Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAutomatic Aid/Initial Action Fire Protection and Rescue Services Nuir AGREEMENT FOR EXCHANGE OF FIRE PROTECTION AND RESCUE SERVICES AUTOMATIC ' AID/INITIAL ACTION February 26, 1985 Agreement for Exchange of Fire Protection and Rescue Services, Automatic Aid/Initial Action . r &RCA.n I `. ``✓ /O N g-- ri 4� ^ ' - '� `r emo'candum', r 4,1ry o . ..'y. Date October 28, 1987 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MICHAEL H. MILLER, CITY ATTORNEY/GF,�2�j,LD R. GARDNER, FIRE CHIEF ' �( �- SUBjECT: PROPOSED CITY/COUNTY EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE CONTRACT Concerning the attached County proposal dated July 24 , 1987 , we have attended various meetings and discussed the County ' s proposal in detail with a number of cities their Fire Chief ' s and City Attorney ' s . It is our conclusion that the recommendation of the Independent Cities Association should be adopted by the City of Arcadia . See additional background materials attached. BACKGROUND The County is proposing a franchise type scheme for the provision of emergency ambulance service . The County makes it appear as though City ' s have no choice but to opt into their program. Their approach is in reaction to the County ' s loss of a lawsuit which confirmed the County ' s responsibility to cover the cost of medical transportation for indigents . However, a number of cities , including Arcadia, have never imposed this cost against the County. We provide the service, bill the parties , and collect the cost of the service to the extent possible . However, in lieu of allowing us to maintain local ambulance service, the County appears to be saying they will franchise a geographical area which will include the City of Arcadia and the franchise provider will provide exclusive service to the County. The bottom line being, that the County is attempting to implement a program at no cost to the County. Although we believe their position is untenable and not legally justified, since the County is not paying for indigent transportation within Arcadia, they really have nothing to gain by forcing another operator into the City in lieu of our own service . An official affirmation by the City Council that this is a matter of our own local control , and that we will continue to provide our own emergency ambulance service is consistent with the Independent Cities recommendation. An expressed willingness by the City that we will continue to negotiate with the County does not mean we will enter into an agreement , unless it evolves into something that is totally consistent with our maintenance of local control over emergency ambulance services . 6e 0 6 d_. , . , , ,....... , , , . `rrr RECOMMENDED ACTION Authorize staff to advise the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, that Arcadia will continue to provide it wn emergency ambulance service, and will continue to with the County along with other cities concerning an emergency ambulance service agreement . CONCURRED: i Geor e J. _, a "t City Manafger -2- 104 INDEPENDENT CITIES ASSOCIATION 14156 MAGNOLIA BOULEVARD.SUITE 103 SHERMAN OAKS.CALIFORNIA 91423 (818)306-0941 OFFICERS October 16, 1987 President Jeanne E.Pamsh San Gabnei First Vice President Jim Roberts Huntington Park Second Vice President Honorable Mayor Charles E. Gilb and Gil Archuletta Manhattan Beach Members of the City Council Third Vice President City of Arcadia Nancy Manners 240 West Huntington Drive West Covina Arcadia, California 91006 Secretary Warren Harwood Long Beach Dear Mayor Gilb and Members of the City Council: Measurer W.Michael McCormick On October 13 , 1987 forty-one representatives of Vernon Independent Cities met to discuss the ramifications of PAST PRESIDENT the County's proposal to franchise emergency ambulance Bruce U.Smith services. The primary speaker and discussion leader at Inglewood this meeting was Lee• Dolley of Burke, Williams & BOARD OF DIRECTORS Sorensen. Mr. Dolley represented the forty-one' Los Angeles County cities in the ambulance suit, City of Betty Ainsworth Lomita. et al. v. County of Los Anaeles, and the law Hawthorne firm he represents provides service to a number of Los Azusa Angeles County cities. Randall R.Barb Downey Based on a thorough evaluation of the matter, including HerbenW.Cranton the information received at the meeting noted above, South Gate the Independent Cities Association (ICA) recommends as Sara Dodds follows: Signal Hill John Ferraro Los Angeles 1. That all, cities which currently provide emergency G.Monty Manibog ambulance service and wish to continue to do so, Monterey Park 1 . with city vehicles and personnel or through a Tim Mock contract with private providers, so inform the Torrance County immediately; and Mark Nymeyer Pomona 2. That the cities also inform the County that they Paul Richards will not sign the Emergency Ambulance Service Lois Shade Agreement recently distributed by the County, but Glendora are willing to negotiate collectively toward that Walter R.Tucker end. Compton MANAGEMENT The Association believes that if all cities that wish CONSULTANTS to continue to provide emergency ambulance services KENSPIKERAND stick together, the probability of reaching a ASSOCIATES.INC. satisfactory agreement with the County will be greatly David N.Smith.Consultant enhanced. MEMBER CITIES: Alhambra Covina Hawthorne Lynwood Redondo Beach Signal Hill Arcadia Culver City Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach • San Fernando South Gale Azusa Downey Huntington Park Monrovia San Gabriel South Pasadena Baldwin Park El Monte Indio Montebello San Manno Torrance Bell El Segundo Inglewood Monterey ParI Santa Fe Spnngs Vernon Claremont Gardena Long Beach Palos Verdes Estates Santa Monica West Covina Compton Glendora Los Angeles Pomona Sierra Madre Whinier Honorable Mayor Charles E. Gilb and Members of the City Council October 16, 1987 Page Two If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call either David Smith, ICA staff, at (818) 906-0941 or Lee Dolley of Burke, Williams & Sorensen at (213) 623-1900. Thank you for considering the position set forth above. Very truly yours, saeil4"olee. Gil Archuletta, Chairman ICA Major Issues & Legislation Committee Councilman, City of Manhattan Beach ds c: George J. Watts, City Manager Michael H. Miller, City Attorney Gerald Gardner, Fire Chief LAW OFFICES BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN ONE WILSHIRE B U I L D I N G MARTIN J. BURKE. MICHELE R. VADON 52A SOUTH GRANO AVENUE. HT' FLOOR VENTURA COUNTY OFFICE GEORGE Yt TACKABURY• B. DEREK STRAATSM• 950 COUNTY SQUARE DRIVE JAMES T. BA•05HAW,Jqf SCOTT F FIELD LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 SUITE 207 MARK C. ALLEN, JR.• BENJAMIN S. KAUFMAN (213) 623-1900 VENTURA, CALIFORNIA 93003 MARTIN L BURKE' MICHAEL J. LONG 18051 844-7480 CARL K. NEWTON' GREGORY A. 000.40 J. ROBERT FLANDRICK• KEVIN S. MILLS TELECOPIER 12131 823-8297 NORMAN E. GAART DEBORAH J. FOX ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE EDWARD N. FOX. L.5A E. KRANITZ 3200 PARK CENTER DRIVE DENNIS P BURKE' MARGARET A. SOHAGI HARRY C. WILLIAMS SUITE 650 LELANO C. OOLLEY' SLADE J. NEIGHBORS 11912-19671 COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA 92625 COLIN LCNN•RO' DAVID A. KETTEL 17141 545-5559 THOMAS J. FEELEY• KIM C. MCNALLY ROYAL N. SORENSEN NEIL F. YEAOCR• STEVEN A. GROWN 11914-19631 BRIAN A. PIERIK• JACK R. LENACK LIGHTON PLAZA KATHERINE E. STONE. ROBERT J. TRgCHTENBERG 7300 COLLEGE BOULEV•RO CHARLES M. CALDERON• DENNIS I. FLOYD SUITE 220 PETER M. THORSON• M, LOIS 50BAK OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS 66210 JERRY M. PATTERSON OEENA C. LEIBOWITZ 19131 339-6200 HAROLD A. BRIDGES• BENJAMIN Y. KIN CHERYL J. KANE• CECILIA M, QUICK October 20 RAYMOND J. FUENTES• FELICIA J. NELSON , 198 • OA COV NS[L THOMAS H. OOWNEY ROBERT V W•DDEN DWIGHT A. NEWELL DON G. KIRCHER CHRISTOPHER J. THOMAS VIRGINIA R. PESOLA MICHAEL R. WOODS S. PAUL SRUGUCRA •PROPCSSION4L CORPORATION to PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ADMITTED KAMSAS A MISSOURI Francis J. Dowling, Director Office of Contracting and Management County of Los Angeles Department of Health Services 313 North Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California 90012 Re: Municipal Ambulance Services Dear Mr. Dowling: Please be advised that this firm represents the cities of Alhambra, El Segundo and Manhattan Beach. In response to your letter dated September 30, 1987 please be further advised that it is the intent of these cities to continue to take responsibility for providing emergency ambulance transportation within the city boundaries of those cities. These cities are willing to enter into negotiations with the County of Los Angeles concerning details of the coordination of the city service . with any proposed county program, including but not limited to entering into a contract with the county to provide the services. A "i PI e__ *awe Nor Mr . Francis J. Dowling October 20 , 1987 Page 2 We will be most pleased to meet with you at any time to discuss these matters. ,Very truly yours, ' / LAND C. ` L Y for BURKE, LIAMS & SORENSEN LCD: lmr/LTR1236 cc: Carl K. Newton, Esq. �,of got L-111 , //e F �f COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES •DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES D \ wr in 313 NORTH FIGUEROA STREET•LOS ANGELES.CALIFORNIA 90012•(213)974- 8101 )L �j� July 24 , 1987 AUG G 3 1987 RECtI V E J CITY OF ARCADIA JUL 291987 Mr. George J. Watts CITY MANAGER City Manager of Arcadia P.O. Box 60 Arcadia, CA 91006 Dear Mr. Watts : NEW COUNTY AMBULANCE PROGRAM As a result of a recent Second Appellate District order (City of Lomita, et al. v. County of Los Angeles (1986) 186 Cal. App. 3d 479) , the County is implementing over the next twelve months a new, Countywide emergency ambulance transportation program. This new program was approved for implementation by the Board of Supervisors on July 21, 1987.. Service under the new program will be furnished by a combination of city and private ambulance providers which will serve under a County franchise arrangement as the sole providers of emergency ambulance transportation within assigned franchise zones established by the County. Emergency ambulance service within your City' s incorporated . area is currently provided by your City' s fire department. Under the County' s new ambulance program, this City fire department service can continue. However, if that is your City' s desire, you will be asked to accept an exclusive franchise from the County under which your City agrees to provide these services at no cost to the County. We ask that you advise us within the next sixty days, if your City intends to furnish emergency medical service as a franchise holder in the County's new ambulance program. Following that time, County staff will establish the boundaries of the franchise zones which will cover all unincorporated areas, as well as incorporated areas not served by city providers pursuant to a County franchise. • Franchises will be awarded by the County for these zones following a competitive process which will be open to bidding by all qualified providers . We will be conducting regular briefings for all concerned parties and will continue to keep you apprised as implementation of the County' s new ambulance program progresses . Mr. George J. Watts July 24 , 1987 Page 2 Your cooperation and assistance in effecting a smooth and safe transition to the provision of ambulance service under the County' s new ambulance program is appreciated. Very truly yours, C. Robert C. Gates Director of Health Services RCG:mmc TO . '� //ernoca /gjm SEP 2 4 1987 �� ,:.^'1 � COUNCIL Ito \. .i Date __Sept.: 2 3 . 1987 TO: George J. Watts, City Manager FROM: Gerald R. Gardner, Fire Chief 4g50"%.. SUBJECT: NEW COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES EMERGENCY AMBULANCE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Attached for your information is the latest update from the Los Angeles County Fire Chief' s Committee regarding L.A. County' s new ambulance transportation program. As you know, it is the County' s intent to implement a program consisting of City and/or private ambulance providers to provide ambulance service in the County through exclusive franchises. It is indicated that the franchises will be determined through a competitive bid process. Said franchise zones propose to include all cities in the County regardless of whether or not a City currently provides ambulance service. The City of Arcadia currently provides emergency ambulance service within the City at no cost to the County. However, the "Lomita et al, Vs. County of Los Angeles" Appellate Court decision requires the County provide ambulance transpor- tation of indigents. It is this court ruling, and the County' s attempt to comply with the ruling at no cost to the County that has prompted this action by the Board of Supervisors. The City has received a draft contract from the County which dictates franchise zones, performance standards, response times, levels of service, insurance requirements , data collection, etc. and will basically place the County Department of Health Services in control of the City,' s emergency ambulance service. The Department of Health Services has set a November 1, 1987 deadline for the City to respond to the proposed contract and to advise if the City intends to provide emergency medical transport service as a franchise holder in the County' s new program. 3 'tow Ned, Page 2 The City Attorney and Fire Chief attended a briefing with the Department of Health Services and have reviewed the proposed franchise agreement. Currently there are preliminary opinions from the legal staffs of various cities i.e. Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, etc. that indicate the County may not have the authority to franchise a City, and that cities clearly have the right to provide their own emergency ambulance service. At this point it is recommended that we take no action regarding a response to the County, and continue to gather and evaluate information as suggested by the Los Angeles County Fire Chiefs ' committee. In addition, the Independent Cities Association is planning to schedule a meeting of elected officials, City Managers, etc. on this subject in an attempt to develop a uniform legal response. cc: City Attorney • *1ry' LAw OFFICES BUESE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN ONC WILSPOIAC •UILOINO MARTIN J. ounce MICMCLC P. VADO■ ea. SOUTN GRANO AV CN u C, II■• 'LOOq vCNTUR• COUNTY 017.0C OCORGC 'A1 TACKAGURY• S. OCNCN STwAATSMA J AWES T. •AAOSNAW,Jw.• SCOTT r rItLD LOS ANGCLCS. CALIFORNIA 90017 ••0 COUNT. SOUAwc OP■vc SUIT[ 207 PARK C. •LLLN. Jw.• •cw•MIN S. K•ur MAN (2131 6=7-1.00 V[NTUSA, CALI•ORNI• •3003 N•RTiN L •URKC• MICNACL J. LONG CARL A. NCWTON• 00[00R. A. DOCIMO 1•0111 •••-7450 J. RO•[wT •4NORICK• KNIN 3. MILLS TCL[CO•ICR 12131 523.5257 MORM•N C. GAAR7 OC•ORAN J. rOK 05•1413C COUNTY O•rICC COWARD M. IOK• ..,SA C. 4•ANlrt 3 200 •ACS CCNT[R ORINC OCNPI S w MAINS. M•wGAwCT A. SONAGI , WILLJAMS SuITC 550 LCLAMO C. OOLL[Y• SLAG[J. MC10N0055 (1012.101571 COST• M(5•, CALIIORNIA COLIN • OAVIO A. KCTTCL 7141 S4•-SS3• THOMAS J. 7C[LCY• AIM C. MCNALLY ROYAL N. SORCMSCPI MCIL YCAGCR• invest A. DROWN 11•141•511 S WAN A. •ILRle• JACK R. LCNACK ■I OM TON KATM[RINC C VON[. RO•CRT J. TRACNTtN•(RO 7300 COLLCG[ •OULCV••O CMARIts M. CALOCNON• OCNN1$ I. 71.OYO SUIT( 550 safes M. TMORSON• M. 6013 15O•AK September 30/ 1987 ••SK, K•NS•S 430/00 Amur.JRY M. •ATTtRSON OCeNA c LCI.OMIIT= 115131 33 II-e200 $4501.0 A. •51000s• •CNJAWIN Y. SIN CM J. CANC. CCCILIA M. OUICw RAYMOND J. /UCNTC3• •(LICIA J. NCLSON 01 COUM•2L 073N TWOMAS 0. M. OOWN[Y ROOM,U cn J. TI OWIONT A. NCWtLL DON 0. KIRCMCR CMR1•TOPN[w J. 7MOMA3 vIROINIA R. •(301.4 MICNAL• R. *0005 S. PAUL SR000CRA •••••S•■••AL COP••RAfOS TA••••C•••••■A••OCIA7g• A0sW77t0 KAR•AS•NI•••V*N TO: CITY ATTORNEYS • As I am sure you are aware, Los Angeles County has recently announced a new County-wide program to provide emergency ambulance service to all residents of Los Angeles County. Recently, the County held separate meetings with Cities and ambulance providers at which it presented a program to "franchise" the entire County. Certain contracts have been offered to 22 Cities which now provide paramedic service as well as emergency transport service by City personnel or, in some cases, by contract. The County has set a deadline of November 1, 1987 at which time the Cities are to indicate to the County their position concerning the offer to contract. It is very unclear at this time exactly what legal position the County may take with respect to these matters. Attached is a memorandum dated September 14, 1987 which reports on the status of the Contract Cities Los Angeles "Ambulance" litigation. The document gives a brief overview of that litigation and discusses issues raised 10 September 30, 1987 Page 2 there which may have some impact upon decisions made by Cities concerning providing emergency ambulance service. It is our view that nothing prevents the Cities from continuing to provide emergency ambulance service. Nonetheless, the County has brought up some questions that should be answered. It has occurred to us that the City Attorneys will be involved in this process and for that reason we are suggesting a meeting of City Attorneys to discuss all of the issues related to the County's proposals. I have discussed this with Byron Boeckman, an Assistant City Attorney of Los Angeles. Byron feels that a meeting would be beneficial. We, therefore, invite you (or your Assistant) to attend a "working luncheon. " Lunch will be provided and will be held as follows: Wednesday, October 14, 1987 Noon Burke, Williams i Sorensen 624 South Grand Avenue 11th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Please let us know no later than noon, Tuesday, October 13, 1987 if you can attend by calling Anne Munsell at (213) 623-1900. We look forward to seeing you. We do think it is a good idea for the Cities to attempt to formulate a single legal position, if that is appropriate. 1,7400p ruly yours, 0 " C. DOLLEY - BURKE, WILLIAMS i SORENSEN AEM:LTR6366 Enclosure LAW OrrICCs BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN O N C W I L S N I R C •U I L O I N O MAIY1N J. •uRKW S. PAUL SRUOU(RA 6=4 SOUTH GRANO AVON U C. II'H •LOOK V(N7u wA COUNTY Orr'G[ 95904E W tACKASURH M1CH(u( R, vA00N LOS ANGCLCS, CALIFORNIA 90017 sec COUNTY SOu•RC DR'VC JANES T MAOSNANt JR.• S. MICK STRAATlw SUIT( 507 NARK C. JO.• SCOTT r 'mix 12171 653-1900 v(NYUR•, CAUr05N'• 53003 ...AIM., L OUSRIEY •CNJAMIN S, *AJIMAN 1•051 SARI-74SO CARL 4. NCWTON• MICHAEL J. LONG ROS(RT YLANORICK• GREGORY A. DOCMO TELCCOR'CR 15131 557.5557 COWARD M. rOx• 4(VIN f. MILLS DRANO( COUNTY 01•1CC OCNNIS I MANIC. DC•ORAN J. FOX 751 sown.' RARKCR s75CC? LCLANO C. OOLLCY• CAROL A. SCHWAS SUITE 710 CORN ( • LISA C. 4RAN1 T= ORANGE. CALI ICON,. THOMAS J. I • M■RGARCT A SONAOI 17141 •75.1155 NEIL I YCAGCR• !LAOS.1. NCIGNSOR• SWAN A. MCR1K• DAVID A ACTTCL K INC E. STONE• KIM C. M.NAY C. WILLIAMS C (S M. CALOCRON• STEVEN A. OwOWN u•15•■••7, .(TER M. TMORSON• JACK R. LCNACA JCROv M. PATTERSON ROGER, J. TRACHTEN•CRG September 14, 1 9 8 7 ROYAL Al. SO RCN•CN u NAOLO A •01041[•• RICHARD J. VILKIN 514.15551 R CHERYL J. KANE. DENNIS 1 •LOYD RAYMOND J. IUCNTCS• N. LOIS SOSAR THOMAS N. DOWNEY. DIANE C. LEISOWIYC Or COUHICL DON 0. AAACNEN •(M/AM•H Y. K1W DWIGHT A. NEWELL vow41Ni* R. RIMOLA CECILIA H. GUICK ••ROrCSS,SNAL COR•O0ATIOK Status of Contract Cities/Los Angeles County "Ambulance" Litigation By: Leland C. Dolley This is a brief update on the status of Lomita, et al. v. County of Los Angeles. BACKGROUND: In July 1979, the cities of Lomita and Huntington Park brought suit against Los Angeles County. The lawsuit requested a declaration that Los Angeles County was responsible for providing emergency ambulance service to residents of Los Angeles County as its own expense and that agreements entered into between the County and the plaintiff cities, whereby the cities were to provide reimbursement to the County for this service, were void. In May of 1983, following a denial of the cities' request for a writ of mandate for Los Angeles County to provide county-wide ambulance service, the cities filed an appeal. In November, 1983, the Court of Appeals issued a decision determining that the County was statutorily liable to provide emergency ambulance service to all indigent residents of the County and that the contracts between the cities and Los Angeles County were void. Lomita and Huntington Park were thereafter joined by 40 other cities who had similar ambulance service Nwe *el Status of Contract Cities August 26, 1987 Page 2 contracts with Los Angeles County. Thereafter, the County, ignoring the appellate court decision indicated to the plaintiff cities that it expected them to develop their own ambulance services to serve their own residents. The cities then filed a petition for writ of mandate to force the County of Los Angeles to provide ambulance service to its residents. The petition was denied in the Los Angeles Superior Court and, once again, the cities appealed. The Court of Appeals, once again, ruled that the County had the obligation to provide emergency ambulance service to all residents of Los Angeles County. It pointed out that the County was free to attempt to collect from all nonindigent persons for whom service was provided, but that the cost of providing the service to indigents► was a proper charge against County funds. Copies of the two Court of Appeals decisions are attached. PRESENT STATUS OF THE LAWSUIT: With the primary issues having been decided by the Court of Appeals, the only remaining issues relate to the restitution to be awarded to cities which are parties to the lawsuit and who, for years, had been paying the County to provide a service which the County was obligated to provide without cost to the cities. In addition, the City of Lakewood filed a companion suit with identical allegations against the County. This action was recently consolidated with the initial lawsuit, thus providing 43 plaintiff cities seeking restitution from the County. Trial is tentatively scheduled for spring of 1988. NEW COUNTY AMBULANCE PROGRAM: The County is requesting all cities providing their own ambulance service to enter into contracts with the County. Obviously, the County' s new program raises questions regarding the authority of a city to choose to accept responsibility for providing ambulance services within its borders. Attached is a copy of a portion of a brief which was submitted in the second appeal in Cit of Lomita, et al. v. County of Los Angeles as well as co es of relevant statutes. This brief touches on some of the issues Status of Contract Cities August 26, 1987 Page 3 which will be of interest to cities which may desire to provide ambulance services within their borders. rvw/LTR9090 Attachments CO OF ARCAn CADI ' , . .,4 � 0 �, ,ik'-: we* ,-, -41., ' Tnentot andum CITY rytAnkur. ;:{y 7-. r. ' L�,rY 4. t5 Date __._ Nov. 7, 1984 .f TO: George J. Watts , City Manager TO NOV 15 19C FROM: Gerald R. Gardner, Fire Chief Ally COUNCIL SUBJECT: AUTOMATIC AID AGREEMENT WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT It is requested that an Automatic Aid Agreement for fire and rescue services be initiated between the City of Arcadia and Los Angeles County. As you know, we have discussed the advantage of being able to use the closest fire station for response to an emergency , regardless of the jurisdiction and have approached the County Fire Department in regard to such an arrangement . During the fire station response study , that was completed last year, we identified several areas in the Southern portion of the City where County Station 47 in Temple City was closer than any of our stations and could respond into this area to provide faster service. We in turn would be required to reciprocate by responding into a similar area of the County west of Baldwin Avenue where an Arcadia Station is closer than a County station. The objective being to provide better service for both Arcadia and the County in specific areas as determined by the Fire Chiefs of each department . Arcadia will retain full authority and responsibility for all services within the City as will the County Fire Department within the unincorporated area. This is a reciprocal agreement based upon the Mutual Aid concept and no compensation will be paid either department . Recommendation : If this meets with your approval , it is recommended that Council approve the agreement for Exchange of Fire Protection and Rescue Services (Automatic Aid/Initial Action) in such form as approved by the City Attorney and forward said agreement to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for their approval. Approved b : /7^George J. atts , City Manager 2 *tee vary COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES mot` ]�((``y��, 4° ay 1• FIRE DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 3009. TERMINAL ANNEX LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90051 � y '4p7ME8 JOHN W. ENGLUND 267-2401 ACTING FIRE CHIEF FORESTER & FIRE WARDEN August 16 , 1984 Gerald R. Gardner, Fire Chief City of Arcadia Fire Department 701 South Santa Anita Avenue Arcadia, CA 91006 Dear Chief Gardner: SUBJECT: AUTOMATIC AID/INITIAL ACTION AGREEMENT Enclosed please find two originals and one copy of the Agreement for Exchange of Fire Protection and Rescue Services . If your City Council wishes to enter into this Agreement , please have the two original copies of this Agreement executed and returned to this Department for further processing by our Board of Super- visors . The effective date to be entered in the Agreement would be the date of approval by our Board of Supervisors . This instrument , when executed, will be the enabling authoriza- tion for you and me to subsequently enter into a Memorandum of Understanding for fire protection and/or rescue services between our Departments . This method provides the flexibility of ad- dressing operational needs and changes if they should occur. Thank you for your attention and interest in furthering the already existing cooperation between our Departments . Very truly yours , • JOHN W. ENGLUND , ACTING FIRE CHIEF JWE: mp Enclosures SERVING THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF AGO..RA r,:Lc BRADBURY GLENDORA LAKEWOOD NORWALK AR'ESIA CARSON HAWAIIAN GARDENS S SAN DIMAS WHIT IERE VILLAGE MIRADA PALMDALE SAN DIMAS WHIT TIER ZLSa CERRITOS HIDDEN HILLS LANCASTER PARAMOUNT SIGNAL HILL BA-J.":IN PARK CLAREMONT HUNTINGTON PARK LA PUENTE PICO RIVERA COMMERCE INDUSTRY LAWNDALE SOUTH GATE MONTE LE RANCHO PALOS VERDES SOUTH GATE BE"F`C'ti'ER CUDAHY IRWINDALE - LOMITA ROI I NO Nn I c sow 1 AGREEMENT FOR EXCHANGE OF 2 FIRE PROTECTION AND RESCUE SERVICES 3 AUTOMATIC AID/INITIAL ACTION 4 5 THIS AGREEMENT , is made and entered into this day of 6 , 1984 by and between the City of Arcadia 7 hereinafter referred to as the "City" and the County of Los 8 Angeles and all the Fire Protection Districts of Los Angeles 9 County, hereinafter referred to as the "County". 10 11 W I T N E S S E T H: 12 13 WHEREAS , the parties to this Agreement provide fire protec- 14 tion and rescue services within their respective territorial lim- 15 its ; and 16 WHEREAS , it is in the best interest of the citizens of the 17 County and the City to provide the most expeditious response to 18 suppress fires and render other emergency assistance ; and 19 WHEREAS , each party is desirous of providing to the other a 20 reasonable and reciprocal exchange of fire and rescue services 21 on a day-to-day basis ; and 22 WHEREAS , this Agreement is authorized and provided for by 23 provisions of the Health and Safety and Government Codes of 24 the State of California and Acts and Statutes of the Federal 25 Government where applicable ; 26 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these mutual 27 covenants , the parties hereto agree to as follows : 28 ///// 1 I 2 The City agrees to provide a designated fire or rescue re- 3 sponse, as determined by the Fire Chiefs of the County and the 4 City, upon request by the County, to that area located within 5 the jurisdiction of the County. 6 7 II 8 In return for the service to be provided by the City, the 9 County agrees to provide a designated fire or rescue response , 10 as determined by the Fire Chiefs of the County and the City, 11 upon request by the City to that area located within the juris- 12 diction of the City. 13 14 III 15 Upon receipt by the County of an alarm within the juris- 16 diction of the County, County as the y, y jurisdictional depart- 17 went , will dispatch its nearest available and appropriate desig- 18 nated fire or rescue response to that alarm and also notify the 19 City fire dispatcher who will , in turn, dispatch the agreed-upon 20 response. 21 22 Iv 23 Upon receipt by the City of an alarm within the City, the 24 City as the jurisdictional department , will dispatch its nearest 25 and appropriate designated fire or rescue response to that alarm 26 and also notify the County fire dispatcher who will , in turn , 27 dispatch the agreed-upon response . 28 ///// - 2 - • 'tome Iwo 1 V 2 The County and the City intend that this agreement will pro- 3 vide mutual benefits to all parties and herein authorize the 4 Fire Chiefs of the County and the City to revise any designated 5 areas or types of response periodically as may be dictated by 6 changing conditions and the requirements of mutual benefits to 7 all parties . It is agreed that substantial reductions of fire 8 protection and/or emergency medical forces by either agency 9 shall be cause for reconsideration of this Agreement . 10 11 VI 12 Details as to amounts and types of assistance to be dis- 13 patched, methods of dispatching and communications , training pro- 14 grams and procedures , methods of requesting aid , and the names 15 of persons authorized to send and receive such requests , 16 together with lists of equipment and personnel which will be 17 utilized , shall be developed by the Fire Chiefs of the County 18 and the City. Such details shall be recorded in Memorandums of 19 Understanding and signed by both Chiefs of the County and the 20 City. 21 22 VII 23 In those instances where the aiding department arrives be- 24 fore the jurisdictional department , the aiding department will 25 take the necessary action dictated by the situation . However, 26 it is assumed that the jurisdictional department will arrive 27 shortly after the arrival of the aiding department . Therefore , 28 the responsibility for coping with the situation will be - 3 I *are *1110 1 immediately assumed by the y y jurisdictional department upon its 2 arrival at the scene. The aiding department personnel will be 3 under the direction of the officer in charge of the jurisdic- 4 tional fire department . It is further agreed that the aiding 5 department will be released from the scene as soon as practical 6 by the jurisdictional fire department . 7 8 VIII 9 It is mutually understood and agreed that this Agreement 10 does not relieve either party from the necessity and obligation 11 of using its own resources for furnishing fire and/or rescue 12 service within any part of its own y p jurisdiction, and that the 13 aiding party' s response to a request for aid will be dependent 14 upon the existing emergency conditions within its own juris- 15 diction and the status of its resources . 16 17 IX 18 This Agreement shall not be construed as , or deemed to be 19 an Agreement for the benefit of anyone not a party hereto , and 20 anyone who is not a party hereto shall not have a right of 21 action hereunder for any cause whatsoever. 22 23 X 24 No party furnishing aid pursuant to this Agreement shall be 25 entitled to compensation for services rendered to the requesting 26 agency, it being understood that the respective covenants con- 27 tained in this Agreement shall constitute the sole consideration 28 for such services . - 4 - 1 XI 2 It is mutually understood and agreed that the g party request- 3 ing assistance is not required to indemnify the q y party furnishing 4 assistance as to liability or damage imposed by law upon the as- 5 sisting party by reason of an act or omission of the assisting 6 party ' s employees occurring in the performance of the service . 7 8 XII 9 This Agreement shall remain operative and effective until 10 participation is terminated by either party. It is further 11 agreed that either g party may terminate the Agreement at any time 12 by giving written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) 13 days prior to the date of withdrawal . 14 15 XIII 16 It is mutually understood that this Agreement will in no 17 way affect or have any bearing on the existing Uniform Mutual 18 Assistance Agreement for Fire Protection and Rescue Services , 19 which is between the County Fire Department and the City, nor 20 will this Agreement affect or have any bearing on the existing 21 California Master Mutual Aid Agreement . 22 ///// 23 ///// 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// - 5 - 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed on the 2 day and year first above written and is effective and operative 3 as to each of the parties as herein provided . 4 5 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES , and the CITY OF ARCADIA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS OF 6 LOS ANGELES COUNTY By 7 Mayor 8 Chairman of the Board of Supervisors ATTEST: 9 of the County of Los Angeles , acting in its capacity as the governing body By 10 of said Districts City Clerk 11 12 ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 13 LARRY MONTEILH, Executive By Officer-Clerk of the City Attorney 14 Board of Supervisors 15 By 16 Deputy 17 APPROVED AS TO FORM: 18 DEWITT CLINTON County Counsel 19 20 By Deputy 21 ///// 22 ///// 23 ///// 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 - 6 -