Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County to review proposals aiming to shore up ambulance coverage; public safety committee to discuss next week
Summary
Tompkins County staff will present options to the Public Safety Committee after the county received proposals and held initial planning to address uneven ambulance coverage; local officials called for closing service gaps and coordinating municipal and private providers.
Tompkins County will bring proposals to the Public Safety Committee in late May to address gaps in ambulance coverage and uneven emergency medical services across the county, county officials said at the May 22 Council of Governments meeting.
The county administrator reported that a team from "DUO" will present to the Public Safety Committee and the county is also expecting a proposal from consulting firm CGR to analyze models and funding mechanisms for countywide EMS services. "We are also expecting a present a proposal review from CGR," the county administrator said. The Public Safety Committee will review the two options and decide whether to proceed with a DUO proposal or to commission CGR for further study.
Discussion at the meeting emphasized documented service imbalances: municipal ambulance services are strained and some towns dispatch ambulances outside their taxing jurisdictions, creating financial and operational stress. Dan and other speakers said county legislators now view the gaps as unacceptable and want to work with existing ambulance providers to close them.
A planning consultant, Paul Bishop, who has worked on EMS analysis in other counties, was referenced as having prepared a bare-bones proposal for the county. County staff and municipal representatives said next week’s Public Safety Committee meeting (May 27 at 1 p.m.) will present initial proposals and options for stakeholder review.
Speakers noted the broader policy context. The group discussed the "essential services" legislation debated at the state level and reported that it was not included in the recent state budget. Several participants warned political resistance to mandates and stressed the importance of funding pathways if the state were to require changes.
No formal county action was taken at the May 22 meeting; members asked county staff to present the DUO and CGR options to the Public Safety Committee and to return to TCOG with next steps after that meeting.
