Paramedics, residents press Ashe County officials over proposed EMS takeover; provider says talks are off

Several paramedics and county residents urged Ashe County commissioners on May 20 to intervene after employees said they were left out of talks about a possible change in the privately contracted ambulance provider and warned the change could cut employees’ benefits.

Ryan Kissel, a paramedic who identified himself as residing in Watauga County and working in the High Country, told the board he and fellow paramedics were “discouraged from coming here to speak to y’all. We were discouraged to show up in our uniforms,” and said the discouragement “needs to be noted.”

Kissel and other speakers said they had learned through internal messaging about a possible merger involving Priority On Demand and an out‑of‑state company. Cody Darnell, an Ash County native and paramedic of about 10 years, described a May 14 briefing in which staff were told Priority On Demand “does not have employees” and that several benefits would change, including “downgrade of medical insurance, removal of 401(k) match, loss of Aflac, and reduction of PTO time.” Darnell said the planned effective date was June 1 and that employees were given roughly two weeks’ notice before some elements of the change were put on hold.

“If this merger takes place and my medication is not covered, I will be forced to leave,” Darnell said. He described having a chronic medical condition requiring daily prescription medication and said his drug is placed in a tier that would not be covered under the Priority plan discussed in the briefing. “My medication was not covered by Priority On Demand’s health insurance, and their coverage was starting June 1. I had approximately 15 days to figure something out,” he said.

County commissioners asked Craig, the provider representative who addressed the board during an extended public discussion, to explain the situation. Craig said his communications had been poor, apologized to the board and to employees, and said that “currently, there is no deal or any changes. Everything kind of went down off the table.” He said his original intent was to explore back‑office consolidation and not to change front‑line service or eliminate jobs. “There was never any service delivery stuff that was ever on the table,” he told commissioners. “No one’s job’s ever — that’s never been on the table.”

Commissioners and county staff pressed Craig about personnel files, benefit changes and why employees were not informed earlier. Patty, a county staff member who spoke during the exchange, said the information that had circulated among employees was “too controversial” and “conflicting,” and she said keeping the contract unchanged through its term was in the county’s and employees’ best interest.

Board members voiced concern about the apparent misinformation and said employees should be able to speak without intimidation. Several commissioners thanked the county’s paramedics for their work and said they heard the employees’ concerns.

No formal change to the EMS contract was announced at the meeting. Commissioners cited a provision in the existing contract — quoted during the discussion — that prohibits assignment or subcontracting of the agreement without the county’s express written permission.

The board did not take a formal vote to change the provider or the contract during the meeting. Commissioners asked county staff and the provider to return with clearer, written information and for Craig to meet with employees to restore trust and clarify any next steps.

Provenance: public remarks by paramedics and the provider were presented during the meeting’s public comment period and later during a staff/provider discussion; the record shows public speakers raising benefit and notice concerns and the provider acknowledging communications failures.