Town of Catsville pitches BLS ambulance crews to fill Greene County transport gaps

George, a representative of the Town of Catsville, told Greene County’s Health Services Committee the town has vehicles, equipment and staff and submitted a proposal offering single-unit 12‑ or 24‑hour basic life support (BLS) or advanced life support (ALS) crews for county coverage. “I don't have a prepared presentation for you,” he said, adding that the town offered four service options to match what the county might request.

The proposal, originally submitted via Supervisor McCulla, priced each option as a single unit; committee members clarified the figures are per‑unit, not for two vehicles. George said the town could scale up within about six months if the county decides to subcontract. “I feel comfortable with six months; we could probably do it in four,” he said when asked about a timeline for staffing and equipment upgrades.

On clinical impact, George told the committee he did not expect a large increase in calls from the new surgical center nearby but cautioned that anesthesia or surgical complications could require higher‑level transports. He recommended the county remain the certificate of operation (CO) holder and subcontract the provider role, citing Medicare/Medicaid and liability considerations.

“My recommendation is you asked us for solutions to a specific problem … putting on dedicated BLS crews to supplement — that’s the intent to solve the problem which was not enough in‑service ambulances to transport people,” George said, arguing BLS crews would address shortages without the higher cost of expanding paramedic staffing across all shifts.

Tom Hoy of the Town of Windham presented a cost spreadsheet that separates personnel, overtime, supplies, maintenance and rental or purchase financing for an additional unit. He estimated an operating budget around $900,000 for a 24‑hour town ambulance and said his fleet currently operates mainly ALS units. Hoy noted he excluded billing revenue from his spreadsheet because collections and billing logistics remain undecided.

Committee members raised several implementation questions: whether added crews or ambulances would be placed in overnight hours, how billing and revenue allocation would be handled (county vs. provider), and whether mutual‑aid arrangements already in use could meet peak demand. A deputy EMS coordinator who spoke from the field said she had not observed daily stockouts of ambulances and stressed that mutual aid and occasional extra crews have been used to fill shortfalls.

Several speakers urged equipment standardization and joint training across agencies to reduce waste and simplify shared responses; officials also noted narcotics expiration leads to avoidable medication waste and described plans to align some ventilator and laryngoscope systems across providers.

Next steps identified by the committee include collecting recent mutual‑aid and transport data (including how many added crews have been run, transports that put ambulances out of service and revenue flows), clarifying whether the county will hold the CO, and returning to budget planning. George and Windham suggested mid‑August to early‑September as a latest decision point for the county’s 2027 budget cycle if a six‑month mobilization timeframe is assumed.

The committee did not take a formal vote on a contract at this meeting; members requested further operational and financial data before deciding whether to pursue a subcontracting agreement or other model.