Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Transport topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Crossville council votes 3-2 to begin city-run EMS transport under fire department with phased start around July 1, 2026
Summary
After public comment and extended council discussion about costs and service quality, the City Council voted to begin transporting EMS calls under the Crossville Fire Department, using a phase-in plan and an approximate start date of July 1, 2026. The vote passed 3-2 amid concerns about property tax impacts and effects on the county system.
The Crossville City Council voted 3-2 to begin city-run emergency medical services transport under the Crossville Fire Department, following public comment and extended council debate about timing, costs and countywide impacts.
Council member Fox moved to begin transporting EMS under the direction and oversight of the Crossville Fire Department using the phase-in plan submitted to council, with a target start date on or around July 1, 2026. The motion was seconded; the recorded roll-call vote was Mayor Pro Tim Gert — aye; Council member Turner — aye; Council member Fox — aye; Council member Mayberry — no; Mayor Crawford — no. The motion carried.
During public comment, resident Ronald Bodari, who said he has lived in Crossville for 32 years, urged caution and asked council to be careful stewards of tax dollars. "That kinda made an impression on me because unless my math has gotten really bad, that would be a property tax increase of 50%. Am I correct in that?" Bodari asked after citing material saying the proposal would add 30 cents per $100 of assessed value and noting the city’s current property tax appeared to be "60 plus some odd cents."
Council debate included arguments both for and against a fire-based EMS model. One council member described advantages of fire-based EMS, including cross-training and potential to improve employee morale and scheduling. Another council member cautioned that Crossville already benefits from a highly ranked county emergency medical system, noting awards and strong performance, and questioned whether starting a municipal service now — and at what cost — was necessary if the existing county provider is performing well.
Several speakers raised fiscal questions. One council member said preliminary estimates produced very different outcomes depending on assumptions, describing a best-case scenario and a worst-case scenario and warning that the city should avoid putting an "unnecessary tax burden on the property tax owner." Another asked the council to "slow play" implementation and to be disciplined about operating inside city limits except for mutual-aid responses.
Council members referred to a phase-in plan submitted to the city; the motion the council approved directs staff to implement the plan with a target start date on or around July 1, 2026, and to proceed under the fire department’s oversight. A council member also said a grant writer could be engaged to pursue funding if the council decided to hire that professional after consulting with the city attorney; the council did not hire anyone during the meeting.
No ordinance or budget appropriation was adopted at the meeting; the vote approved the policy direction to begin city transport using the submitted phase-in plan. Council members who voted against the motion said they feared substantial property tax increases and a financial burden on residents with fixed incomes. Proponents said the change could improve response times and employee job satisfaction under a fire-based EMS model.
The council moved on to routine reports after the vote; no immediate budget amendment or effective date beyond the "on or around 07/01/2026" timeline was adopted during the meeting.
