Kentucky Supreme Court Upholds Paducah Firefighter Residency Requirement
The Kentucky Supreme Court has concluded that a residency requirement imposed by the city of Paducah on its firefighters does not violate a state law prohibiting “emergency medical service first response provider” from having a residency requirement on its firefighters. The decision affirmed summary judgment in favor of the City of Paducah and upheld the city’s firefighter residency ordinance.
The case was brought in 2021 by Nathan Torian, a Paducah firefighter, individually and as a representative of a proposed class consisting of members of IAFF Local 168. Torian challenged Paducah Ordinance § 2-304, which requires firefighters hired after October 1, 1998, to reside within McCracken County or within a forty-five-minute travel radius of Station 4 “as a condition of their continued employment.”
Torian argued that the ordinance was preempted by Kentucky Revised Statutes § 311A.027(1), which provides that “[n]o public agency, tax district, or other publicly funded emergency medical service first response provider or licensed ambulance service shall have a residence requirement for an employee of or volunteer for the organization.” According to Torian, Paducah firefighters qualify as “emergency medical service first response providers” because they are required to hold EMS certifications and routinely provide medical care while responding to emergency calls.
The City countered that the statute applies to EMS providers as institutions, not to individual employees, and that the Paducah Fire Department is a fire department governed by KRS Chapter 95, not an emergency medical service first response provider under KRS Chapter 311A. The City also emphasized that it does not operate an ambulance service and that ambulance transport in Paducah is handled by a private provider.
The McCracken Circuit Court granted summary judgment to the City, concluding that KRS § 311A.027(1) was not intended to apply to firefighters and did not prohibit municipalities from imposing residency requirements on fire department personnel. The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed.
On discretionary review, the Kentucky Supreme Court also affirmed, though on different grounds. The Court held that KRS § 311A.027(1) focuses on the status of the employer rather than the employee, and that the phrase “emergency medical service first response provider” refers to institutions that provide ambulance or medical first response services as regulated under Kentucky’s EMS statutes and administrative regulations.
The Court noted that Paducah Fire Department does not maintain ambulances and is not subject to the regulatory framework governing ambulance providers or medical first response agencies. As a result, the Court concluded that Paducah Fire Department is not an “emergency medical service first response provider” within the meaning of the statute and that the residency ordinance was not preempted by state law.
The Supreme Court emphasized that its decision was limited to fire departments that do not operate ambulance services, and it expressly declined to address whether combined fire-and-EMS departments might be treated differently under KRS § 311A.027(1).
Justice Keller dissented, arguing that the statute’s plain language covers publicly funded first responders who provide emergency medical services, regardless of whether they operate ambulances, and that Paducah firefighters meet that definition based on their training and role in emergency medical responses.
This decision comes against the backdrop of additional litigation involving Torian. As previously covered here, Torian was terminated by the City of Paducah in October 2025 and filed a separate federal lawsuit challenging that termination in November 2025. Here is more on that story. Here is a copy of the Kentucky Supreme Court’s decision:
