Competition is normally a good thing. It drives the capitalism that fuels our nation&8217;s economy.

But sometimes competition hampers the ability to efficiently get things done, especially when public safety is on the line.

A small debate has begun over the county&8217;s long-standing policy of simply letting any ambulance company who meets the minimum state standards accept emergency calls. Emergency calls are divvied out in a rotating basis.

While the system mostly works OK, problems occasionally do occur during the transferring of calls, which recently caused an emergency call to turn deadly.

Ambulance service needs to ensure the best possible service, not just a service that meets the minimums and happens to be next in line.

Imagine how you&8217;d feel if you called 911 as someone was breaking into your house and you realized that one of three sheriff departments might be called to help. How would you know you were getting the deputy that was the closest or the best trained?

We&8217;ve suggested local leaders strongly consider looking at how other cities and counties operated with a lone, contracted provider.

Critics will argue that having multiple providers is simply better, the logic being if more companies are operating, the public will have more access to ambulance service.

That may seem to be correct, but it&8217;s not necessarily so. Each of the companies currently in competition largely has the same, basic costs, regardless of the number of calls they receive. At a certain point, having more calls allows them to easily &8220;scale up&8221; and put more ambulance teams on the road.

Our leaders need a little urgency in focusing on getting the best service instead of just letting the current system ride.