Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears EMS monthly report; approves stopping detailed public review of hardship waivers
Summary
The First Response Services Committee received routine monthly reports from EMS staff on staffing, vehicles and training. The committee voted to stop reviewing individual hardship waivers and write-offs in committee detail, agreeing instead to receive only counts unless a member requests file-level review.
The First Response Services Committee on an evening meeting reviewed the monthly EMS report from Matt Beatty and debated how the committee will handle hardship waiver and write-off reporting going forward.
Matt Beatty opened the report with staffing and vehicle updates and summarized training and supply items. Beatty said the service is "full staff" for on-duty coverage with one paramedic always on each shift and additional PRN (as-needed) personnel. He described an upcoming request to add another paramedic and said, of vehicles, that the department had received “this is our new one out there,” and that two older ambulances have more than 200,000 miles and are showing wear. On procurement timing he said ordered ambulances have long lead times: “we're looking at about 15 or 18 months” for a new ambulance, and that cost estimates were “running anywhere from $2.90 to $3.20 for the ambulance” and that a remount option would be less (Beatty used the phrase “in a remount, we're looking around 200”).
Committee members asked about resale value and training. Beatty said the department completed 32 hours of in-person training this year and is using more in-person training to qualify personnel for a state $800 training incentive. He also reported routine maintenance and a potential supply-tracking system to be considered in the next budget.
Committee members questioned the hardship waiver that appeared on the report. Beatty briefly summarized a recent waiver (identified in the meeting as December) and gave a broad description of the applicant’s limited monthly income. Committee members debated whether the committee should review full financial details in public. David Nolwers moved that the committee “no longer go over the waivers and the write offs in this committee” and the motion was approved on voice vote; the committee agreed it will continue to receive a count of hardship waivers granted and that members may request further details from Beatty’s office if needed. “I probably wanna see a still even just say we granted 1 hardship waiver,” a committee member said while expressing a desire to keep some summary reporting.
The committee did not change the underlying approval authority for hardship waivers; Beatty said the waiver had been signed by the chairman and that any member with questions could review the file in his office. No statute, ordinance, or resolution name was offered during the discussion other than a reference to a resolution the committee passed “a couple years ago” governing waivers; the transcript did not provide the formal resolution title.
Committee members requested a simple monthly tally of waivers and write-offs on the consent packet rather than line-level financial disclosures, and Beatty agreed to provide that summary going forward.
The committee did not take other formal budget actions during this portion of the meeting.
Ending: Committee members said they will monitor staffing and vehicle needs during upcoming budget discussions and will return to waiver reporting format in the next meeting packet if needed.
