Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Health Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves CDPH sequencing agreement after adding mutual indemnity language
Summary
Supervisors approved an agreement with the California Department of Public Health to submit specimens for whole-genome sequencing, but not before a sharp discussion about an indemnity clause; the board added language specifying reciprocal indemnification for county acts and state acts.
Fresno County supervisors on Jan. 28 approved a three-year agreement with the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to support SARS-CoV-2 whole-genome sequencing and routine infectious-disease surveillance, after an extended debate about an indemnification clause.
Supervisor Reiser Bredefield raised concerns about a CDPH contract provision that read as if it would require the county to indemnify the state against ‘‘any and all claims’’ arising from the agreement. Bredefield said he would not support a blanket indemnity to the state, citing past public distrust of pandemic-era public health decisions.
County counsel and public-health staff explained that many state program contracts arrive as standard state-drafted agreements and that the typical indemnity language protects a state partner only for county-caused acts; the county cannot obtain program participation if it rejects the state’s standard language, staff added. Several supervisors pressed for reciprocal language.
Ultimately, the board approved the contract on the condition that indemnity responsibilities be reciprocal: the county will indemnify CDPH only for claims arising from county acts, and CDPH will indemnify the county for claims arising from state acts under the agreement. The board’s motion to add mutual indemnification language passed; the clerk recorded one dissenting vote. The board also directed county counsel to prepare a fair and adequate summary and set Feb. 11, 2025 for the second reading of the related ordinance establishing a special tax for an unrelated annexation matter earlier in the meeting.
Why it matters: The agreement maintains the county’s access to state public-health laboratory sequencing and surveillance support — an ongoing, non-emergency public-health function — but the debate highlighted local supervisors’ attention to contract terms and state-drafted standard agreements.
Public comment and board direction: Supervisors heard public remarks urging caution around the indemnity language; county counsel said the language would be tailored so the county is not exposed to the state’s own misconduct. The board’s final action accepted mutual indemnity language and authorized staff to finalize the agreement.
