Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Oversight Ambulance Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident asks Avondale to clarify ambulance contract for Unit LA 175
Summary
A resident asked the council to produce the intergovernmental agreement for Unit LA 175 and questioned staffing and vendor arrangements; city staff said they will follow up.
Get email alerts on the Public Oversight Ambulance Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A resident raised questions during public comment about the legal and operational status of an Avondale Fire and Medical vehicle identified in the transcript as Unit LA 175, asking the council on Aug. (date not specified) to provide a copy of the intergovernmental agreement and to clarify staffing requirements and vendor relationships.
Theresa Desanti said she requested a copy of the intergovernmental agreement on June 23, 2025, and again on Aug. 17, 2025, but the records she received did not mention Unit LA 175. "So on 08/17/2025, I submitted another request to the city specifically requesting a copy of Avondale's Unit LA 175 contract. Per the city of Avondale, there are no agreements connected with the city of Avondale Fire Medical Vehicles. Has they own they are owned by the city and not leased," Desanti said.
Desanti said that on April 7, 2025, Chief Rooney had told her the city could staff Unit LA 175 "with EMTs per the contract" when she asked why a paramedic sometimes was not present on that unit. She asked whether Avondale continued a contract with AMR or had entered a new contract with another ambulance provider and whether any Maricopa ambulance staff had ties to Chief Rooney.
"Does that mean the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing? Seems a lot, not a little, suspicious to me in my opinion," Desanti said.
Mayor (first name not specified) asked whether staff would follow up; City Manager Ron said yes. The council did not take formal action during the public comment period; staff acknowledged they would follow up on the records request and the questions about Unit LA 175.
No city-recorded contract or formal agreement for Unit LA 175 was presented during the meeting; the resident said the city’s response to her public-records requests did not contain a document she expected. She asked for clarification about vendor contracts and whether any staff relationships affect contract awards. The city committed to follow up with the resident and return to council as appropriate.
