Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/10/2004 01:39 PM Senate CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 335-EMERGENCY SERVICES DISPATCH/911 SURCHARGE
CHAIR BERT STEDMAN announced SB 335 to be up for consideration.
He asked Senator Seekins to proceed.
SENATOR RALPH SEEKINS, sponsor, asked his staff member to
present the bill.
JOE MICHEL, legislative aide to Senator Seekins, explained that
the bill relates to enhanced 911 surcharges. Enhanced 911, or E-
911, shows the physical location and name of a caller to
emergency service dispatchers. The purpose of SB 335 is to give
municipalities more freedom to recover some of the costs of
providing E-911 service to their community.
Currently there is a statutory ceiling on the amount a
municipality may collect to pay for E-911 services. That amount
isn't enough to pay the overhead so municipalities have to
recover those costs from the people through increased taxes of
some sort. SB 335 amends the statute by raising the surcharge
ceiling and by instituting a surcharge for the operation of the
E-911 service.
The final change this bill makes occurs on page 3, lines 18-20.
It says, "The municipality may only use the emergency services
dispatch surcharge for the actual labor and equipment used to
provide emergency services dispatch." That addition is to ensure
that municipalities recover no more that their operation costs.
Also, an annual review of the actual costs is required.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS noted that municipalities with fewer than
100,000 people could charge up to $2.15 for E-911 services and
asked for verification that they wouldn't recover more than the
actual costs up to that limit.
MR. MICHEL agreed and reiterated that the goal is to transfer
the cost burden from the taxpayers.
CHAIR STEDMAN told of an experience he had recently, in which he
was asked to return a missed call to someone in a nearby
community. When he made the call, he discovered that the cell
number was from the state of Washington. He asked if that caller
would be paying the proposed fees or would they be able to avoid
them.
MR. MICHEL replied they would avoid the fees. He explained that
his cell phone service comes from Fairbanks and if that
municipality instituted a fee he would pay that fee regardless
of the fact that he was using his phone in Juneau. Furthermore,
the difference between phases I and II, E-911 service is that
911 calls from cell phones in Alaska can't currently be
triangulated. Unlike a landline, emergency cell phone calls in
Alaska don't register a physical location.
SENATOR KIM ELTON noted that this is a per line charge rather
than a per household charge and asked whether the sponsor might
consider the latter rather than the former. He reasoned that a
number of households have separate computer and fax lines that
wouldn't be used to make emergency calls. "How did you get to
the point where you do it per line rather than per household,"
he asked.
MR. MICHEL responded by saying that the Fairbanks mayor asked
the sponsor to introduce the bill, which is a companion to HB
461. As written, the charge would be per line, but the sponsor
is open to the change. "The idea was presented that you could
provide evidence that you have a fax line and then you'll be
able to take that surcharge off your phone line. So it would be
by household. It would be the responsibility of the resident to
turn that in to the phone company. Those ideas have been brought
forward by different representatives."
SENATOR GARY STEVENS remarked that this bill attempts to recover
some of the costs, but there are inequities to consider.
Referring to his community, he said the City of Kodiak provides
E-911 service to the city and a much larger portion of Kodiak
Island that is outside the city.
MR. MICHEL said this bill is trying to address that. Using
Fairbanks as an example, he said that this would transfer the
burden from those paying property tax to those with phones who
therefore have the capability of dialing 911.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked if 911 service extends outside the
city or borough of Fairbanks.
MR. MICHEL deferred to Mr. Harris, director of police.
SENATOR ELTON assumed that there is no distinction made between
a business phone and a residential phone.
MR. MICHEL agreed there is no distinction. "If you can dial 911
from it, the surcharges apply."
SENATOR ELTON wanted to make sure he understood correctly that
the surcharge would apply to all lines, but the sponsor would
consider change to exclude lines that weren't used for voice
calls.
MR. MICHEL said the sponsor would consider change in that area,
but currently the surcharge would apply to fax and modem lines.
CHAIR STEDMAN opened public testimony.
PATRICK COLE, representative for the Fairbanks mayor, testified
via teleconference to express support for the bill. Fairbanks
has been working with both the borough and the City of North
Pole in an effort to find ways to control and or recover the
cost of dispatch centers.
Referencing an earlier question about service areas, he
explained that under current law a dispatch center could serve
an area that stretches beyond its own boundaries. Specifically,
Kodiak may serve beyond the city boundaries, which would allow
them to recover some cost of providing service to the
surrounding area.
For at least the last ten years the law has provided for a per
line charge. They have discussed the possibility of not charging
for more than one line, but "this bill, as written, solves our
short term problem," he said. It would enable the municipality
to broaden service and take the burden off taxpayers and place
it on users.
SENATOR ELTON asked, "If the bill is amended to allow customers
to check off and not pay for modem or fax lines, would that make
us need to revisit the 85 cents per month surcharge? I mean
would you need to go up to 87 cents?"
MR. COLE said he didn't know, but he did know that the number of
landlines have declined in the last few years in Fairbanks. "I
don't think that allowing a per household [charge] would hurt
things terribly, but we really don't know."
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked if the City of Fairbanks subsidizes
their 911 services and if so, how much does it every year.
MR. COLE said they spend about $1 million a year to run their
center. "That includes all our dispatch services. Right now the
current surcharge only pays for the software and the equipment."
ERIC MOHRMANN testified via teleconference from Fairbanks to
represent the Interior Fire Chiefs Association in support of the
bill. His department is one of nine within the borough and this
bill would help address their high and escalating costs.
PAUL HARRIS, Fairbanks Police Department director, spoke in
support of the bill.
Fairbanks Police Department currently runs a dispatch
center and provides services to the Fairbanks Police
Department, fire department, and emergency medical
services. We've just signed a contract with North Pole
and we will be providing those same services to North
Pole and we're working on contracts with Delta, Delta
Rescue, and Deltana to provide services out there
along with the Salcha Rescue.
We support this bill.... We think it will help us a
lot in covering the cost of the dispatch center. It
will provide funding for the dispatch center as we go
together. And even if we don't end up in a regional
dispatch center, we would end up in that place like we
are now with five different dispatch centers. Each one
of those dispatch centers would receive funding for
their operation from this bill.
The 911 surcharge is certainly not a new concept. AS
29.35.131 already provides for a surcharge of up to 75
cents on every telephone line and cell phones if
enhanced 911 services are offered. In the [Fairbanks]
North Star Borough, we haven't charged against the
cell phones.
If you're in Fairbanks and you dial 911 on your cell
phone, it doesn't make any difference whether you're
inside the city limits or outside in the borough
someplace. It all rings into the Fairbanks Police
Department dispatch center. So every cell phone 911
[call] that is made rings in. We have an operator that
picks it up and answers it, finds out where the
problem is and sends it to the right agency.
There was a comment made about what if somebody has a
cell phone in Fairbanks and is in Juneau and dials
911. What actually happens is that 911 call is
answered at the Juneau 911 center and they would know
that it is in the area. They would not know exactly
where that phone was located. That's the same thing we
deal with in Fairbanks. The 911 rings into us from
Delta all the way down to past Nenana.
The surcharged provided in the current law is barely
enough just to cover the equipment costs for
maintenance and replacement. The proposed amendment
provides money necessary for equipment upgrades and
replacement up to 85 cents and additional monies to
pay for the actual operation of emergency dispatch
center up to $2.15.
I don't believe that in the North Star Borough that we
would ever charge the maximum amount that's allowed
under this proposed amendment. It's possible some
other jurisdictions might do that, but as previously
stated, there's language in the bill that causes each
municipality to go back and look at it every year so
that ... the surcharge then can then be adjusted up or
down to cover the actual costs of the dispatch center.
The current surcharge that we have does not pay for
the cost of a well-trained dispatcher 24/7 to answer
the call. Right now the money that is collected on the
surcharge simply pays for you to pick up the
telephone, dial 911, it to ring into a dispatch
center. That's all that's paid for at this point.
There's nothing provided to pay for somebody to
actually lean down and pick up the headset and say,
"Hello this is the Fairbanks Dispatch Center." That
cost is all covered by the local governments.
I think it's also important to recognize that there's
nothing in this proposed legislation that requires a
municipality to charge the maximum amount. That
question has come up several times and it needs to be
made clear that the amount that's put into this is the
maximum amount that can be charged, but it's not a
requirement that anybody charge that amount.
We feel that now, especially with municipalities
having difficult times financially, this amendment
allows the opportunity to pay for critical services
without going back to the property owners and laying
it on the taxpayers. We support this amendment and we
encourage you to support it.
SENATOR ELTON thanked Mr. Harris for extending him the courtesy
of meeting with him prior to the hearing and apologized for
neglecting to ask about the following: Consider a small business
owner with a couple of employees. When you consider that they
might have a fax line, a modem line, employee lines and a cell
phone at work and nearly as many lines at home. I can see the
monthly surcharge for this one small businessperson amounting to
$8.50 if they have 10 different lines. In comparison, he said,
someone else pays for my work phone and at home I pay for one
landline and my cell phone. "And so my bill is $1.60. I'm one
person and that is one person and yet they're supporting this
enhanced 911 service and the dispatch call service at a rate 3
to 4 times what I'm paying. And how do you get around that?"
MR. HARRIS replied you have to justify it by saying that any
time there is a phone line with voice call capability it's
available for a 911 call 24/7 and you're paying for that
service. He runs a dispatch center and can easily justify that
in his own mind because he knows the kinds and numbers of calls
that come in. He understood the concern, but he asked for
recognition of the fact that most fax phones have a handset and
are therefore available for voice communication. If the bill is
amended to exempt phones that aren't meant for voice
communication, he didn't know that they would be greatly
impacted. The reason he can say that is because of the increased
cell phone usage. "Cell phones are getting to be used so much
that that's what we need to charge it to."
SENATOR ELTON said you're looking at that from a logical
perspective and "the thing is, we sometimes think too much in
this building and there are several logical perspectives." One
such perspective is that the person who pays a surcharge on 10
lines and the one who pays a surcharge on two lines are equally
likely to call 911. From that perspective, one person's access
is worth more per month than another's, particularly when it's
more and more likely that both individuals would use their cell
phone to place a 911 call.
MR. HARRIS reasoned that the cost of the equipment for those
phones to have access doesn't go down if there are two less
phones, which is justification for spreading the cost over every
phone.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked whether there were any other questions or
comments and if not he was ready for a motion.
SENATOR ELTON remarked that a lot of the issues the committee
raised could be addressed at the local level where decisions
could be made regarding how to assess the charge and which
phones would be exempt. Although that has a certain attraction,
he asked whether the committee should consider an amendment to
exempt certain kinds of lines. The sponsor's staff indicated
that they are open to the change. The change wouldn't be
dramatic and the phone owner would still have to apply for the
exemption.
"I don't know what the rest of the committee feels about an
amendment like that, but I think in Finance they'll probably
just be looking at the numbers. They're not going to be looking
at the policy in general so I'd like to hear from other members
of the committee about it."
SENATOR GARY STEVENS agreed that the committee should consider
such an amendment and there was time to do so in the CRA
Committee.
CHAIR STEDMAN commented that in his previous life he dealt with
bringing phone systems into the Municipality of Sitka and the
issue of surcharges for multiple lines came up. They decided not
to exclude any phones so the cost was spread over all phones. At
that time it was an inconsequential expense, but that isn't the
case here.
With that, he announced he would hold SB 335 until the next
meeting to allow time for an amendment.
SENATOR ELTON suggested that the sponsor has already spent time
considering this change and perhaps he would consider working
with the Chair's office to draft an amendment.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|