Measure addresses S.L. ambulance dispute
Sen. Dan Eastman's first substitute version of SB183 defines the term "governing body" to mean a city or county council and would require that the governing body review the bids and proposals submitted by contractors for major services.
"It does make a difference . . . that it's out in the open and there's some discussion about why a particular (request for proposal) was chosen over the other," said Eastman, a Republican from Bountiful.
Eastman's first draft would have changed the way cities vet contract providers. The substitute is "what you end up with when you have two groups that can't agree on anything substantive," he said. "Why should the state Legislature dictate to the cities or to towns or to Gold Cross, for that matter, how they operate their selection process?"
The Senate Transportation and Public Utilities and Technology Committee's vote moved the bill to the Senate's consent calendar Monday, meaning that the Senate can vote "yes" or "no" on the bill without debate.
The change is one that Gold Cross thought was already in the law that passed last year's session and required that a "governing body" of a city or county approve the call for proposals for ambulance services before the city or county started reviewing those proposals.
Instead, a committee of nine men, most with current or past experience in fire or paramedic services, ranked the proposals from Gold Cross and Southwest Ambulance on experience, training procedures, response times, equipment and cost to patients. Gold Cross scored 61 percent, and Southwest scored 66 percent. The rates are set by state law, so the costs were the same for both providers.
"It was clear what we meant" by governing body, said Mike Moffitt, senior vice president for Gold Cross. "It must have been ambiguous to somebody else. Any time a city or municipality endeavors to look at their emergency services . . . it's something that the community needs to know about and possibly have some input into. This was something that should have the approval of the full council before it goes forward."
A series of letters between City Attorney Ed Rutan and Gold Cross lawyers show that the company wanted to block Southwest's license until the City Council approved the ambulance contract. Rutan argued that the city had approval from its governing body, which he interpreted to be Anderson, who oversees the purchasing and contracts division.
Eastman's bill would require city and county councils to approve the requests and offer input before soliciting proposals. But it's not retroactive and won't ostensibly apply to Salt Lake's contract with Southwest.
"We believe the City Council is supportive of what we've done thus far and is supportive of the fact that a (request for proposals) is released," said Scott Freitag, a fire department spokesman and chairman of the committee that ranked Southwest higher than Gold Cross.
Moffitt would not say how much losing the Salt Lake City contract cost his company but said that legal action "is still being discussed on our end."
E-mail: kswinyard@desnews.com
You can be the first to comment on this story.