Washington County EMS says third ambulance would improve coverage but faces a large funding gap

Washington County EMS leaders and board members discussed a proposal to add a third ambulance to reduce coverage gaps, but acknowledged substantial funding and staffing shortfalls.

At the meeting, staff set expectations for capital costs and recurring expenses: "You're looking at $500,000, give or take," Floyd said when describing the cost of buying another truck, adding that the price varies depending on whether the unit is medic‑equipped or basic. Board members and staff noted prior analyses showing transfer reimbursement alone would not close the gap.

Why it matters: the county frequently relies on mutual aid and transfer calls that pull units out of service for many hours; staff warned the system needs an additional unit to avoid service interruptions on long transfers. Tony said recruiting and staffing would also be a constraint — the service would need roughly six personnel to operate a third truck full time and currently had only four candidates interested.

Board members discussed possible funding routes: a township cost‑share based on run volume (citing language in Senate Bill 1 as one option) and a public‑safety or ambulance tax. A board member noted the county council must provide funding, and commissioners cautioned that a tax would likely meet resistance and raise only part of the needed revenue.

Next steps: staff said they would continue to refine cost estimates and return recommendations; board members also indicated they would consider pursuing written mutual‑aid agreements and explore township contributions as part of a broader funding strategy.