Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Emergency Medical Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ulster County legislators postpone vote on $5 million EMS fund policy amid oversight concerns
Summary
A proposal to allocate up to $5 million annually from Ulster County's unassigned fund balance to support local emergency medical services was postponed after debate over distribution formula, oversight and workforce development.
Legislator Kovacs introduced a resolution proposing a county policy to allocate up to $5,000,000 annually from Ulster County's unassigned fund balance to support local emergency medical services (EMS), saying the county's EMS system is "in distress" and that the county has "the means to fix this."
The resolution would have directed payments to towns proportionally, proposing a 50/50 split based on population and assessed property value, and required annual reporting and intermunicipal agreements to limit use to EMS staffing, training, equipment and operations. Kovacs cited the Ulster County Controller's report and the county's recent budget surpluses as justification, saying the county has an excess of $31,100,000 over its fund balance threshold and three-year surpluses totaling about $136,000,000.
The committee's emergency services director, Director Erickson, acknowledged the intent but said the proposed execution "is fundamentally problematic," arguing that sending funds directly to towns without performance-based standards or direct reimbursement to EMS agencies risks perpetuating fragmentation, inefficiency, and fails to address workforce and training needs. Deputy Executive Capuano warned of an expected federal funding "fiscal cliff" and said basing distribution on assessed value would not align funds with demand; he recommended a population or needs-based allocation and urged completion of a countywide operational assessment first. Legislator McCullough asked how the $5,000,000 figure was determined; Kovacs said it was chosen to produce an average town allocation of about $200,000 but said he was open to adjusting the amount or the allocation method.
After discussion and several members expressing support for the concept but concern about mechanics and timing, Legislator Clinton moved to postpone consideration of Resolution 102; Legislator McCullough seconded the motion. The motion to postpone carried and the resolution was postponed for further work and review.
The committee record shows the motion to postpone was made by Legislator Clinton and seconded by Legislator McCullough; the transcript does not include a roll-call tally for that motion.
