Take Action Now to Stop Negative Change to Our Economic Opportunity!
The Federal House and Senate have introduced companion legislation meant to block the Office of Management and Budget/OMB from implementing the proposed change in Metropolitan Statistical Area/MSA designation criteria. S. 2057 and H.R. 3999 would permanently cap the threshold for MSA designation at 50,000 in population, appropriately making the case that metro designation should not depend on national population trends but the reality of whether or not a community is metropolitan.
Will you take a moment and reach out to your Senators and Representatives in D.C., asking them to sign onto this legislation?
As a reminder, a change in designation would negatively impact all 144 of our communities by:
- Negatively impacting healthcare access: The Medicare Labor Reimbursement Rate, part of the overall Medicare rate healthcare providers receive, is determined by whether or not a provider is located inside of an MSA or not. In our community alone we predict a more than $1 million impact on our local health systems if the rule were approved.
- Unfair competition for rural communities: Existing rural Americans live in counties with a mean population of 23,000 people. The newly defined rural citizens would live in counties with a mean population of 75,000, or three times as many people. If enacted, rural towns currently designated as micropolitan would then be forced to compete for federal dollars against these larger cities.
- Reduced exposure to large economic development projects: Losing the status of Metropolitan Statistical Area would devastate efforts to attract and retain businesses and top talent in any of the 144 communities impacted.
- Future loss of CDBG and other funding: Changes in MSA criteria will likely lead to a change in grant and funding criteria as new standards are adopted. For instance, current CDBG funding uses the current MSA threshold of 50,000 in an urban area to define entitlement communities when distributing funds. If a new MSA threshold is adopted, we are likely to see policy reflect this change. How will entitlement communities face this loss of funding?
Take Action Now to Stop Negative Change to Our Economic Opportunity!
The Federal House and Senate have introduced companion legislation meant to block the Office of Management and Budget/OMB from implementing the proposed change in Metropolitan Statistical Area/MSA designation criteria. S. 2057 and H.R. 3999 would permanently cap the threshold for MSA designation at 50,000 in population, appropriately making the case that metro designation should not depend on national population trends but the reality of whether or not a community is metropolitan.
Will you take a moment and reach out to your Senators and Representatives in D.C., asking them to sign onto this legislation?
As a reminder, a change in designation would negatively impact all 144 of our communities by:
- Negatively impacting healthcare access: The Medicare Labor Reimbursement Rate, part of the overall Medicare rate healthcare providers receive, is determined by whether or not a provider is located inside of an MSA or not. In our community alone we predict a more than $1 million impact on our local health systems if the rule were approved.
- Unfair competition for rural communities: Existing rural Americans live in counties with a mean population of 23,000 people. The newly defined rural citizens would live in counties with a mean population of 75,000, or three times as many people. If enacted, rural towns currently designated as micropolitan would then be forced to compete for federal dollars against these larger cities.
- Reduced exposure to large economic development projects: Losing the status of Metropolitan Statistical Area would devastate efforts to attract and retain businesses and top talent in any of the 144 communities impacted.
- Future loss of CDBG and other funding: Changes in MSA criteria will likely lead to a change in grant and funding criteria as new standards are adopted. For instance, current CDBG funding uses the current MSA threshold of 50,000 in an urban area to define entitlement communities when distributing funds. If a new MSA threshold is adopted, we are likely to see policy reflect this change. How will entitlement communities face this loss of funding?