Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Ambulance Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners postpone ambulance items, direct comprehensive EMS study
Summary
After extended debate, the board voted unanimously to postpone three ambulance‑related items (47, 48, 71) and directed staff, EMS council and the county attorney to produce a comprehensive study (item 79) and return with draft ordinance and recommendations at the first January meeting.
The Broward County Commission voted unanimously to postpone three separate ambulance and EMS policy items and to fold them into a single comprehensive review under item 79.
Senator Steve Geller proposed that items 47, 48 and 71 be postponed and rolled into Commissioner Davis’s motion (79) for a holistic rewrite and study of the relevant chapter of county code. Geller said the CEO of the hospital districts and some ambulance providers raised concerns that separate votes on the items could cause a cumulative impact on the local health care system. “None of these individually would cause significant impact, but cumulatively they might,” Geller said.
Commissioner Davis, who sponsored item 79, asked staff to convene the EMS council, hospital districts, private ambulance companies and other stakeholders; the county attorney confirmed staff would draft a proposed ordinance and the EMS council would be asked for recommendations. The board instructed staff to return with a draft ordinance/work product at the first commission meeting in January (timeline explicitly included to avoid an open‑ended study). The motion to postpone 47, 48 and 71 until the study was completed passed unanimously.
Speakers from EMS providers and industry cautioned that the EMS council will need time and that a subcommittee may be required for thorough review; private providers urged careful consideration of transport liability and operational impacts. County staff said EMS council meets December 4 and staff expects additional material for the board’s December 9 meeting; commissioners emphasized the study must be timely but not open‑ended.
The board action does not adopt any ordinance; it directs a structured review with multiple stakeholders and requests staff and the county attorney produce a draft ordinance for the board’s consideration.
