BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 210 (Solorio)
Hearing Date: 8/15/2011 Amended: 8/15/2011
Consultant: Katie Johnson Policy Vote: Health 5-3
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 210 would revise existing statute pertaining to
the role of city, county, and fire districts in the provision of
prehospital emergency medical services.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Increased ambulance $100 $100 $0 General
zone reviews
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Existing law establishes the Emergency Medical Services System
and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act, which
governs local emergency medical service (EMS) systems and
establishes the Emergency Medical Services Authority (EMSA).
EMSA is responsible for the coordination and integration of all
state activities concerning EMS. The authority reviews and
approves or disapproves of 32 local EMS agency (LEMSA) plans and
338 exclusive operating area (EOA) claims and exclusivities
annually. Since this bill would revise the standards that
determine EOAs and exclusivities, EMSA would need to review all
ambulance zones that have city or fire department
participation-between 110 and 170 additional ambulance zone
reviews at a cost of about $200,000 General Fund.
This bill would continue the authorization of a city or fire
district to provide prehospital EMS that it had continuously
contracted for or provided since June 1, 1980, within the
geographical service area that it continuously served during
that time, if the city or fire district makes a formal written
request to the LEMSA prior to January 1, 2014, as specified. If
the city or fire district fails to enter into an agreement by
AB 210 (Solorio)
Page 1
January 1, 2014, it would be prohibited from performing
prehospital EMS for that type of service unless formally
authorized to so by the LEMSA. It may appeal to first the local
emergency medical care committee, or its equivalent, then the
LEMSA, and then to the courts. This bill would authorize a city
or fire district to increase its geographical area and increase
or decrease its level of service, as specified. This bill would
prohibit a LEMSA from creating an exclusive operating area for a
type of prehospital EMS provided or contracted for by a city or
fire district that is providing continuing prehospital EMS. This
bill would prohibit a city or fire district that has not
continuously provided or contracted for a type of prehospital
EMS since June 1, 1980, from providing or contracting for that
type of prehospital EMS unless it is formally authorized to do
so by a LEMSA. A LEMSA would be required to include all cities
and fire districts that comply with these provisions in its
local EMS plan.
This bill would require the local emergency medical care
committees, authorized by the EMS Act and currently required to
annually review ambulance services operating within the county,
to review the county's EMS system and to act in an advisory
capacity to the county board or boards of supervisors.
This bill would state that these provisions should not be
construed to affect, limit, or otherwise invalidate any decision
by a court. This body of law has a 30 year history of
litigation. For example, in its most recent case, County of
Butte v. California Emergency Medical Services Authority , 3rd
Appellate Court (2009), EMSA paid $75,000 in legal costs to the
Attorney General's Office.