Pender County presents plan to merge EMS and fire into single Emergency Services Department; officials flag budget, service and transition questions

Pender County officials on June 2 presented a broad plan to merge the county’s separate EMS and fire organizations into a single Emergency Services Department, with county operations proposed to begin July 1, 2026.

The plan, delivered as an informational presentation by county staff (identified in the meeting as Miss Fulton), lays out milestones through a final legal merger agreement by the end of the year, a payroll transition on July 10, 2026, and follow-up tasks such as retitling assets, IT integration, and rebranding of fleet and stations.

County staff said the merger would fold Pender EMS and Fire, Penderlea Fire, Maple Hill Fire and Rocky Point Fire into a consolidated department. The plan describes a traditional emergency-services organizational chart—director, deputy director, division chiefs for fire and EMS, an emergency services communications administrator and a continuing emergency management function—and says some existing administrative and logistics roles may be allocated to other county departments after evaluation.

The presentation emphasized this session was informational only: “Tonight will be informational only,” Fulton said. The timeline presented shows a memorandum of understanding stage, town-hall meetings for staff and public, updating the county EMS system plan, and a final legal merger agreement before the planned July 1, 2026 operational transfer.

Why it matters: the plan includes both one-time and recurring costs and takes on current debts and liabilities the county does not now hold. Commissioners pressed staff for details on the estimated recurring personnel and benefits costs (presented as an estimated $2.6 million annually, primarily from required employer retirement contributions and a 3% cost-of-living adjustment) and a debt/liability figure the county staff identified as about $15.6 million. Staff also said some additional, not yet finalized expenditures could raise the total by another several million dollars (for example, recently ordered EMS vehicles whose debt service the departments had budgeted to begin covering this year).

Commissioners repeatedly asked how the county would pay for the increased recurring costs without raising the county’s overall tax burden. Fulton replied the county will incorporate existing fire and EMS district taxes into the county’s ad valorem tax rate; she said the math used “an average fire tax rate” that would cause some property owners to pay more and some to pay less, and that municipal residents who currently do not pay a fire tax would see the new tax rolled into their ad valorem bill. Fulton also said the county could use fund balance or stagger financing options for identified capital needs such as a fleet garage previously identified in the county’s facilities master plan.

On financing and credit, staff said effect on the county’s long-term borrowing and bond rating would depend on how the county treats the $15.6 million in existing debts and leases: “If we assume it, it could impact it; it doesn't have to necessarily,” Fulton said, noting many of the items are lease-backed and the county would analyze amortization schedules with its financial advisers.

Operational and implementation concerns dominated discussion. Commissioners repeatedly asked how the merger would affect ISO (insurance grading) ratings, response districts, volunteer roles and patient care. Fulton said the county has contracted NC Fire Chief Consulting, which had just begun reviewing the plan, and that OSFM (the Office of the State Fire Marshal) and OEMS (the NC Office of Emergency Medical Services) will be part of the technical steps. On ISO, Fulton said a consultant told staff that mergers “don’t impact the ISO as much as people think they do,” but she acknowledged staff must “work through all of that.”

Staff said the plan seeks to preserve current staffing levels and equipment at stations and not immediately redraw response districts: “So for right now, yes, everyone's gonna get the same level of service they're currently getting,” Fulton said. The plan also provides for converting part-time positions in some volunteer-run stations to full-time county positions; staff estimated hiring about seven additional full-time employees to replace part-time coverage at some stations.

Commissioners and others raised repeated requests for more granular financial modeling and for answers to how the county will remain revenue-neutral in the coming budget year. Commissioner Tate asked whether the county’s reevaluation and higher tax base could be used to remain revenue-neutral, and other commissioners pushed staff to produce detailed amortization schedules and reconcile what debts the county would assume.

Risks identified in the plan include public-safety risk during the transition (dispatch and IT changes; potential payroll or benefits enrollment errors; temporary gaps in authorized medication or equipment), integration of grants and contracts, transfer of titles and deeds and the need to rebrand fleet and stations. Staff repeatedly highlighted communication—internal and with union/volunteer stakeholders—as the primary mitigation strategy.

What was not decided: the presentation was explicitly informational and did not ask the board to approve the merger at the June 2 meeting. Several commissioners said they support providing county benefits to EMS and fire staff but asked for more detailed financial options, including whether contracting models could achieve similar benefits without the county assuming debt. Fulton said these options can be explored and that the current product is a starting point for the board to decide whether to move forward.

Ending: Staff said they will continue meetings with NC Fire Chief Consulting and OSFM, hold staff and public town halls, and prepare a final merger agreement for board consideration later in the year. Commissioners asked that staff return with detailed financing models, amortization schedules, and more specificity about which departments or services would have reduced funding if the plan is implemented as presented.