Village president seeks new Cross Plains EMS district agreement as residents warn takeover would erode service

Village President Jay Langfeld told the Village of Cross Plains Public Safety Committee on Aug. 19 that he wants to renegotiate — and, if necessary, prepare to withdraw from — the Cross Plains EMS District agreement because the existing contract is outdated and places disproportionate costs and decision authority on the village.

Langfeld said the district’s total budget is about $735,000 and that the village’s assessed share is $286,075. "We moved from a volunteer system to now a paid service," Langfeld said, adding that EMS now accounts for roughly 7.9% of the village’s levy-limit spending, up from about 2.3% in 2019. He said about $150,000–$160,000 of the district budget is covered by user fees billed to patients and insurers, and that the village accounts for about 65% of calls for service.

The proposal to seek a new intermunicipal agreement prompted multiple public speakers, including volunteers and career EMS personnel, to urge the committee to preserve the existing Cross Plains EMS District. Chief Tony, the district chief, warned committee members that a village takeover “will leave the village down a very dark and catastrophic flow that will actually obliterate your current EMS,” and cited letters from the Wisconsin EMS Association and the district medical director urging the district remain intact. Ellie Powell, a volunteer EMS member and resident, told the committee the district has operated successfully for more than 45 years and said, "If the village takes over, this service will completely dissolve, and you will no longer have anyone to answer the call." Linda Niebert, a longtime resident, also urged the committee to keep the volunteer-based services in place.

Why it matters

Cross Plains officials and residents framed the issue as one of governance, transparency and money, not an immediate change in how ambulances operate. Langfeld said the district agreement (signed in 2017 and structured in five-year terms with an automatic-renewal provision) gives each member jurisdiction one vote despite wide differences in population and call volume; the village now pays a substantially larger share of costs while lacking commensurate budgetary control. Under the agreement, a municipality intending to withdraw must notify the district by Dec. 1 two years before the five-year term’s end, a timing Langfeld used to explain why talks must move forward now to affect change before 2033 if nothing is done.

Details from the presentation and public comments

- Governance and voting: Langfeld said the district board gives each jurisdiction one vote, even though the village contributes a substantially larger share of the levy-funded portion. He argued that the formula produces a cross-subsidy: "If you go to a second crew," Langfeld said, "the village only needs 1 crew. So we're paying an extra $100,000, basically, 20% more. And that is subsidizing the towns." He proposed a cap on district board spending requiring supplemental approval by municipal boards for expenditures beyond a small percentage threshold.

- Budget and revenue figures: Langfeld summarized the finance committee’s work and stressed the difference between the $735,000 total budget and the village’s $286,075 levy-funded share; he said roughly $240,000 of the district budget comes from fees collected on ambulance runs. The village finance director (identified in the meeting as Bobby, Finance Director) told the committee he fills out the village’s levy-limit worksheet and said there is no statutory "levy limit exemption" for EMS unless a district qualifies as regional (eight or more municipalities), which Cross Plains does not. He said: "There is no exemption for EMS." (finance director: first referenced Aug. 19, finance report.)

- Operational changes not proposed: Langfeld repeatedly emphasized that none of the village’s proposals change the EMS service level, licensing or station location in the documents he presented. "We did not touch any of the services or parts of it," he said. "We did not change personnel, we didn't change how they deliver." He said the discussion is limited to the district’s governance and financial terms, not clinical staffing levels or response standards.

- Public warnings about risk to service: Multiple volunteers and career EMS personnel said a village takeover or the withdrawal of surrounding towns could cause the volunteer base to collapse and increase response times. One longtime EMS member said the district has nearly 30 volunteers and that dissolving the district would "completely dissolve" the service and raise taxes. Chief Tony said he has received letters from the Wisconsin EMS Association and the district’s medical director calling the village letter "misleading," and he warned the committee to consider patient outcomes if neighboring municipalities withdraw.

- Transparency and accounting questions: Langfeld and speakers flagged records availability and a carry-forward/surplus entry in the district budget. Langfeld pointed to a line labeled "profit" in the district's published budget materials and suggested the district had shown a carry-forward that appeared as a surplus; he asked why a carry-forward number appeared as revenue without matching expense amendments and suggested that some budget lines should be amended publicly.

- Asset buyout example: Langfeld summarized the finance team’s estimate that the village appears to own roughly 55% of district assets and used a hypothetical building sale to show the buyout math: on a $500,000 sale, the village share would be about $275,000, adjusted by a $46,000 prior land conveyance arrangement, leaving an illustrative buyout figure of about $174,000.

Committee response and next steps

Committee members and staff discussed mediation and negotiation paths. Several committee members urged Jay Langfeld and district representatives to pursue facilitated talks among the four member jurisdictions. Langfeld said he had tried negotiating for two years and that the village presented a proposal that was rejected without counteroffer.

No formal votes were taken at the Aug. 19 meeting; the public safety committee identified the EMS district agreement as a priority to bring to the Village Board in September. Langfeld said the village board will take the issue up starting in the September meeting; the committee directed staff to gather clarified budget materials and to ask district leaders for the minutes, employee policies and operational documents Langfeld said are difficult to find.

What was not decided

The committee did not vote to withdraw the village from the EMS district, nor did it authorize a village takeover of EMS operations. Langfeld presented "Option 1" (village takeover/merge into a village department) as a contingency should member towns refuse to agree to a new contract; he said Option 1 is one of several contingency options finance modeled if the village withdraws from the current district. Committee members said they would prefer negotiation among the four jurisdictions but expressed concern that the district’s current structure leaves the village financially exposed.

Ending

The committee scheduled follow-up work and asked staff to prepare clearer budget exhibits and to invite district officials to provide missing documents. The committee set a next meeting for Sept. 9 at 6:00 p.m. at the fire station (public notice to be posted). No timetable for a decision on the district agreement was established at the Aug. 19 meeting.