Nottoway County hears fire and EMS budget requests as chiefs warn of aging trucks and staffing shortfalls

County staff and local fire and emergency medical officials urged the Nottoway County board during a budget briefing to help cover mounting equipment and staffing costs, seeking a $50,000 per‑department allocation from decal/reserve funds and asking the board to consider an additional one‑time increase this year.

A county agency official presenting the request said departments have been level‑funded for two years and are now seeking to use decal/reserve money to pay for apparatus replacement. “The fire trucks, replacements,” the agency official stated, describing a recently ordered engine with about a 50‑month delivery window and a large immediate price; the presenter said a deposit reduced the near‑term cost to roughly $1.1 million and that the new apparatus will replace two older vehicles and reduce fleet size.

The request is modest in board terms but significant for the volunteer departments: members and staff walked the board through a per‑department request of $50,000 — five departments would total about $150,000 — and debated whether the county should advance an extra $100,000 this year based on revenue projections. One board member said they are “supportive” of $50,000 but asked staff to examine whether an additional $100,000 could be justified as revenues come in.

Why it matters: officials said vehicle prices and delivery times have increased and that grants cover ambulances more readily than fire engines. County staff flagged a 20‑year capital improvement plan created in 2022 that projects roughly $8.7 million in apparatus and ambulance needs across the planning horizon, providing a context for why modest, recurring contributions and strategic one‑time payments matter to sustain service levels.

Staffing and service model under pressure: fire and EMS leaders told the board that volunteer ranks are aging and that many departments will need to cross‑train personnel for both EMS and fire response. Agency representatives said reliance on mutual aid has grown and that demand on busier days can require three or more ambulances county‑wide; they urged development of a multi‑year staffing plan and suggested reviewing staffing and funding again six months after the new budget year to assess progress.

Revenue, billing and community support: the briefing included a review of revenue recovery and billing. The county’s billing contractor collects roughly 4–6% of collections, staff said, and average monthly collections were described as about $54,000 in recent months. Presenters and board members also acknowledged a decline in physical donations since levy changes and noted that some residents expect a pay‑per‑use model rather than tax‑supported services.

Grants and procurement: staff described grant opportunities for ambulances (programs that can fund a large share of ambulance cost, cited as about 70% in one example) but cautioned that grants for fire apparatus are intermittent and that several federal programs have been slow or frozen. Presenters described examples where up‑front payments and payment plans reduced acquisition costs for some departments and noted that repurposing older vehicles (for example into rehab trucks) is one way departments have stretched limited resources.

Training, equipment and 9‑1‑1 services: staff also proposed sustaining county support for a joint training and burn building operated with the Town of Blackstone, asking to maintain $10,000 in support with a possible $5,000 increase for maintenance and training center needs. Separately, the 9‑1‑1 center asked the board to consider a console translation service (start‑up roughly $11,070 and recurring about $5,000 annually) to support dozens of languages in dispatch operations.

What’s next: board members did not take a final vote on the funding requests; they asked staff to return with clarified numbers, options for allocation formulas (rather than a straight per‑department flat amount), and the CIP spreadsheets that itemize capital needs. At the close of the presentation a board member moved to adjourn and the meeting ended after informal agreement to do so.

The board instructed county staff to review allocation options, verify grant eligibility, and bring back refined budget recommendations and supporting documents for further consideration.