Richland County board moves to require municipal contracts for ambulance service after steep rate increase

Richland County supervisors voted Sept. 16 to convert the current memorandum of agreement for the county ambulance service into a contract for 2026 and to set new per‑municipality billing terms intended to make the service financially sustainable.

The county administrator said the county must rebuild an ambulance budget that covers vehicle replacement, facility repairs and rising operating costs. “If this is a service that the board wants the county to continue to provide, we have to make it sustainable,” County Administrator Clark said.

The new terms approved by supervisors set a charge of $2.25 for each time an ambulance was dispatched (an amendment the board added during debate) with a $2,500 minimum payment per municipality. The board also adopted an amendment requiring the county to offer the arrangement as a one‑year contract and asked municipalities to respond by Nov. 1, 2025, so they can set budgets.

Board members and staff said the current memorandum and the historical rates have not covered the program’s true costs. The administrator said the previously used per‑call rate of $170 had been in place since at least 2017 and that supplies, labor and equipment prices have risen sharply. "We have to build a budget that allows us to replace ambulances, that allows us to repair the roof when it needs to be repaired," Clark said.

Several township representatives and supervisors said the increases would be a significant jump for some municipalities. Supervisor Frank and others pressed for more transparent call‑volume data; board members asked staff to provide clarifying call counts, explain whether Pine Valley calls were being allocated to specific municipalities and confirm how mutual‑aid runs will be billed.

County legal counsel recommended converting to a contract rather than relying on a bare‑bones memorandum so the county can include standard contract protections (indemnities, notice periods and termination language). "It would be preferable to do a contract," counsel said, adding that a contract would allow the county to include more protections and clearer notice provisions for municipalities.

Before the final vote, the board adopted a procedural amendment clarifying that the contract language will count dispatches (calls where an ambulance is dispatched) instead of only transports (when a person is picked up). The board also directed staff to draft a contract and present it to the executive and finance committee for review; supervisors said they want the contract offered to municipalities with a target response date of Nov. 1 to allow municipal budget planning.

The board approved the change to a contract format and the rate structure following those amendments. No formal roll‑call vote tally for the final amended resolution was recorded in the public transcript; the clerk announced the resolution as adopted.