Merced County discusses six‑month ambulance contract extension as state delays RFP

Merced County supervisors on Tuesday discussed a proposed short-term extension of the county’s exclusive ambulance contract after the state delayed the county’s next request for proposals (RFP).

The discussion mattered because the county uses an exclusive operating area (EOA) contract to ensure ambulance coverage across rural areas; county staff said the extension would allow the winning vendor of the next RFP six months to ramp up operations and preserve continuity of service.

Dr. Sullivan, Merced County public health director, told the board that the county’s current provider, identified in the meeting as SAMSA, is meeting the county’s timeliness standard this year and that the extension is being considered because the state has not yet approved the new RFP. “We'd like to give whomever wins that RFP 6 months to ramp up before they take over the service delivery within the county,” Dr. Sullivan said. She added that the county is pausing fines and penalties only for the transition period and that previously assessed fines remain owed: “They will still be responsible for those fines and penalties. This is pausing the fines and penalties during this transitionary period while we execute the RFP.”

A public commenter, introduced as Councilmember Harris speaking as a resident, urged the board to continue the item and convene the Emergency Medical Care Committee (EMCC) before approving any change. “Removing the penalties for late calls removes accountability, and it removes a security blanket that's there and it needs to be there,” Harris said, and asked the board to consider incentives rather than eliminating penalties.

Supervisor Silvera and other board members asked staff to clarify operational and contractual risks. Dr. Sullivan said county staff examined other providers but found few willing to accept a short, uncertain term if subject to fines; she also said a new provider could concentrate resources in population centers without an EOA, leaving rural areas underserved. “Otherwise, what would happen is that companies would come in and they would be around population dense centers. So they would stay in Merced City,” she said when explaining the rationale for the EOA.

Board members repeatedly noted the state’s delay of the RFP review and the county’s preference for a stable transition to protect staffing and response times. County staff said monitoring and oversight of the current provider would continue during any extension and that the item was a contract extension rather than the RFP itself. The item had been pulled from the consent calendar for discussion; no final vote on the extension was recorded in the provided transcript.

For now, the board directed staff to continue discussions with the EMCC and county counsel and to report back with any additional options or safeguards. That follow-up will determine whether the board adopts the proposed short extension, requires added accountability measures, or pursues alternative contracting arrangements.

No formal contract action (approval or rejection) on the extension is shown in the transcript excerpt provided.