By Caleb Sprous
Merced Sun-Star
MERCED, Calif. — A Merced couple was billed thousands of dollars for a non-emergency ambulance transport to Fresno. Now, one city councilmember would like to see up-front cost estimates for non-emergency ambulance transfers given to patients.
After experiencing abdominal pain on New Year’s Eve, William Austin was admitted to Mercy Medical Center in Merced and diagnosed with a gallstone-blocked bile duct, which would require surgery.
| READERS RESPOND: We are not a taxi service: Preventable nursing home transfers
A surgeon was not available at Mercy and Austin was informed he would be transferred to St. Agnes Hospital in Fresno.
Hours later, he was sent by ambulance to Fresno.
“We were not given any choices,” Melissa Austin, William’s spouse, said. “We were just informed he needed a higher level of care and he was being transferred.”
The Austins’ insurance plan came with a high deductible and they were responsible for the full $7,300 bill for the 61-mile trip.
When Melissa Austin first saw the bill, she thought it must have been a mistake. The bill amounted to roughly $120 per mile.
Had she and her husband been given a cost estimate for the ambulance transport, they would have elected to drive themselves if they were allowed to self-transport, Melissa Austin said.
That story stuck with Merced Councilmember Mike Harris who shared it at a recent city council meeting.
Harris would like to see patients given cost estimates for non-emergency ambulance services before transport, meaning transports not initiated by 911 calls and that do not require advanced life support.
“You do it for any kind of service. If you get a plumber, they’re going to tell you how much it’s going to cost to fix the leak,” Harris said at an Aug. 18 city council meeting. “If you have an electrician, they can tell you how much it costs to turn the lights on.”
Harris said he hopes the issue could be addressed through a city ordinance or a letter from the city supporting a statewide bill to address the issue. He also suggested working with the county government and local hospitals.
City Attorney Craig J. Cornwell told council members he had begun his research into a potential ordinance but has concerns there are preemptions from both the state and federal level.
“It’s an issue that definitely needs discussing, and I think we should do what we can, but there’s just some legal concern, legal hurdles,” Cornwell said.
Councilmember Darin DuPont said he is opposed to policing the issue.
“I don’t think that’s the role of one, city council, or the role of government,” DuPont said. “Who’s to say that, you know, the next time around we don’t decide ‘Well, someone else needs to do an estimate for services they’re providing, or this industry needs to do an estimate, or whatever it may be.”
Harris disagreed with DuPont’s opposition, saying it’s not a control issue as much as it is “an information and consumer protection issue.”
Council referred the issue to the Public Safety Subcommittee to discuss possible options, including an ordinance, letters of support to the state legislature for a bill to address the issue, or to open conversations with local hospitals and Merced County .
DuPont said he is not opposed to sending a letter of support to the state legislature.
The subcommittee will return to the city council with their recommendations at an unknown date.
Mayor Matthew Serratto said the process takes “typically two to four months” before recommendations by the subcommittee are given to council.
© 2025 the Merced Sun-Star (Merced, Calif.).
Visit www.mercedsunstar.com.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
