Rural ambulance service to build new facility with $300,000 federal grant
The Southwest Webster Ambulance Service in Gowrie is in desperate need of an upgrade. EMT Terry Towne said they outgrew the building 15 years ago.
'When I started 30 years ago, all of our supplies were in the bay with the ambulance, but now very little of them are because there's no room,' Towne said.
To save space, they started storing equipment inside their meeting room instead. The bay now only stores their two ambulances.
One is nine-years-old and the other is 16-years-old. There's a cabinet inside the bay that opens directly onto one of the vehicles. According to Towne, newer ambulances are getting larger and wider, so while they're tight for space now, it may be worse in the future.
However, federal funding will now help them create a new building. Senator Chuck Grassley announced $2.3 million in federal funding through the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Development Grant Program. The money was awarded to five communities, and Gowrie was one of them.
'Many Iowans call rural communities home, and they deserve our support and investment. These federal dollars will upgrade critical infrastructure, promote economic development, and boost health and safety initiatives throughout rural Iowa,' said Grassley.
None of this would've been possible without the help of one local Gowrie business. Marcie Boerner is the CEO and General Manager for the Webster-Calhoun Cooperative Telephone Association. She applied for the grant on behalf of the Southwest Webster Ambulance Service.
Webster-Calhoun has a revolving loan fund, which means they're able to make 0% loans to businesses and organizations within their community to support economic growth.
Scholastic Spotlight: National excellence for Iowa teachers in math and science
She found out earlier this year they were awarded $300,000 for the project. The ambulance service will provide a 20% match.
'It's actually a program that's a win-win for the both of us. So, its adding $360,000 to our revolving loan fund but as they pay it back to us, we're able to continue to reloan it to other businesses and organizations throughout our service area,' said Boerner.
The partnership with the medical services crew was an easy decision for Boerner.
'There's three [hospitals] but they're 30 minutes away, and so it's really important and really fortunate as a citizen and resident in Gowrie that we have the Southwest Webster Ambulance crew here in town,' she said.
Towne describes this loan as a dream come true.
'It's still very emotional when I think about it, because we've been trying to work on an ambulance but fundraisers only go so far and the cost of the buildings keep going up, even more than our fundraising has been going up. So, this is not anything we could've reached without this loan that we're getting from them,' she said.
The new building will be constructed in between the current facility and the town's fire department. The City of Gowrie already voted to buy the current facility to use it as a police station. The new facility is projected to be completed by the fall.
Towne also said they will use part of the grant to employ a paramedic. The Southwest Webster Ambulance is ran by volunteers. Employing a paramedic will ensure the station has someone available to better assist residents around the clock.
Currently, the police and fire departments are funded by property tax, but EMT is not. As a result, Webster County is also holding a special election on March 4th to change this. If approved, the county will dedicate a tax of 75-cents per $1,000 of taxable property. They expect this to raise around $200,000 annually for the ambulance service.
Iowa News:
Marshalltown skimming suspect charged in Newton case
Rural ambulance service to build new facility with $300,000 federal grant
Families explore thousands of reptiles at Iowa Reptile Show
Armed barricaded individual in Storm Lake, police on scene
IDP Chair talks 2026 plan, state and federal economic policy
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
a day ago
- Newsweek
SNAP Lawsuit Against Trump Admin Gets Clinton Judge
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton has been assigned to preside over a high-profile lawsuit brought by a coalition of states challenging the Trump administration's efforts to collect personal data from participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). On July 29, 2025, U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney, who has served in the Northern District of California since 1995 and currently holds senior status there, has been assigned to the case. Newsweek has sent email requests for comment to attorneys representing each of the twenty states, the federal agency, and attorneys for the administration. Why It Matters The lawsuit at the center of the case challenges a federal directive requiring states to turn over detailed personal information about SNAP recipients to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Filed by attorneys general from 20 states, the District of Columbia, and Kentucky, the suit argues that the USDA's demand for data—including names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and immigration status—oversteps legal boundaries and risks unauthorized sharing with other federal agencies. The plaintiffs contend the mandate violates federal privacy laws and the Administrative Procedure Act. Stock image/file photo: A woman looking a receipt while grocery shopping. Stock image/file photo: A woman looking a receipt while grocery shopping. GETTY What To Know State of California et al v. United States Department of Agriculture et al, challenges the federal mandate requiring states to provide the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) with sensitive personal information about all SNAP recipients dating back to January 2020. The legal challenge comes in response to a March 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump that directed federal agencies to expand interagency data sharing. Following that order, the USDA began requesting extensive SNAP data from state agencies, warning that noncompliance could jeopardize federal funding for state-run SNAP programs. The attorneys general claim that the USDA's actions force states into a legal and financial dilemma: either comply with what they consider an illegal federal directive or risk losing millions in SNAP funding. The lawsuit seeks to block enforcement of the USDA's demand and to prohibit the transfer of SNAP recipient data to agencies not directly involved in the program's administration, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Government Efficiency. The USDA has not yet publicly detailed its rationale for the data request or how the collected information would be used. How many People Use SNAP? Nationally, SNAP peaked at over 43 million in September 2020 and served an average of 41.7 million people per month in FY 2024. In New York, about 2.9 million people received SNAP benefits in May 2025, roughly 14.7% of the state's population. Of those, nearly 1 million were children. Nationally, more than 55 percent of SNAP recipients are in families with children. Although non-citizens are generally not eligible to receive SNAP for themselves, federal law allows them to apply on behalf of U.S. citizen children. The plaintiffs contend that the administration's policy change could disproportionately impact mixed-status families by exposing them to increased scrutiny or enforcement and that the USDA's demand for data that includes names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and immigration status is unlawful and exceeds the agency's authority. They argue that the data could be improperly shared with other federal agencies, particularly those involved in immigration enforcement. According to the lawsuit, such a requirement violates both the Administrative Procedure Act and federal laws that restrict the use and disclosure of SNAP data. What People Are Saying New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a press release dated July 28, 2025: "Families should be able to get the food assistance they need without fearing that they will be targeted by this administration," adding: "I will not allow the SNAP benefits that millions of New Yorkers count on to be put at risk. We are suing today to stop this illegal policy and protect New Yorkers' privacy and access to food assistance." The same day, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell pointed out in a press release: "In fact, the USDA itself has described SNAP as having "one of the most rigorous quality control systems in the federal government." Adding: "Those systems do not require, and have never required, that states turn over sensitive, personally identifying information about millions of Americans without any meaningful restrictions on how that information is used or shared with other agencies." California Attorney General Rob Bonta said: "President Trump continues to weaponize private and sensitive personal information—not to root out fraud, but to create a culture of fear where people are unwilling to apply for essential services," adding: "This unprecedented demand for SNAP data violates state and federal privacy laws. California will not comply. We'll see the President in court." What Happens Next No hearings have been scheduled, and the case remains in its early stages. Judge Chesney's assignment adds a notable element to the proceedings, as the court prepares to consider arguments over federal authority, data privacy, and administrative law. The case could have significant implications for the privacy rights of SNAP recipients, particularly in the states and jurisdictions involved in the lawsuit. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, it could limit the federal government's ability to collect or use personal information from individuals enrolled in federally funded food assistance programs.
CBS News
2 days ago
- CBS News
Michigan joins over 20 states in suing USDA over access to SNAP food stamp recipient records
Michigan is among nearly two dozen states that are suing the federal government over a pending rule that seeks extensive access to the personal records of food stamp recipients. A total of 22 states have signed onto the suit, which was filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the U.S. Department of Agriculture. "USDA's actions are unprecedented, threaten the privacy of millions of families, and ignore long-standing restrictions on the use and redisclosure of SNAP data," said the statement from Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's office. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, is the modern version of what was once called food stamps. The program is meant for lower-income people who complete an application and meet a series of eligibility requirements. While the SNAP program is federally funded, it has long been administered by the states, and the records of recipients are generally handled at that level. Michigan currently directs about $254 million in SNAP benefits a month through the Michigan Bridge Card network. Eligible recipients can use their individual or household allocations via the electronic benefits card toward purchasing food at most supermarkets and other participating retailers. Fruits, vegetables, meat and dairy products can be purchased with SNAP benefits. Paper products and cleaning supplies are among the ineligible grocery items. In May, the USDA issued a notice that it will require states and territories to share records of SNAP benefits and allotments with the federal government. While those instructions are on hold, according to the USDA, they do ask for personally identifiable information such as names, addresses, Social Security numbers and other records about applicants and recipients. The USA is also seeking information "sufficient to calculate the total dollar value" of SNAP benefits that participants received on and after Jan. 1, 2020. "For years, this program has been on autopilot, with no USDA insight into real-time data. The Department is focused on appropriate and lawful participation in SNAP, and today's request is one of many steps to ensure SNAP is preserved for only those eligible," USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said in her announcement. The lawsuit said the federal government has never previously asked for such detailed records on SNAP recipients. Quality control checks normally ask for sample data, and both inspections and audits would seek a limited range of information specifically allowed by law. "SNAP applicants provide their private information on the understanding, backed by long-standing state and federal laws, that their information will not be used for unrelated purposes," Nessel's office said. "USDA's actions are unprecedented, threaten the privacy of millions of families, and ignore long-standing restrictions on the use and redisclosure of SNAP data."
Los Angeles Times
3 days ago
- Los Angeles Times
California dairy farmers get $230 million to help cover costs of bird flu losses
The federal government has paid California dairy farms more than $230 million to subsidize losses in milk production resulting from bird flu, records show, an amount that the dairy industry expects to climb higher as more claims for damages are processed. The H5N1 bird flu has swept through more than 75% of California's 1,000 dairy farms since August 2024, sickening cattle and leading to steep dropoffs in milk production. Farmers were able to get relief under a U.S. Department of Agriculture program known as the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees and Farm-Raised Fish Program, or ELAP. The program usually provides assistance for farmers impacted by wildfires, drought and flooding but was opened up for dairy farmers last year as bird flu began ravaging their cows. U.S. Department of Agriculture records show that 644 payments were made to 359 California dairy farms between November 2024 and June 2025 totaling $231 million. The average per farm payment was about $645,000, and ranged from $2,058 to the Pereira Dairy Farm, in Visalia, to $4.4 million to Channel Islands Dairy Farm, in Corcoran. Those payments are expected to go much higher, however, as more claims are submitted and processed. Many of the payments issued in May and June were for outbreaks in 2024, suggesting there are more to come. The relief payments were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by Farm Forward, a nonprofit group that advocates against factory farming. The group asserts that the subsidies help prop up industrial-scale dairy operations that perpetuate the spread of bird flu. 'These are mega industrial operations that are fueling an outbreak,' said Andrew deCoriolis, Farm Forward's executive director. 'Bird flu spreads in exactly the kinds of environments that we're paying to preserve.' Anja Raudabaugh, the chief executive of the industry's largest state trade group, Western United Dairies, said the payments have 'ensured our dairy communities and their workers stay employed and healthy. Until we get approval of a dairy cow vaccine, weathering this storm has only been possible with the assistance of the milk loss payments.' Jonathan Cockroft, managing partner of Channel Islands Dairy Farms, said while the payments helped with the roughly 30% drop in milk production his farm experienced, his losses exceed the $4 million he received. He said the virus caused cows to abort their pregnancies, and often prevented them from getting pregnant again. A dairy cow that doesn't give birth doesn't produce milk. In other cases, he said the udders were so scarred by the disease that the cows were unable to produce milk at levels prior to infection. 'There's a whole other version I'm not sure the public understands, which is the huge impact on reproduction,' he said. He also noted many animals died — especially when the outbreak first hit last fall, and the newness of it combined with the blazing heat of the Central Valley felled 10% to 15% of many California herds. Joey Airoso, a dairy farmer in Tipton, received a $1.45-million subsidy for an outbreak at his farm last October. He said the outbreak has cost him more than $2 million 'just on milk income and that does not include the over $250,000 of extra care costs' required to treat cows with medicines, extra staffing and veterinary consultations. And it doesn't cover the cost of the cows that died — which can't produce milk or be sold for meat. The average dairy cow costs about $3,500, Cockroft said. Jay Van Rein, a spokesperson for California's Department of Food and Agriculture, said the loss payments are 'the most realistic way for producers to recover and to avoid huge disruptions in the food supply of these products.' USDA officials didn't immediately respond to a request for comment, but a former top USDA official who left the agency in January said it was important to provide dairy farmers relief once the agency identified H5N1 bird flu in a handful of Texas herds in March 2024. By then the disease had been spreading for weeks, if not months, making containment to one state impossible. 'This was a once-in-a-lifetime event, and we knew that we were going to need to support producers, and we knew that the quicker we could get some assistance out to them to help them test, the better off we were going to be, and the faster we'd be able to bring the infection under control,' he said. Farm Forward's DeCoriolis and others, however, say these programs perpetuate an agricultural industry designed around containing hundreds, if not thousands, of genetically similar animals into confined lots — veritable playgrounds for a novel virus. He also noted the federal relief programs don't come with any strings attached, such as incentives for disease mitigation and/or biosecurity. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan's Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization in Canada, said handing out subsidies to farms without trying to understand or investigate the practices they are using to quash the disease is a mistake. 'What are they doing on the farms to prevent reinfection?' she said. The USDA payments were based on a per cow milk production losses over a four-week period. According to Farm Forward's data, several farms received more than one subsidy. While roughly half received just one payment, 100 farms received two payments, 58 received three, 19 received four and two received six separate payments. At one farm in Tulare County, four USDA payments were submitted once a month between November 2024 and February 2025. At another, payments stretched from December 2024 to May 2025. Rasmussen said the multiple payments most likely stemmed depending on specific circumstances at the dairies involved. Cockroft of the Channel Islands Dairy said he and other farmers have seen waves of reinfection and milk tests that remain positive for months on end. He said he knew of a farm that was in quarantine for nine months. When herds are quarantined, animals are not allowed to be transferred on or off site. In California, a farm is under quarantine for 60 days after initial virus detection. It can't move out of quarantine until tests show its milk is virus-free — for three weeks in a row. Van Rein, the state agriculture spokesperson, said the average time under quarantine is 103 days. He said that of the 1,000 herds in California, 940 are not under quarantine; 715 of those had previously been infected and released from quarantine. A quarantined farm can still sell milk, however, even if the milk tests positive. Pasteurization has been shown to kill the virus. The relief payments are another sign of how the U.S. government supports the agricultural industry, which is considered by some to be vital to the national interest. 'We've decided politically that this is an industry that we want to support, that was hit by something that obviously wasn't their fault, and we're going to help them, because it was a disastrous thing that hit the industry,' said Daniel Sumner, an agricultural economist at UC Davis. 'If we thought about these payments as we're using our tax money to help somebody who's in need, because their family is poor, that's not the case.'
