📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 6 findings
F1
Page 10
a contract for Pre-Hospital Training did exist that covered the period of the allegations. The contractor was qualified to deliver the service and the matter of whether or not the Fire and Rescue Chief and the Contractor were friends is immaterial. The contract is legal and binding and the terms and conditions of that contract were fulfilled. The Jury further finds that the county has no obligation to enter into a competitive bidding process for this kind of professional service contract.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Page 11
on the question of an inappropriate exemption, the County did not issue an exemption to the contractor. The contractor was directed to stop licensing himself with Cal- EMSA as a county affiliate to avoid any appearance of favoritism.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Page 11
as far as the scope of services not meeting the needs of the 11 Fire Districts and not meeting their expectations with regard to cost, it is a subjective matter of opinion which has been mitigated fully by the county by placing control of the program into the hands of the 11 Fire Chiefs.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Page 11
on the matter of using county equipment for contracted training, there is no prohibition of this practice.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Page 11
on the question of on-the-clock versus off-the-clock training and compensation, the jury recognizes that a potential for inappropriate compensation does exit.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Page 11
with regard to Liability Insurance, the contractor had the required coverage.
No recommendations for this finding