal amount,” Public Health Administrator Frances Smith said. “This is by no means will be maintaining our current services.”

Public health oversees a wide variety of services including monitoring drinking water quality, restaurant inspections, immunizations, family planning, emergency preparedness, communicable disease tracking and nutrition programs.

This year the department had carryover money at the beginning of the year, but still needed to borrow money from the county to get through the first quarter. Next year that carryover will not be there, Smith said.� � � 

� The county provides facilities and maintenance, but no other support. Public Health can use that as matching support for program grants mostly through federal and state sources.

Commissioner Kevin Stufflebean said in an e-mail Saturday he had been considering a tax levy since April. The recent vote to place it on the ballot was supported by fellow Commissioner Nikki Whitty, but opposed by Commissioner John Griffith.

Keeping local authority over public health is the main motivation. The state may not provide the facility support the county has, Smith said, and that likely would mean reduced services to the citizens of Coos County.

� “It really boils down to local control or state control,” Stufflebean said.

The health department also is the local critical response agency in the event of a natural disaster or disease outbreak. Without local control, the initial response could be delayed, Stufflebean said.

Griffith feels the vote may backfire. He said if the levy passes that will offer proof to the agencies funding public health that local people are willing to provide money out of their own pockets, perhaps at the expense of future funding. If it fails, that may put current services at risk because failing to approve such a small amount may give the impression people don’t care to continue some services.

“Either way, it’s kind of a risk,” Griffith said.

He also would rather have had the levy put on the ballot by petition, or gathering signatures of registered voters in support of the levy. That way at least there would be some proven interest.

Stufflebean believes the interest is already there.

“I am a strong believer that voters are strongly supportive of ensuring that our community is healthy and that public health rises to the top,” Stufflebean said. “I do believe that voters will support the minimal amount that is being requested.”