Nottoway supervisors hear town‑run payroll plan seeking $44,500 monthly for full‑time fire/EMS staffing
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
At a Nov. work session the Nottoway County Board of Supervisors heard a proposal from a volunteer fire chief asking the county to remit $44,500 per month (about $534,000 a year) to a town to fund full‑time fire and EMS staff under a town payroll model; board members asked for legal review and a contract before any funding decision.
Chief Welch, identified in the transcript as chief of the local volunteer fire department, told the Nottoway County Board of Supervisors at a work session that his station has more than doubled call volume in the last decade while volunteer numbers have declined, and that the station needs paid staff to sustain fire and emergency medical services. "We're trying to build our volunteer system back, but in order to continue to provide good quality fire and EMS coverage out of our station, we need paid staff there," he said.
Welch presented a plan for the town to employ the staff while the county would provide funding to the town. He said that routing payroll through the town would allow employees to receive Virginia Retirement System (VRS) benefits and other town employee benefits and would create clearer auditing trails. "I would prefer it go straight to the town. The town make the payroll checks," he said.
The chief requested $44,500 per month ("approximately $534,000 annually," as stated in the packet) to fund a single fully staffed ambulance 24/7/365 and described a staffing and pay schedule with wage ranges and benefit arrangements. He said the town would create a dedicated payroll account, supply the first monthly deposit to start the account, and limit disbursements to employee‑related expenses. He estimated that the town‑employee model would cost roughly $200,000 a year less than putting the same employees on county payroll, citing earlier county staff proposals for comparison.
Board members raised legal and funding questions. One member asked whether EMS tax‑levy funds can be paid to a town as a pass‑through rather than used to pay county employees; Welch and others urged legal review and an attorney‑drafted contract. The board discussed current county contributions to local EMS and fire agencies, noting figures referenced in the meeting packet and discussion: the transcript records both $135,000 and $145,000 as amounts previously budgeted or provided for staffing and operations. A board member summarized that, after accounting for previous lump‑sum payments and existing allocations, the new recurring county money requested would amount to about $32,400–$38,400 per month of new funds depending on how prior amounts are counted.
Speakers also flagged capital needs: ambulance replacement and apparatus costs were discussed, with ranges cited for a new ambulance and lead times for delivery. Welch said vehicle replacement is a looming expense and that a long lead time means planning must begin early. The chief said he would prefer the agreement, if legal and contractual issues can be resolved, to begin Jan. 1 to align with the department's January–December budget.
The board did not take formal action during the work session. Chair and staff asked attorneys to review legality of the proposed funding mechanism and to draft an agreement if feasible. The meeting packet and remarks recorded by speakers will be reviewed and the item may return for formal consideration at a later public meeting.
Ending: The board agreed to continue reviewing the proposal; no funding decision was made at the work session and staff were directed to check the legal and contractual details before returning the item to a future agenda.
