Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fire Programs Fund Atl topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee backs bill to expand uses and revenue for fire programs fund, sending it to full committee
Summary
The subcommittee reported a substitute for HB 20‑69 to the full committee by a vote of 6‑1. The bill would increase and broaden Aid to Localities (ATL) funding for fire and EMS needs; supporters argued it addresses aging apparatus, staffing and volunteer declines while insurers warned of a premium tax increase passed to consumers.
Delegate Garrett presented HB 20‑69 to expand the Aid to Localities (ATL) program that supports local fire and EMS resources. Garrett described long‑standing funding gaps for apparatus, stations and mental health supports for first responders and argued the bill would allow localities more flexibility to deploy ATL funds where they are most needed.
Nut graf: Supporters — including the Virginia Association of Counties (VACO), the Virginia State Firefighters Association and the Virginia Fire Chiefs Association — argued the measure would address widespread, multi‑jurisdictional equipment shortfalls, declining volunteerism and rising equipment costs. They cited examples including counties operating decades‑old apparatus and a new pump truck costing roughly $750,000.
Agency and stakeholder testimony: Ray Creasy, director at Fire Programs, told the committee that a recent VCU study showed localities carry about 97% of fire/EMS funding burdens and that ATL distributions historically are small relative to replacement costs. Garrett and witnesses also discussed ATL mechanics: by code, 75% of the fund is distributed back to localities and 25% operates the agency that distributes grants; last year the fund distributed about $40 million to 316 localities, and testimony projected the bill could increase distributions toward roughly $60 million annually while producing a modest administrative fiscal impact (one additional staff position and an estimated $118,000 per year in administration was discussed).
Opposition testimony from insurance industry groups noted the change would be a premium‑linked tax increase (an increase in the premium‑based tax from 1% to 1.5% was discussed) and could trigger retaliatory tax calculations against Virginia insurers in other states. Karen Addison of the American Property Casualty Insurance Association warned consumers would ultimately bear the cost through higher premiums.
The committee adopted a substitute and voted 6‑1 to report the bill. Supporters said the change is intended to give local officials discretion to address local priorities, including apparatus, facilities, mental health supports and other fire service needs.
Ending: HB 20‑69 moves out of the subcommittee to the next committee stage; stakeholders said they would continue to work through fiscal modeling and statutory detail as the measure proceeds.
