Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Fire Ems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Eagle Pass asks Maverick County to cover 40% of city fire and EMS costs; court moves discussion to executive session
Summary
The City of Eagle Pass asked Maverick County on March 14, 2025 to pay roughly 40% of the city’s adopted 2025 fire and EMS budget — about $3.285 million — and the commissioners took related agenda items into executive session for negotiation.
The City of Eagle Pass requested that Maverick County pay its share of fire and emergency medical services at the Maverick County Commissioners Court meeting on March 14, 2025. Mayor Salinas told the court the city provides life‑saving fire and EMS services to county residents and that “about 40% of the calls that EMS gets are from people that live out in the county.”
City representatives said the city’s adopted 2025 fire department budget is $8,212,849 and asked Maverick County to pay 40% of that amount, which the city calculates as $3,285,139 for the year and $273,761 per month if paid monthly. Mayor Salinas told the court the prior interlocal agreement expired in September 2024 and that the city is seeking an updated, reciprocal payment arrangement so services to county residents continue.
“We’re just requesting the county to take that into consideration,” Mayor Salinas said during public comment, calling the services “life saving” and urging the county to treat public safety as a top budget priority.
A city speaker identified as Mr. Valdez presented the numerical breakdown: “Our budget is $8,212,849. When we divide that up based on our ask of the county, 40% of that would be 3,285,139. . . . We would kindly ask the commissioners court to approve monthly payments to the city for fiscal year 2025 in the amount of 273,761.”
County Judge announced that agenda items 19 and 21 — which the agenda materials tie to discussions and potential action on a fire/EMS extension agreement with the City of Eagle Pass — would be taken into executive session for legal consultation. No formal interlocal agreement was approved in open session during the meeting; the transcript records the court referring the items for closed‑door negotiation.
Why it matters: The dispute involves where responsibility and cost for emergency responses fall across city/county borders. If the county accepts a 40% share as requested, the cost would represent a multi‑million‑dollar addition to the county’s budget for the year and would affect budget priorities for other services.
What’s next: The court recorded the discussion and moved related agenda items into executive session for attorney consultation and negotiation. The public record at this meeting does not include a signed contract or final vote on an interlocal agreement.
