Mobile council rejects new ambulance certificate as members call for ordinance overhaul
Loading...
Summary
Council members voted down a certificate of public convenience for a new ambulance provider after hospitals and councilmembers flagged patient-transport bottlenecks and an outdated ordinance; supporters said they want to help, while critics said adding providers without fixing rules could worsen service.
The Mobile City Council voted against approving a certificate of public convenience that would have added an additional ambulance provider after extended public comment and council debate.
Porter Taylor urged the council to give new providers the opportunity to help the city. Paul Reed, vice president and chief nursing officer at Spring Hill Medical Center, told the council that hospital discharge transportation is a bottleneck for emergency departments and that additional provider capacity could help move patients and reduce ED backups. "When we don't move patients off the floor ... the ER backs up," Reed said, describing recent days when dozens of patients waited for beds and transport.
Representatives from other ambulance providers including Medevac acknowledged ongoing issues but described them as manageable. Corey Hughes of Medevac said his organization was "still working on" small problems and prioritizing available assets.
Council debate focused on whether the current ordinance governing certificates of public convenience is effective. Councilman Reynolds said the city had previously added a provider believing it would solve response problems and instead saw the situation worsen. "It's not effective, and we sort of need to get our house in order," Reynolds said, arguing that the council should pursue a substantial modification to the ordinance and coordinate with Mobile Fire Rescue and hospitals before approving more providers. Councilwoman Woods said she agreed and would not support the certificate until the ordinance and system issues are addressed.
On the council floor the motion to approve the certificate failed after members voted no; the clerk recorded the item as failed. The discussion included acknowledgement that hospitals and first-responder agencies are continuing conversations about a broader policy fix and that companies could reapply for certificates in the future once the ordinance is revised.
The council did not adopt a replacement ordinance at the meeting; council members instructed staff and stakeholders to continue working on structural changes to how basic life services and transports are regulated.
