NY: Kathy Hochul vetoes legislation aimed at helping EMS providers. Here’s why
Kathy Hochul vetoes legislation aimed at helping EMS providers. Here’s why
Jillian McCarthy
Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin
Dec. 24, 2025
Key Points:
- New York Governor Kathy Hochul vetoed a bill that would have allowed local governments to fund emergency medical services outside of the property tax cap.
- The governor cited concerns that the bill could lead to substantially higher property taxes for homeowners and businesses.
- The vetoed bill was part of a legislative package aimed at addressing funding and service gap issues for EMS providers across the state.
- State Assemblymember Donna Lupardo, who introduced the bill, expressed disappointment that the governor did not offer alternative solutions to the EMS funding crisis.
Gov. Kathy Hochul has vetoed a bill designed to provide financial support to emergency medical services across New York state.
On Dec. 23, State Assemblymember Donna Lupardo (D-Endwell), who initially introduced the legislation as a part of her “#RescueEMS” legislative package, announced that it had been vetoed despite bipartisan support and receiving almost unanimous approval when it passed through both houses.
The bill would have removed expenditures for EMS from the limit on real property tax levies issued by local governments, allowing municipalities to fund EMS outside of the tax cap.
This, Lupardo said, would have given local governments the “flexibility needed to better support these vital services.”
Hochul: EMS bill vetoed to avoid higher property taxes
Hochul issued a statement after vetoing the bill, citing the potential for higher property taxes as a result of the legislation:
“This bill would exclude the costs of Emergency Medical Services from the calculation of the limit upon municipal property tax levy increases imposed by the General Municipal Law. The property tax cap, enacted in 2011, restricts the annual increase in local property tax levies by local governments and school districts to two percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is less. The tax cap has been effective in limiting local property tax growth, resulting in considerable savings for taxpayers. This bill, as written, could lead to substantially higher property taxes imposed on homeowners and businesses in communities throughout the state. Therefore, I am constrained to veto this bill.”
The “#RescueEMS” legislative package
In July, Lupardo and state assemblymember Joe Angelino (R-Norwich) joined Broome County EMS Coordinator Dave Tinklepaugh at a press conference to discuss the status of several bills within the legislative package.
Together, they looked to address issues with EMS ranging from underfunding to the Medicaid reimbursement rate, a decrease in volunteers, and the slow decline of access to EMS, especially in rural areas.
The second bill in the “#RescueEMS” legislative package initially designated general ambulance services as an essential service, an issue that first arose in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. An amended version of the bill passed without that provision, but it does require every municipality to conduct “an exhaustive planning process” related to emergency medical system plans.
This bill was approved and signed by Hochul.
The process will require counties, cities, towns and villages to work together to assess current service levels, identify existing service gaps and estimate costs for providing such services.
The third and final bill in the package requires the Thruway Authority to issue emergency services permits to ambulance and fire vehicles, making them exempt from roadway tolls.
This bill, like the first, was also vetoed by Hochul.
EMS has ‘dangerous service gaps, especially in rural areas’
In the wake of the first bill being vetoed, Lupardo said she is disappointed that the veto message from Hochul did not include any “alternative suggestions” regarding the EMS “funding crisis.”
“For the last few years, we have worked tirelessly across party lines to raise the alarm about the need to #RescueEMS,” she wrote in a statement. “But in spite of our best efforts, there remain dangerous service gaps, especially in rural areas, and an uncertainty about what the future holds. The bottom line is that New Yorkers expect EMS to come to the rescue whenever needed − ironically, they are the ones in need of rescue now.”
New York State Senator Rachel May also responded to the veto, emphasizing the bipartisan agreement that the “need to fund emergency medical services was more important than an arbitrary tax cap.”
“I am disappointed that the Governor chose not to empower local municipalities, including many rural villages and towns in my district, to fund EMS as they see fit and as current economic realities demand,” May wrote in a statement.







