Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Green River council hears repeated concern over EMS staffing; county funding and local incentives discussed
Summary
Residents and councilors said emergency medical services (EMS) in Green River face retention and coverage challenges; council and staff described steps including an EMT class, a county proposal of $25,000 from TRT funds for EMS retention, stipend practices and possible local budget adjustments to improve coverage.
During public comment and staff reports Oct. 14, several residents urged the council to address persistent EMS staffing and response gaps. Commenters said calls sometimes go unanswered or are covered by out‑of‑town ambulances, and asked what the city and county are doing to improve coverage.
Councilors said an EMT training class has started, and the council is exploring recruitment and retention tools, including advertising campaigns and incentives. “We’re trying to allocate certain amount of money for an advertising campaign for the lack of EMTs via either local radio stations or the newspaper,” one councilor said; the meeting record also notes discussion of property‑tax relief up to $1,000 as an incentive and stipends for nonresident EMTs who respond to Green River calls.
City leaders said they have discussed a $25,000 allocation from county TRT (transient room tax) funds that Commissioner Kevin Jensen proposed be targeted toward retention in Green River. The council noted that once the county transfers money to the EMS special service district it is a separate taxing entity and the district controls how funds are spent, but the county may set distribution suggestions or guardrails intended to benefit Green River retention specifically.
Councilors and commenters emphasized coordination with the county special service district and continued work to reallocate some city budget items if necessary to expedite better local coverage. No formal council action was taken at the meeting on EMS funding; councilors asked staff to continue working with county partners and to seek retention‑focused uses of any available county funds.
