Committee approves three-month interim ambulance agreement, forms transition committee; EMS policies and equipment moves also advanced

The Richland County Executive Finance Committee voted to send an interim memorandum of agreement on ambulance services to the full county board and authorized formation of a transition committee after extended discussion about contract funding, billing for calls to county facilities and service sustainability.

The committee approved putting a three-month interim agreement on the county board agenda that would be offered to all municipalities while the city and townships seek longer-term funding or alternative service arrangements. Committee members asked staff to remove a sentence in the draft MOA that stated Richland County EMS “will no longer exist on 04/01/2026” so continued service beyond that date could be negotiated if municipalities and the county reach a new agreement.

Why it matters: County officials said the ambulance service is operating on a “bare bones” 2026 budget that cannot absorb new, recurring costs without adding to the levy or shifting funds. Committee members and municipal representatives said additional time is needed to explore options including creation of a service district, per-capita funding, or outsourcing; county staff warned that continuing the current service level without new revenue is not sustainable.

County Administrator Trisha (present online during the meeting) told the committee, “I am more than willing to give this three-month extension, so that we can try to come up with another option that’s out there.” That extension is intended to allow municipalities, the county and other stakeholders to meet, assess alternatives and return with proposals before March 31, 2026.

Discussion and next steps - Transition committee: The committee asked staff to convene a multi-jurisdictional committee to meet as soon as possible (staff aimed to hold a first meeting before the end of the month) and to report back to the county board. Trisha said the committee membership will be confirmed by the county board. Several supervisors asked that benchmarks and intermediate deadlines be set so planning does not lapse into another crisis. - Scope and who’s covered: Staff reported an average of 90.75 annual ambulance calls to county-owned buildings over the four-year period examined. If the county were to absorb those calls, staff estimated it would add roughly $20,000 a year to county costs. Committee members asked staff to provide detailed billing and call-by-call spreadsheets to clarify which calls have been billed to municipalities in past years and which were absorbed by the county. - Staffing and operations: Committee members asked how many EMS employees would be affected if the county discontinued service. Staff said there is not a single undisputed headcount in the packet—the discussion included mention of roughly seven to eight full-time staff and several part‑time and on-call personnel; the committee instructed staff to provide an exact current staffing roster in the next packet.

Actions the committee took - Moved the interim memorandum of agreement for ambulance services to the full county board for consideration (motion carried by voice vote in committee). The MOA offered a three-month interim extension to municipalities so they could explore alternatives. - Directed staff to convene the transition committee and to remove the absolute 04/01/2026 cessation language from the MOA so continuation can be negotiated. - Approved sending proposed EMS handbook and addendum updates to the full county board; staff requested the handbook changes be backdated to July 1 to align EMS leave accruals with other county employees. - Approved use of unspent FAP (grant) funds to purchase a cardiac monitor and accessories (approximately $44,000) for EMS; committee said the purchase uses grant funds and will not draw on the county general fund. - Postponed action on the ambulance building roof replacement pending more bids and local contractor outreach; staff will pursue additional local contacts and report back.

What was discussed but not decided - Who will pay for calls to Pine Valley and other county facilities. Staff said historically the county absorbed these calls and that current contracts and proposed municipal cost shares vary; committee members asked for line-by-line billing history so the budget impacts are clear. - Whether to create a formal ambulance district or shift to private contractors; several supervisors urged outreach to municipalities and exploration of district-based or per-capita funding models.

Quotes from the meeting - “I am more than willing to give this three-month extension, so that we can try to come up with another option that’s out there,” Trisha said when proposing the interim agreement and committee meetings. - Supervisor Severson, whose letter was read into the record, warned against moving too quickly: “I feel that we are acting way too fast on this matter just to get a budget passed.” - EMS staff member Barb provided staffing context when asked about layoffs: “I think there are 8 full time staff at the ambulance service right now, 5 part time staff, and then there’s on-call staff,” later noting a possible adjustment to seven full-time positions; the committee requested staff verify the current roster.

Background and context Richland County currently operates an in-county ambulance service. Committee members said only a small number of counties in the state operate county-run EMS directly; many neighboring counties rely on municipal, fire-based or private providers. Committee members and staff repeatedly noted that private providers typically charge more because they must generate profit to operate.

The county’s 2026 budget presentation had already flagged that the general fund was tight; staff said there is no identified extra $20,000 to absorb county-owned-facility calls without using reserves or adding levy.

What to watch for next - The county board will receive the interim MOA, the EMS handbook updates, and the cardiac monitor purchase recommendation at its next meeting. The transition committee is expected to begin meeting quickly and present interim benchmarks and options to the county board in the coming weeks.

Ending note Committee members emphasized urgency: they approved a short interim extension while asking staff and municipal partners for detailed billing histories, staffing rosters and realistic funding options so the county board can make an informed decision before the calendar turns to 2026.