FEERICK MACCARTNEY NUGENTE DENNIS EA. DONALD J. FEERICK, DAVID MACCARTNEY, IR. D. OF COUNSEL DONALD ROSS DAVID RESNICK KEVIN F. MECHAEL K. STANTON: JR. BLANCHARD WILSON BARDYL R. _'Via E?Maz'l Chairman of the Board ATTORNEYS AT LAW ROCKLAND COUNTY OFFICE 96 SOUTH BROADWAY SOUTH NYACK, NEW YORK 10960 TEL. 845?353-2000 FAX. 845-353?2789 COUNTY OFFICE 235 MAIN STREET. SUITE 550 WHITE i?iJ?iiNS, NEW YORK 2060! (NHL {m sci-?re ?If papers) ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE 6 DEPOT SUITE 202 NEW YORK 10992 (Nut fur service papers) All correspondence must be sent to Rockirmd County Office November 15, 2016 'Ramapo Valley Ambulance Corps 235 State Route 59 Snffern, New York 10901 Attention: Mark Strohli, Chairman Re: Internal Investigation Ramapo Valley Ambulance Corps Dear Chairman Strohli: MARY E. M. STEPHEN M. ALAK Si?lAi-l* PATRICK A. JOHN J. KOLESAR ALSO IN NEW JERSEY ALSO IN Our Firm: Feerick MacCartney Nugent (the ?Firm?) was retained by the Ramapo Valley Ambulance Corps to undertake an investigation into certain allegations purporting wrongful conduct by RVAC and certain individuals associated with RVAC. We are providing to you herewith the Executive Summary of our Investigation Report. Kindly ?nd enclosed outlining the same. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Enclosure STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF ROCKLAND In the Matter of the Investigation of the INVESTIGATIVE REPORT Ramapo Valley Ambulance Corps EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I Introduction Our Law Firm, Feerick MacCartney Nugent, Esq. (the irm?) was advised of recent media reports and other information where accusations of wrongdoing concerning the Ramapo Valley Ambulance Corps were made. Some of the primary allegations our Firm investigated include, but are not limited to: l. RVAC Members are required to volunteer for RVAC shifts in order to get paid shifts with MEDICS, 2. Anyone who has complained has suffered ?retaliation?; 3. ?By?Laws and Policies and Procedures Handbook are unavailable and/or inaccessible to RVAC Membership; 4. Members do not know who the Medical Director is; Minutes from Meetings are unavailable to RVAC members; and 6. ?People are told that they can?t run for positions at any point,? and that Members Who show interest in, running against current Board members are ?suspended for no good reason.? II Procedure Over the course of several weeks, our Firm attempted to contact and did contact over thirty different RVAC Members. These individuals range widely in position, length of membership, and whether or not they have also worked for MEDICS. Our Firm interviewed Board Members, non-Board Members, Line Of?cers, non?Line Of?cers, ordinary Members with just over one year at RVAC, and Members with years of Membership with RVAC. The effort in our investigation was to have a diverse number and association of RVAC Members to ascertain all iss'ues, all complaints and all ?sides? of any issue raised at any time and no matter where raised. Twenty-three of the thirty plus RVAC Members the Firm contacted provided relevant information to our Firm. Some had a lot to say, some very little. Most were open and forthcoming, answering all questions asked, providing valuable information, and inviting our Firm to re?contact them in the future if additional follow-up information was needed. A few, were hesitant to speak and a few refused to provide any information. Chairman Strohli provided, in an email letter to all RVAC Membership, a procedure by which information could be supplied to our Law Firm without anyone (including our Firm) knowing the identity of who sent what information Of interest, is that despite this manifest method of protecting the identity of FEERICK MACCARTNEY 8: NUGENT, PLLC November 15, 2016 Internal Investigative Report Page Two whomever made complaints or wanted to provide relevant information, our Law irrn received no anonymous complaint information. Findings 1. Our Firm found no evidence of anyone being required to volunteer for RVAC duties as a condition of his or her getting paid shifts with MEDICS. 2. Our Firm found no evidence of anyone suffering retaliation of any kind. 3. Our Firm found no evidence that the By?Laws or the Policies and Procedures Handbook are unavailable to or inaccessible by Membership. 4. Our Firm found no evidence that any Member who wanted to ?nd out who the Medical Director is could not ?nd out quickly by simply asking a member of his or her chain of command. 5. Our Firm found no evidence to support the allegation that meeting Minutes are unavailable to Members. 6. Our Firm found no evidence of anyone being told that they ?can?t run for positions at any point,? nor evidence of members who showed interest in running being ?suspended for no good reason.? "1 7 IV Analysis/Commentary ?Based on the extensive information our Firm gathered and our review and research regarding all information evaluated, our Firm finds that no allegations of ?corruption,? ?retaliation,? inaccessibility by Membership of pertinent RVAC documents and the like assertions to be established. There was no credible evidence of any violations of any relevant and applicable rules, regulations or laws of any kind whatsoever by RVAC Directors, Chairman or Officers with regard to those allegations made by others. Respectfull submitted, FEERI KL CH