Mendocino Logo
File #: 22-0839    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Approval Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 5/27/2022 In control: Executive Office
On agenda: 6/8/2022 Final action:
Title: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Clarification of Emergency Medical Services including Ambulance Transport as Public Safety; Review Current Service Gaps and Risks; and Direction to Staff to Return with Plan (Sponsors: Supervisor Williams and Supervisor Mulheren)
Attachments: 1. Lomita 1986, 2. Mendocino County Ambulance Service Areas & Fire Districts, 3. 6-8-22 Mendocino County BOS EMS Presentation

 

To:  Board of Supervisors

FromSupervisor Williams and Supervisor Mulheren

Meeting DateJune 8, 2022

 

Department Contact:  

Ted Williams

Phone: 

707-937-6500

 

Item Type:   Regular Agenda

 

Time Allocated for Item: 45 Min

 

 

Agenda Title:

title

Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Clarification of Emergency Medical Services including Ambulance Transport as Public Safety; Review Current Service Gaps and Risks; and Direction to Staff to Return with Plan

(Sponsors: Supervisor Williams and Supervisor Mulheren)

End

 

Recommended Action/Motion:

recommendation

Clarify Emergency Medical Services including Ambulance transport as public safety; Review current service gaps and risks; and direct staff to return with plan, working with the Fire-EMS Ad Hoc as necessary.

End

 

Previous Board/Board Committee Actions:

None.                     

 

Summary of Request

California Constitution, Article XIII - Taxation, Section 35, (2): “(2) The protection of the public safety is the first responsibility of local government and local officials have an obligation to give priority to the provision of adequate public safety services.”

 

The public views emergency medical response and transport as public safety. It’s time for the County to formally adopt emergency medical response as a public safety priority.

 

See attached fire district and ambulance service area map.

 

See attached CITY OF LOMITA et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES…, Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Four, Oct 16, 1986

 

Alternative Action/Motion:

Take no action.                     

 

Does This Item Support the General Plan? Yes

 

Supervisorial District:  All

                                          

vote requirement:  Majority

                                          

 

 

Supplemental Information Available Online At: N/A

 

Fiscal Details:

source of funding: General Fund, Other

budgeted in current f/y: No

current f/y cost: N

if no, please describe:

annual recurring cost: Y

revenue agreement: Choose an item.

 budget clarification:

Agreement/Resolution/Ordinance Approved by County Counsel: N/A

 

CEO Liaison: Executive Office

 

 

CEO Review: Yes 

 

 

CEO Comments:

 

FOR COB USE ONLY

Executed By: Atlas Pearson, Deputy Clerk II

Final Status:Direction Given to Staff

Date: June 14, 2022