Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget Ems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Edgefield County council advances FY2025-26 budget after extended discussion of EMS funding and possible millage increase
Summary
Edgefield County Council gave second reading to the FY2025-26 general operating budget on May 6, 2025, after extended discussion about a funding gap for emergency medical services that could require a property tax millage increase and consideration of a 1% capital project sales tax ("penny tax").
Edgefield County Council on May 6, 2025, gave second reading to ordinance 24 25 0007, the FY2025-26 general operating budget, after council members discussed how to fund a persistent shortfall in emergency medical services (EMS).
Council members said the county faces limited state funding prospects for EMS and discussed options that include separating the capital cost of a new EMS building from operations and using either a property tax millage increase or a 1% capital project sales tax to cover the building. Council discussed a combined millage figure of 16.25 (described in the meeting as "combined") that would cover both operations and capital under one scenario; council members described that option as undesirable but possible if other revenue sources do not materialize.
The discussion emphasized two linked points: the county must fund EMS operations in the near term, and voters could be asked in 2026 to approve a 1% capital project sales tax that would pay only for capital projects, not ongoing operations. Council members said that if a sales-tax measure later provided capital funding for the new EMS facility, the county would seek to roll back the property tax increase used in the interim to pay the debt service.
County officials also told the council they do not expect significant state allocations this year to cover the EMS shortfall. Council members discussed using available operational surpluses, upcoming property reassessments, and the penny tax as potential ways to reduce the burden on property taxpayers.
After discussion, Councilmember Talbert moved to give second reading to the FY2025-26 budget ordinance (No. 24 25 0007); the motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
The second reading advances the budget to a later meeting for final consideration; at the May 6 meeting the council did not adopt the ordinance on final reading. Council discussion included explicit commitments by members to seek a rollback of any temporary millage increase if alternate capital funding becomes available.
