[{"_1":2,"_86":-5,"_87":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6383839,"mediaKeyId","2123428-a715e535057ee52e5f9842ddb11badb1","parentId",2123428,"title","Wicomico County hears EMS task force SWOT: chiefs and staff back a 1-paramedic/1-BLS model but funding and recruitment remain hurdles","audioSeconds",2746,"startMs",3800000,"endMs",6546000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2123428-a715e535057ee52e5f9842ddb11badb1&start=3800&end=6546","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2123428-a715e535057ee52e5f9842ddb11badb1/thumbnail_3800000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6383839/Wicomico-County/Maryland/Wicomico-County-hears-EMS-task-force-SWOT-chiefs-and-staff-back-a-1-paramedic1-BLS-model-but-funding-and-recruitment-remain-hurdles","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6383839-20b6f02259350f7996aeb0cb9b1fb69b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191343&Signature=fEZhLVqlem2p4Ua0dd4dM8XodiTCRgUBteDQS7ciX88iQxiQJ7l4fzlTDTZGEjpkORN2iM2c2-LaPnXS8J1~EKieU4o55zlMf605BViZsG0pzKPp-zojr7tLyMq7LLPOBGr2dJHzL63eMoLxg3Xe-KxX8u5sYOYovDSk5NXdwljRMrxBfj8eUWItdFt9dWYAUW90ODOXCqfRrU0SqlW4jHsUK6neb4TJqvQ2mIygdadQwYSJPQ27v-Aa4dtprOlVz1eK9EoyfT-iHuVxGfDzgiY65Yax24g1mUhRLHkquWM6aXcNkuOFi2IEVhiNBmuOmiCuDxwFC6SCWn9VWSKbAw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Wicomico County, MD","date","2025-01-14T00:00:00Z","article","Wicomico County officials, fire chiefs and emergency services staff reviewed recommendations from an EMS task-force SWOT analysis during a county work session, and the Wicomico Fire Chiefs Association expressed unanimous support for an option that staffs each station with one paramedic and one basic life-support provider.

The SWOT presented two primary options: option A (a chase-unit concept with two EMTs in each station plus three county-operated paramedic chase vehicles) and option B (a 1-paramedic/1-BLS provider in each station). Chiefs and staff discussed cost estimates, equipment needs, recruitment constraints and implementation priorities.

Why this matters: Emergency medical response is a core public-safety service. The county's choice of staffing model affects response times, budget planning and how county and volunteer fire departments coordinate care and billing.

Key findings and discussion

- Staffing estimates and constraints: The SWOT estimated option B (1-and-1) would require roughly 100 advanced life-support paramedics and about 100 EMTs to staff countywide 24/7 coverage; option A (chase-unit with EMTs in stations) would require roughly the same number of EMTs but about half as many paramedics (the report cited about 48 paramedics). Lorenzo Cropper, director of emergency services, and others cautioned that \"there is a shortage of paramedics\" nationwide and locally, making recruitment a major barrier to immediate implementation.

- Cost estimates: During discussion, one council member referenced an annual cost of about $7,430,000 (including a 125% factor for benefits) for one staffing scenario; speakers emphasized the numbers in the SWOT are substantial and will compete with other budget priorities. Staff and chiefs repeatedly described equipment and ongoing maintenance costs that would add to personnel expenses.

- Operational and policy issues: Chiefs noted questions about how county-employed paramedics would be integrated into volunteer firehouses, including issues of workspace, HIPAA compliance and chain-of-command. Chief Logan (Powellville/association leadership) and Chief Rob Frampton (Salisbury Fire Department) said departments already own a baseline of ALS equipment and that personnel costs, rather than equipment purchases, would be the primary recurring expense for a 1-and-1 model.

- Funding and incentives: Chiefs proposed multiple strategies to address recruitment: sign-on bonuses or stipends for paramedic training (Salisbury cited a $10,000 stipend it offers), tuition support or multi-year county-funded paramedic positions with service agreements, and use of grant programs (for example, SAFER grants) to offset start-up hiring costs. Several chiefs suggested phasing hires across multiple budget cycles (for example, adding 10 paramedic positions in year one, 10 in year two) rather than an immediate countywide rollout.

- Equipment and capital costs: Speakers noted that chase or county-employee vehicles still need ALS equipment (monitors, drug boxes, CPR devices) and that outfitting even a single set can be expensive. One participant cited life-pack monitor contract costs in the low tens of thousands; chiefs also discussed engine and ambulance acquisition costs (engines commonly near $1 million; ambulances around $400,000–$500,000) and multi-year lead times for apparatus.

- Reimbursement and billing: Council members asked whether insurance reimbursements would come to the county if the county operated transport units; staff said billing arrangements would have to be negotiated with each fire department and that jurisdictions such as Dorchester County have used agreements to return a portion of transport revenue to the county in some setups.

Chiefs' recommendation and next steps

The Wicomico Fire Chiefs Association reported unanimous support for the 1-paramedic/1-BLS staffing model (option B) and urged the county to phase funding and recruitment steps into upcoming budgets. County administration said it recognized merit in both options but that budget constraints and workforce shortages make immediate, full implementation unlikely without staged investment and targeted recruitment incentives.

There was no formal vote; councilmembers and staff agreed to consider the SWOT recommendations during the upcoming budget process and to explore grants and incentives for paramedic training and retention.

Ending

Council members called for continued collaboration between county administration, the fire chiefs and city providers to develop a phased, budget-aware plan that addresses recruitment, equipment and billing arrangements before any staffing model is adopted countywide.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Wicomico County Council Special Work Session, 1/14/2025","oneSentenceSummary","An EMS task-force SWOT presented two staffing options — a county chase-unit model and a 1-paramedic/1-BLS provider in each station. Fire chiefs' association unanimously recommended the 1-and-1 approach; county administration said both options carry substantial costs and that recruitment of paramedics is a major constraint.","taxTitle","Wicomico County, Maryland","taxId",4258,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":44,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6383844,"Wicomico County council reviews overhaul of personnel manual; council oversight, hiring rules flagged for clarification",3728,72000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2123428-a715e535057ee52e5f9842ddb11badb1&start=72&end=3800","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2123428-a715e535057ee52e5f9842ddb11badb1/thumbnail_72000.jpg","/articles/6383844/Wicomico-County/Maryland/Wicomico-County-council-reviews-overhaul-of-personnel-manual-council-oversight-hiring-rules-flagged-for-clarification","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6383844-03346be8bc1cfcf75a476e7d962e280a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191343&Signature=QUH3JZnGYUVtb3HT~tjTkK2nJ6t53tSeiXYCth5hS8-ADdHjYQ~OD0Xidm~Vyq0b1cfpFKPcEBvKUSR9~rE03PHBRwzD8vJJcfXOPMM9pgfX-Rqu-iIudXwEhGw~-gZ7pez~86HXoHh71VJv~vXax8UJDN9L2HMOXEOdu8Jp3jjwe564Ha7BgatQMquGSVknjbnTPIoz71i4U2~QflS4hyBtOTwg61iIU-HikIWWwedFFjj-PvSeOWQUatzVKyvuZCPUBO0lkHDS6N8e76ycCCbTDlMWOrEnlvec2gvjAZcKsMjECTa8Gp1OORwobHvgOYKlJsynTrgGDWyzGYK0yw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At a Wicomico County Council open work session, county human resources staff reviewed proposed revisions to chapters 1–6 of the county personnel manual and highlighted changes that shift operational authority from the council to executive-branch staff.

The proposed rewrite reorganizes and consolidates decades of provisions, but council members asked for clearer alignment with the county charter and for explicit language on several topics including position reclassification, grievance procedures for legislative-branch employees, veteran hiring preference and nepotism rules.

Donna O'Hara, director of human resources, told the council she had consolidated material and noted overlaps between the manual and the charter. \"They fall under their own. The only thing that we do for them is provide their benefits,\" O'Hara said when explaining why some positions that are listed as exempt in the charter had been added to the manual's draft list. Council members raised that the charter's list of exempt positions supersedes the manual and asked whether the manual should be revised to match the charter.

Why this matters: The manual governs hiring, classification, benefits and discipline for county employees. Changes in who approves reclassifications, how long acting appointments can continue, and which procedures apply to elected-branch staff will affect oversight and day-to-day operations across departments.

Major points discussed

- Charter vs. manual: Council members repeatedly pointed out inconsistencies between the charter's list of exempt positions and the draft manual. Mr. Benson, County Council member, emphasized the hierarchy: \"the charter would supersede the personnel manual,\" and asked staff to reconcile the difference.

- Reclassification and delegation of authority: The draft moves some approval authority from the council to executive-branch staff. Under the proposed language, the director of human resources could deny reclassification requests and, if denied, the request would not be forwarded to the council. Council members noted this is a substantive change from current practice and asked for explicit cross-references to chapter 3 and the charter.

- Acting appointments and recruitment timeframes: New language would allow the director of administration to extend acting appointments beyond 120 days in 30-, 60- or 90-day increments, up to one year, before council review would be required. Council members asked for clarity about the point at which council approval would again be required.

- Systems and records: The draft states most but not all personnel transactions will be processed in Munis. O'Hara clarified that the time-clock system \"imports the data into the Munis system,\" and other systems (for example, CivicPlus for online applications) interface with Munis.

- Sheriff and corrections language: Section 402 (hiring processes for law enforcement and corrections) was revised to require notification to the county attorney, human resources and the director of administration when the sheriff or corrections makes changes to departmental policies. Council members confirmed the sheriff reviewed and approved revised wording, and asked staff to note whether any portion conflicts with collective-bargaining provisions or agreements covering deputies or corrections staff.

- Veterans preference and selection scoring: The current manual uses a point system that awards veterans five points in interview scoring; the draft removes the old numeric point system and instead says veterans \"may be given preference\" when equally qualified candidates exist. Council members asked staff to specify how preference would be calculated and recommended use of firmer language (for example, \"shall\" rather than \"may\") or explicit procedural steps.

- Nepotism and consensual relationship rules: Nepotism provisions were moved into a single chapter to avoid scattered, inconsistent language. Council members asked for clearer definitions (for example, whether \"consensual romantic relationship partners\" includes employees currently dating) and cautioned that any waiver process must include safeguards so it does not create perceived or actual preferential treatment.

- Other items raised: council members asked staff to confirm that veterans' reemployment rights language and other statutory protections are retained elsewhere in the manual, to restore an apparent payroll deduction for the State Employees Credit Union if appropriate, and to clarify references to retirement chapters that were renumbered in the draft.

What staff said next: O'Hara said the draft consolidated material so users would find all rules on a topic in one place, and that she had circulated the manual to department heads and affected offices last year. She also said she would: remove or reconcile items inconsistent with the charter; clarify grievance procedures for legislative-branch employees; reword sheriff-related language where necessary; and supply the council with the missing chapters (notably the full nepotism chapter and veterans/military service language).

No formal votes or policy adoptions occurred during the work session. Council members requested additional review and cross-checking with the charter, payroll, finance and the county attorney's office before any adoption.

Ending

Staff will return revised language on the identified items at a future work session; council members and staff recommended a periodic review schedule for the manual so the county does not wait decades between comprehensive updates.","County HR presented a proposed rewrite of chapters 1–6 of the personnel manual at an open work session. Council members and staff pressed for clarity on charter conflicts, reclassification authority, sheriff hiring language, veteran preference and nepotism rules. No formal action was taken; staff will return with revisions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Wicomico County hears EMS task force SWOT: chiefs and staff back a 1-paramedic/1-BLS model but funding and recruitment remain hurdles

Wicomico County council reviews overhaul of personnel manual; council oversight, hiring rules flagged for clarification