Resident urges transparency on Dry Ridge EMS interlocal and staffing; court says reports are provided after 9-1-1 board meetings

(Note: This article covers public comment about Dry Ridge EMS and related ambulance-district developments raised during the public-comment period.)

A resident urged Grant County Fiscal Court on Tuesday to demand quarterly and annual reports from Dry Ridge EMS on run counts, reimbursement rates and personnel costs and to publish that information for the four entities that fund the service.

David Rose, a resident who said he has followed the interlocal language and fiscal questions, asked the court for clearer, published reporting that includes: the number of EMS runs inside Dry Ridge limits, runs to each participating city and the county, reimbursements and reimbursement rates by run type (for example, nonemergency transports, automobile accidents), quarterly financial audits, personnel-cost reporting and the existence and limits of liability and workers’ compensation insurance. He also asked for response-time and on-scene time metrics and for the cause/category of calls (for example stroke, heart attack) in aggregate rather than address-level detail.

The nut graf: Rose said that the interlocal agreement (effective dates discussed in the record) names four funding entities — Corinth, Crittenden, Williamstown and Grant County — and that those entities should receive regular, published metrics because they provide the money. He said recent staff departures and social-media posts had created public concern and urged transparency to address fear and rumor.

In reply, Judge Dills and other officials said the mayors and county judge already receive the quarterly and annual reports; the reports are presented after the 9-1-1 board meeting because all participating mayors and the judge attend that forum. Shauna (magistrate/officer reporting on the ambulance district) told the court the ambulance district had voted to go with Dry Ridge under an interlocal agreement that still needed development and that the district was considering shortening an originally proposed three-year term.

Rose said he wanted the four funding entities to receive the reports directly rather than having to rely on the 9-1-1 board meeting as the delivery method. He read the sections of the interlocal agreement that list required reporting items and asked that the court insist the data be provided to the funding entities and published for taxpayers. Court members said they receive the materials at the 9-1-1 board meeting and that the board is the practical forum where mayors and the judge can ask questions collectively.

Rose also raised the staffing issue: he said several EMTs had left for higher pay elsewhere and that uncertainty about the ambulance service’s future had created fear among personnel. Court members acknowledged staff turnover in EMS and said the ambulance district and board were reviewing options and contractual language.

Ending: The court did not change policy during the meeting. Officials said they would continue to receive the quarterly reports at the 9-1-1 board meetings and the ambulance-district board will continue its work on interlocal contract terms; Rose asked the court to consider publishing the reports to enhance transparency.