Gold Cross contract fails

Gold Cross ambulance. Photo courtesy Facebook

Date: October 19, 2022

After a lengthy discussion, the Augusta Commission failed to ratify a contract with Gold Cross EMS at the Oct. 18 meeting.

Negotiations have gone on for months, but some commissioners keep adding more stipulations in public meetings without the input of Gold Cross.

The Administrative Services Committee approved more stipulations and set the subsidy given to the ambulance provider to $900,000 a year at the Oct. 11 meeting.

The new stipulations include eliminating the use of Quick Response Vehicles, which are smaller SUV’s that paramedics can normally use to get to a scene quickly and stabilize a patient while the ambulance is on route.

MORE: Column: Mayor Davis says Gold Cross is like Burger King

The committee also approved asking for a three-year contract renewable annually instead of a 10-year contract, a demand that Gold Cross not use subcontractors, elimination of the six-month compliance period and a $900,000 yearly subsidy to be paid monthly.

At Tuesday’s meeting, the amount of the subsidy was once again the biggest sticking point. District 8 Commissioner Brandon Garrett favored raising the amount to $1.6 million and District 6 Commissioner Ben Hasan continued to lobby for no subsidy at all.

Hasan has been the driving force behind having the city take over ambulance service and place the responsibility with the Augusta Fire Department.

Several substitute motions were made with various proposed subsidy amounts and all failed to gain a majority.

“This feels like we’re on The Price Is Right,” District 3 Commissioner Catherine McKnight.

District 7 Commissioner Sean Frantom, who has been vocal about his disdain for the commission discussing proposed contract details in public without including Gold Cross, said the process was unfair, and he would no longer take part.

“Here we are playing with Monopoly money, and they are not at the table. I am not voting yes on any of this,” Frantom said.

After the motions and substitute motions failed, District 9 Commissioner Francine Scott asked the commission to reconsider and offered a compromise motion that accepted the stipulations and raised the subsidy to $1 million a year.

Scott’s motion failed as well.

In related commission news, after lobbing the issue back and forth between committee and full commission, the body agreed to give the Augusta Fire Department $3.5 million in American Rescue Plan funding.

MORE: Gold Cross contract negotiations with the city lurch forward

Initially, Fire Chief Antonio Burden asked for $7 million for equipment purchases, reminding the commission that his department will not be receiving any funding.from the special purpose local-options sales tax 8.

The request was initially granted by the Public Service Committee but was rejected by the full commission.

As with the Gold Cross subsidy, several motions were made related to Burden’s request with various proposed dollar amounts volleyed around, but none managed to garner a majority.

Scott offered a compromise motion of $3.5 million for the equipment, and her motion passed.

Scott Hudson is the senior reporter for The Augusta Press. Reach him at scott@theaugustapress.com 

What to Read Next

The Author

Scott Hudson is an award winning investigative journalist from Augusta, GA who reported daily for WGAC AM/FM radio as well as maintaining a monthly column for the Buzz On Biz newspaper. Scott co-edited the award winning book "Augusta's WGAC: The Voice Of The Garden City For Seventy Years" and authored the book "The Contract On The Government."

Comment Policy

The Augusta Press encourages and welcomes reader comments; however, we request this be done in a respectful manner, and we retain the discretion to determine which comments violate our comment policy. We also reserve the right to hide, remove and/or not allow your comments to be posted.

The types of comments not allowed on our site include:

  • Threats of harm or violence
  • Profanity, obscenity, or vulgarity, including images of or links to such material
  • Racist comments
  • Victim shaming and/or blaming
  • Name calling and/or personal attacks;
  • Comments whose main purpose are to sell a product or promote commercial websites or services;
  • Comments that infringe on copyrights;
  • Spam comments, such as the same comment posted repeatedly on a profile.