Morrow County responds to lawsuit

By on Tuesday, May 16th, 2023 in Columbia Basin News More Top Stories

The following is a news release from Morrow County regarding a lawsuit filed against it, the Boardman Fire Rescue District, et. al:

Morrow County Health District (MCHD) has filed a lawsuit against Morrow County, Boardman Fire Rescue District (BFRD), and several individuals, to stop the County from engaging in its legal obligation to develop, update and replace the current 1998 Ambulance Service Area (ASA) Plan. The complaints and allegations are baseless and inflammatory, misrepresent the process and actions to the public, and seek to prevent the Board of Commissioners (BOC) from exercising its obligations. In furtherance of that effort, MCHD has threatened personal liability and has filed personal ethics complaints. Morrow County will not be deterred in its legal obligation to develop an ASA Plan that provides the best ambulance services available to everyone in the County.


Morrow County is legally required to update the 1998 ASA Plan and regrets MCHD’s efforts to create false narratives and inflame public fear and passion with baseless allegations. The BOC has invited MCHD, and others, to submit testimony regarding their concerns, and will consider such in the formulation of the final 2023 ASA Plan.


In response to the lawsuit, please note the following:
• MCHD wrote and unilaterally implemented the 2021 ASA Plan. That effort fell short
since, 1.) the legal process was not followed, 2.) the proposed ASA Plan was not
approved by the County as required by law, and 3.) the ASA Plan included the unlawful
transfer of all authority from the County to MCHD. The Oregon Health Authority
(OHA) is aware of the County’s efforts to update the 1998 ASA Plan and of the County’s
determination that the 2021 ASA Plan was never legally approved.
• The 1995 intergovernmental agreement between Morrow County and MCHD transferred ambulances and related equipment to the Health District so the Health District could take over the responsibility to provide ambulance services throughout the County. It was an asset transfer agreement, not an exclusive grant of a franchise to provide ambulance services indefinitely. In fact, the State of Oregon statutory process requires that counties develop and administer ambulance service plans, determine ambulance service areas, and designate ambulance providers. That process was followed in the development of the 1998 ASA Plan, and MCHD accepted its designation under the 1998 ASA Plan. The Health District was not provided with a perpetual right under the 1998 ASA Plan.
• MCHD appears to be under the mistaken belief that it has legal authority to govern
ambulance services within the County. That belief is false. MCHD refuses to recognize the law or the fact that the County is responsible for ambulance service areas and plans, and for appointment of ambulance service providers.
• MCHD has made several misleading, false, and confusing statements in its complaint, but here are the facts:
Ø MCHD has no authority over BFRD and does not have authority to levy fines.
Ø Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 198.720(2) provides that a district may not
include territory included within another district formed under the same principal
Act. BFRD is a rural fire protection district formed under ORS Ch. 478, and
MCHD is a health district formed under ORS Ch. 440. If the BOC decides to
allow BFRD to provide ambulance services, such is not prohibited by ORS
198.720(2).
Ø Rural fire protection districts are authorized to respond to all medical, fire and
emergency calls. That is not a violation of MCHD’s right to provide ambulance
transport. The public benefits from reduced response times and quicker medical
assistance.
• Morrow County encourages MCHD to participate in the ASA Plan process and submit
evidence to support its claims so that the BOC can consider it when making its final
determination. For example, 1.) provide support for the geographic allegations regarding
the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) boundaries for cost-based reimbursement, 2.)
the claim that “the loss of runs” results in a loss of funding for the entire program when
MCHD also claims that it loses money on every run, and, 3.) why response times would
be harmed by adding additional ambulances to the system when the opposite claim was
made in MCHD’s 2021 Plan, and so on.