Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/03/2004 01:36 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 STEDMAN announced SB 335 to be up for consideration and he
would like a motion to adopt the committee substitute (CS).
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER made a motion to adopt CSSB 335(CRA) for
discussion purposes. There being no objection, it was so
ordered.
JOE MICHEL, legislative aide to Senator Ralph Seekins, told
members the CS addresses the questions raised by the committee
during the March 10 hearing. He said the bill reflects hard work
on the part of a number of people. He read:
This committee substitute addresses the major concerns
this committee had regarding multiple lines in a
residential home. There is concern of this committee
that the Legislature would have to deal with this
issue again and again as technology advanced and new
surcharge limits would need to be set as Alaska was
able to move on to Phase II, E-911 technology.
This bill is about enabling municipalities to have the
means to support a 911 system. Every citizen needs 911
services and the adjustments made by this CS will make
great strides towards the goal of local control for
city and borough governments.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS recalled there was considerable concern
about cell phones and wondered whether cell phones would work
through the 911 system.
MR. MICHEL replied they would. "It would be per billing
statement; it would be where the billing statement is located,"
he said.
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER asked for expanded discussion about
multiple lines into a residence and how would be handled.
MR. MICHEL said, "The multiple phone lines now will be per
billing address per statement. It won't be if you have a fax
line, you're children have a line. All those go to whatever the
one statement is per billing address. There will be one
surcharge placed on that." He clarified that businesses are not
included.
SENATOR WAGONER questioned what would happen if he had two lines
into his house from ACS and one line from GCI.
MR. MICHEL replied, "If you had two different phone companies
coming into one address, I would say you would probably get the
surcharge twice because the individual companies are responsible
for collecting the surcharge on the phone bill."
SENATOR WAGONER commented that it's not really true that one
resident gets one surcharge.
MR. MICHEL agreed.
SENATOR WAGONER asked what he said about cell phones.
MR. MICHEL repeated that they're charged per billing statement.
SENATOR WAGONER remarked that he could receive two billings at
his residence for the service from two companies and one billing
for his cell phone.
MR. MICHEL agreed.
SENATOR KIM ELTON asked for a discussion on the rationale for
doing away with the caps.
MR. MICHEL said it's the result of discussion on a companion
House bill. The limits were lifted so that individual
municipalities could do what they saw fit to run their 911
services.
SENATOR ELTON asked if the state would be exempted from the
surcharge.
MR. MICHEL didn't know the answer, but said he'd find out.
SENATOR ELTON asked if there was discussion about how market
dynamics could change so there was shifting from one provider to
another to consolidate billings.
MR. MICHEL said there was discussion and opined that market
dynamics might be affected in an effort to avoid surcharges, but
he didn't think it would amount to much. "People would either
accept the phone charge or move on and try to consolidate their
companies," he said.
SENATOR ELTON remarked that cell phones are the tethers by which
families stay in contact with their teenagers. If cell phones
are billed by the number, then some families will pay the fee a
number of times.
MR. MICHEL thought the surcharge was per billing address, but if
different companies provided service to the same address, then
the fee would be paid more than once. The main rationale is to
assess a user fee for 911 service and not place the burden on
property tax owners.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked about municipalities receiving
reimbursement for providing 911 service to people that are
living outside the city borders but inside the service district.
MR. MICHEL said that areas get billed wherever the emergency
services are provided.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS noted that someone was shaking their head
so the question needs further exploration.
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER remarked that in years past when PTI had
the phone system on the Kenai Peninsula, he was billed for local
service by PTI and then AT&T billed him for long distance
service. That would be two billings for 911 service for one
residence.
MR. MICHEL pointed to Section 5 and said it speaks to local
exchanges so the long distance providers wouldn't collect the
service charge.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked for verification that there is no longer a
cap and that businesses would be charged per line.
MR. MICHEL said that is correct.
SENATOR ELTON asked if the bill has any provisions to allow
municipalities to make local accommodations so that they could
configure local 911 charges to their liking.
MR. MICHEL said the purpose of the bill is to allow
municipalities local control over funding their 911 systems.
SENATOR ELTON narrowed his question and asked whether a
municipality would have the ability to charge a residence just
one service fee regardless of the fact that the residence may
have more than one cell phone and more than one land line
MR. MICHEL said, "Yes sir, the whole goal is for the
municipality to run their show as they see fit. We used the word
may many times just to provide them with plenty of wiggle room,
depending on what they feel their municipality needs to fund
this service."
SENATOR GEORGIANNA LINCOLN noted that the committee aide
distributed an amendment that she wanted to offer.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked whether she wanted to discuss it informally
or make a formal motion.
SENATOR LINCOLN made a motion to adopt amendment 1, which adds a
new section on page 8.
SENATOR WAGONER objected for discussion purposes.
SENATOR LINCOLN continued to explain that the new section is the
exact verbage that was offered on a companion bill in the House.
It reads:
AS 42.05 is amended by adding a new section to read:
Sec. 42.05.295. Routing 911 calls. Notwithstanding AS
42.05.711, to ensure statewide access by all residents
to 911 wireline services, traditional or enhanced, for
areas where there is no local or regional public
safety answering point, the state shall provide a
toll-free, statewide default public safety answering
point to which each local exchange telephone company
must route all 911 calls originating from within its
customer service base.
She noted that AT&T supports the amendment fully. The amendment
would allow the rural areas of Alaska to have access to 911
service. Currently the rural areas aren't able to access 911
service and with the decrease in public safety officers in the
small communities, this access can be critically important.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS said he wasn't familiar with the term
"wireline services" and mused that it might be the opposite of
"wireless services."
SENATOR LINCOLN wasn't altogether sure, but took the lead from
some nodding heads and agreed that was probably correct.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS said he understood the reasoning, but he
wasn't sure how that would work because there wouldn't
necessarily be any anyone close enough to respond.
SENATOR LINCOLN said:
There was an example used when a village member in
Aniak was able to get a hold of a person to be able to
call the dispatcher - has to call Bethel to get an
okay to respond. In this manner they would have the
hubs and the hubs would be able to respond to those
911 calls without having to go through different
phases of getting to the next larger community.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked if that meant that she wasn't
suggesting a trooper dispatch service, but that every community
would have a hub for calls to come into.
SENATOR LINCOLN said that's correct and she didn't think it
would cost the state.
SENATOR WAGONER asked who would pay for the service.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she didn't want to put anyone on the spot,
but she hoped that someone from AT&T could answer those
questions. She understood that it isn't a cost to the state.
It's an option for the communities so the villages would have
access. She said, "I would imagine that it would be through the
communities if there's any expense."
SENATOR WAGONER questioned, "If you're in Nightmute and you want
to call in a 911 call - it originates in a residence - and the
state then has a line that calls it into a 911 center?"
SENATOR LINCOLN understood that the 911 call would go in to the
closest hub and that person would then contact the needed
service.
SENATOR WAGONER asked if the people in the hub community would
pay for all the 911 calls and the individuals making the
emergency calls from the remote areas would pay nothing under
the proposed amendment.
SENATOR LINCOLN said it was her understanding that there was no
charge to the state and she didn't know how the rest of the
costs would be distributed.
SENATOR WAGONER understood that the state wouldn't get the
fiscal note, but it would cost whoever was supporting the hub.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked if the state currently has any calling
centers.
SENATOR LINCOLN couldn't put her finger on one in her district
of 127 communities.
CHAIR STEDMAN pointed out that the verbage is that the state
shall provide.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS said he wouldn't feel comfortable voting
for the amendment until he heard from the communities that would
subsidize the service to areas outside their boundaries.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked if anyone would like to speak to the
amendment and received no response.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked to hear from the Alaska Municipal
League.
KEVIN RICHIE, Alaska Municipal League, noted that Tim Rogers was
on-line to help, but his quick answer is that: "Given the
ability to adjust your calling area, I believe that this
provision would allow PSAP, Public Safety Answering Points,
which is a calling center - whatever calling center was taking
the calls would have the ability to collect the surcharge on the
telephones within that area." He understands that, "by expanding
those calling areas it would be possible - if this bill were to
go though as it is allowing a municipality to essentially
recover the costs that it actually expends - to not have some
area subsidizing others because you would be collecting enough
to run the system potentially within the larger calling area."
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked if it's his feeling that these
centers could be funded at no cost to the local community. They
would receive the money needed to run the centers without
subsidizing them from the local tax base.
MR. RICHIE replied that is his understanding, but he would defer
to Mr. Rogers to make sure that's the case.
TIM ROGERS, Alaska Municipal League, spoke via teleconference to
say that the intent of the amendment is to establish an ability
for the rural areas that currently don't have 911 service to
have the local phone companies be able to switch back into a
statewide 1-800 number that would allow them to reach an
emergency services dispatcher. Currently there are a number of
areas in the state that don't have 911 service and this would
provide that access.
SEANTOR WAGONER said the question was who would pay for the
service.
MR. ROGERS opined the state would have to pay for the cost of
the 800 service and there would have to be an agreement made
with each dispatch center.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked if it's his understanding that if the
system were developed with the regional service areas that local
cities wouldn't have to subsidize a larger area.
MR. ROGERS replied that his understanding of the amendment is
that it would require the local telephone companies to have a
switching mechanism so that any time a 911 call came in and it
was not a local PSAP [Public Safety Answering Point], it would
automatically switch to an 800 number that would go to some
dispatch center within the state.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked him to verify that the state wouldn't have
to pay for this and that there had been some discussion about
placing a 5-cent surcharge on all billings to ensure that this
service was available statewide.
MR. ROGERS told her he knew nothing about a 5-cent surcharge or
any type of statewide surcharge. When he spoke with an AT&T
representative he was told that the state could have a simple
switch to an 800 number then to a dispatch center for little or
no expense.
SENATOR WAGONER disputed the previous comment saying that there
is an expense. It comes from operating the 911 system and if
individuals outside a service area use the system without paying
a fair portion then that's an expense to the cities or
municipalities.
TAPE 04-12, SIDE B
2:23 pm
SENATOR ELTON said he could see an additional cost, but he
viewed it as a good neighbor policy for larger areas to offer
access to 911 service to outlying areas. For instance, if a 911
call was made to the Juneau center from Tenakee Springs, it
would be a good neighbor policy to call the Coast Guard for a
MediVac or whatever service was needed. He said, "I think the
argument may be a good argument if in fact additional resources
are needed, but I suspect that you're probably not going to need
additional resources. You're just going to be using the existing
resources."
SENATOR WAGONER said his point is that when these systems are
established you figure out the costs to run the system. "So if
they want to participate at that level, I'll buy into that
argument, but if they want to participate at that level after
the system is set up, manned and put in place and the equipment
purchased, I don't buy that." He questioned whether that 5-cent
surcharge would be for everyone statewide or just those that
don't currently participate in a 911 system. If it
SENATOR LINCOLN said it's statewide.
SENATOR WAGONER said that's inequitable.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS agreed with Senator Wagoner's comments.
SENATOR ELTON said those same types of subsidies are provided in
public protection as well. "Those kind of subsidies are natural
kind of subsidies. They're using our roads when they come to
visit town and we're not trying to recapture those costs."
SENATOR WAGONER said those who have been involved in municipal
government clearly understand the burden that's created when
areas outside the city or municipality borders use and don't pay
for city services. He told an anecdotal story about the
communities of Kenai and Soldotna that used to pay for fire
protection services to areas beyond their borders and how that
impacted property owners. "This 911 system looks to me like
we're going down that same road and I don't think we should go
there and I think we should have a lot of input from
municipalities before we go this way because I know what my
municipality would say I'm sure," he said.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked who was on line to testify.
CHAIR STEDMAN told her Mayor Thompson from Fairbanks, Linda
Freed from the City of Kodiak, Lieutenant Storey with the
troopers, and someone from the Department of Law were available.
SENATOR LINCOLN apologized for not having the answers to the
questions that were raised and then pointed out that the
municipalities would have the option to charge the phone users
through a surcharge. The amendment was intended to allow 911
access to all areas in the state and not just in the
municipalities or boundaries of a borough.
Rather than have the amendment go down in flames, she asked
whether she could withdraw her amendment to provide the people
waiting on line the opportunity to comment.
CHAIR STEDMAN was agreeable and stated that testimony would be
taken on the \D version and anyone who wanted to comment on the
amendment was free to do so. He called on Lieutenant Storey.
LIEUTENANT AL STOREY, Alaska State Trooper, Department of Public
Safety, said he had several comments. First, Section 1 relates
to actionable claims against the state and the department likes
the provision, he said.
He expressed concern with the proposed amendment that had a
friendly withdrawal. The fiscal note would be indeterminate
rather than zero. "Common sense would dictate that the troopers
and Public Safety would probably be the primary call takers for
any regional call centers that were set up." Currently they have
a system for networking with local emergency services, but it
isn't a 911 system. They recognize that a 911 system is needed,
but they don't want to jump in without a comprehensive and
organized plan with identified funding sources and distribution
of responsibility. It's important to provide the best 911
service possible, but routing an emergency call through a
dispatch center in Anchorage when the emergency originates in
Shaktoolik might not satisfy the caller's needs as quickly and
efficiently as you might like.
The bill does allow municipalities to collect surcharges, but
there is no provision where the state could benefit from
collection of any surcharge so any cost incurred would have to
be covered by the state.
SENATOR WAGONER asked for verification that more time is needed
to study the impacts of proposed amendment 1.
LIEUTENANT STOREY replied that is correct. He knew that AT&T
association members have expressed concerns on the liability
that might be extended to them in not being able to send calls
to a PSAP.
LINDA FREED, city manager for the City of Kodiak, testified via
teleconference in support of the committee substitute, version
\D. The City of Kodiak is the PSAP for the Kodiak road system
representing about 15,000 people and they spend about $.5
million per year to operate their E 911 and dispatch systems.
They take in about $45,000 under the system that is
legislatively capped. It's important to pass the legislation
this session so they can find a local funding source to help
defray the large subsidy they now provide for their dispatch
system.
The E 911 and dispatch systems cover an area that stretches well
beyond the city limits. They are very happy with language that
would allow them to extend a levy to support their dispatch
system, which is more costly than the E 911 portion. The E 911
part handles the emergency calls coming in and the dispatch
system is the response calls out and the way they communicate
when they have a disaster or an emergency response. That's where
a lot of staff time is consumed.
With regard to proposed Amendment 1, she said the House
companion bill removed that portion because of the many
unanswered questions. The House suggested a letter of intent
speaking of the need to establish a coordinator position to
review and come up with a workable system for communities that
don't currently have E 911 service without burdening those that
are already subsidizing the system with local tax dollars.
STEVE THOMPSON, mayor of the City of Fairbanks, testified via
teleconference in support of the committee substitute. He
complimented Ms. Freed for covering most of the points they feel
are important. The mayors of North Pole and Fairbanks North Star
Borough also support the \D version CS for SB 335.
He noted that utility providers want the cap, but the question
arises over whether the cost to provide emergency dispatch
services to Barrow compared to Fairbanks compared to Anchorage
is the same. "With new technologies coming on line would both be
going back to Juneau trying to get the cap changed in the next
year or the year after because it doesn't provide enough money?"
Having the dispatch area authority set the rate to cover the
cost of the services is a good way to do it, he said.
SENATOR WAGONER asked if the city or borough runs the 911
service in Fairbanks.
MR. THOMPSON said they currently have five different dispatch
answering services in the valley. They're trying to combine them
into one. The borough operates the technical 911 switch that is
used by the local phone exchange and that's the only way the
borough is involved for dispatching.
The combined cost for the five dispatch centers is about $4.7
million per year. They look for a considerable reduction in
operating costs when they consolidate.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked whether he had any comments on
proposed Amendment 1 that would probably make the city
responsible for a number of communities outside of the ones they
currently deal with.
MR. THOMPSON called it a good concept, but he couldn't see how
they could foresee the cost or any of the other particulars.
When they answer an E 911 call now they know exactly the address
the call is coming from. If they were to receive out of area
calls they would have no location data whatsoever. It's a good
idea for sometime in the future after more study. "We're not
really in favor of that at this time. In the future I can see it
happening though," he said.
SENATOR LINCOLN thanked him for saying the concept was good
rather than saying it was a rotten idea.
CHAIR STEDMAN noted there was no one else to give testimony.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she heard the concerns expressed about the
proposed amendment and she would like to withdraw Amendment 1 at
that time.
CHAIR STEDMAN announced Amendment 1 was withdrawn.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS said he appreciated what he was doing, but
it's an important principle and he wondered if he would favor a
letter of intent to work toward developing a statewide
coordinated system.
SENATOR LINCOLN seconded the idea.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked for a motion.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS made a motion to draft a letter of intent
stating support for a coordinated statewide system. There being
no objection, it was so ordered.
SENATOR WAGONER made a motion to move CSSB 335 from committee
with individual recommendations. He added "and hopefully there
will be a resolution to this in the near future."
There being no objection, CSSB 335 \D moved from committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|