Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Webster County approves EMS 20/80 funding agreements with edits to allow annual recalculation
Summary
After lengthy debate over contract language and local needs, Webster County supervisors approved the EMS 20/80 agreements with amendments to permit annual reassessment of allocation percentages and to preserve flexibility for priority emergency expenditures.
Webster County supervisors voted to approve a set of EMS 20/80 funding agreements on a motion that included targeted edits to contract language intended to preserve flexibility for emergency needs and allow annual recalculation of allocation rates.
The motion, approved by voice vote after extended discussion, directs changes to Section 2(M) so that approved priority, needs‑based allocations would be deducted "off the top" of the total EMS fund before the percentage‑based distribution is calculated; it also adds language to require an annual reassessment of district valuations used to set each transport agency’s allocation. County counsel proposed the edits and said the changes clarify that rate adjustments can be made at renewal rather than locking the county into a multi‑year allocation that could impede responding to changing needs.
Why it matters: EMS providers and county officials argued the funds are needed now to hire and sustain personnel in rural areas that have lost volunteers and face recruitment shortages. Dan Hansen of the Southwest Webster Ambulance board, who also serves on the county EMS advisory board, told supervisors the service has been "patiently waiting" and stressed agencies need county resources before they can recruit part‑time EMTs and drivers.
What was debated: Supervisors and EMS leaders questioned whether an 18‑month mutual termination‑for‑convenience clause would prevent a new transport site from joining the system. County counsel explained termination‑for‑convenience differs from termination‑for‑cause and recommended clarifying that allocation rates can be reset annually based on changes in membership or demographics. Some supervisors warned that contract language using the word "shall" to require fixed payments could limit the board’s ability to address emergency purchases or reallocate funds when needs change.
On staffing vs. equipment: Fort Dodge Fire Chief Matt Price and other EMS representatives stressed staffing is the primary need; Price cautioned that if funds are diverted to equipment purchases the county could undermine staffing and response capability in rural areas. "Staffing needs are really what our problem is," Price said during the discussion.
Public input and urgency: Multiple EMS leaders and elected officials urged approval to get funds flowing. A written comment from Sarah Piper, Dayton city clerk, urged the board to pass the agreements so local budgets and hiring plans could proceed.
Next steps: The board authorized the chair to sign the county’s agreement templates with the specified amendments; the final language will be distributed to member entities and formally adopted at a subsequent meeting when the definitive drafts are reviewed.
The vote: The amended motion to approve the 20/80 agreements carried by voice vote. The board’s action allows the county to implement the EMS funding model while preserving a mechanism to adjust allocations annually as conditions change.
