File No. 93

Senate, March 23, 2010

The Committee on Public Safety and Security reported through SEN. STILLMAN of the 20th Dist., Chairperson of the Committee on the part of the Senate, that the substitute bill ought to pass.

AN ACT MANDATING THE REGIONALIZATION OF PUBLIC SAFETY EMERGENCY TELECOMMUNICATION CENTERS AND A STUDY OF CONSOLIDATION.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

Section 1. Section 28-24 of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2010):

(a) There is established an Office of State-Wide Emergency Telecommunications which shall be in the Division of Fire, Emergency and Building Services within the Department of Public Safety. The Office of State-Wide Emergency Telecommunications shall be responsible for developing and maintaining a state-wide emergency service telecommunications policy. In connection with said policy the office shall:

(1) Develop a state-wide emergency service telecommunications plan specifying emergency police, fire and medical service telecommunications systems needed to provide coordinated emergency service telecommunications to all state residents, including the physically disabled;

(2) Pursuant to the recommendations of the task force established by public act 95-318 to study enhanced 9-1-1 telecommunications services, and in accordance with regulations adopted by the Commissioner of Public Safety pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, develop and administer, by July 1, 1997, an enhanced emergency 9-1-1 program, which shall provide for: (A) The replacement of existing 9-1-1 terminal equipment for each public safety answering point, provided, on or after July 1, 2016, such answering point is part of a regional public safety emergency telecommunications center; (B) the subsidization of regional public safety emergency telecommunications centers, with enhanced subsidization for municipalities with a population in excess of forty thousand; (C) the establishment of a transition grant program to encourage regionalization of public safety telecommunications centers; and (D) the establishment of a regional emergency telecommunications service credit in order to support regional dispatch services;

(3) Provide technical telecommunications assistance to state and local police, fire and emergency medical service agencies;

(4) Provide frequency coordination for such agencies;

(5) Coordinate and assist in state-wide planning for 9-1-1 and E 9-1-1 systems;

(6) Review and make recommendations concerning proposed legislation affecting emergency service telecommunications; and

(7) Review and make recommendations to the General Assembly concerning emergency service telecommunications funding.

(b) The Commissioner of Public Safety shall adopt regulations, in accordance with chapter 54, establishing eligibility standards for state financial assistance to local or regional police, fire and emergency medical service agencies providing emergency service telecommunications. Not later than April 1, 1997, the commissioner shall adopt regulations, in accordance with chapter 54, in order to carry out the provisions of subdivision (2) of subsection (a) of this section.

(c) Within a time period determined by the commissioner to ensure the availability of funds for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1997, to the regional public safety emergency telecommunications centers within the state, and not later than April first of each year thereafter, the commissioner shall determine the amount of funding needed for the development and administration of the enhanced emergency 9-1-1 program. The commissioner shall specify the expenses associated with (1) the purchase, installation and maintenance of new public safety answering point terminal equipment, (2) the implementation of the subsidy program, as described in subdivision (2) of subsection (a) of this section, (3) the implementation of the transition grant program, described in subdivision (2) of subsection (a) of this section, (4) the implementation of the regional emergency telecommunications service credit, as described in subdivision (2) of subsection (a) of this section, provided, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001, and each fiscal year thereafter, such credit for coordinated medical emergency direction services as provided in regulations adopted under this section shall be based upon the factor of thirty cents per capita and shall not be reduced each year, except as provided in subsection (d) of this section, (5) the training of personnel, as necessary, (6) recurring expenses and future capital costs associated with the telecommunications network used to provide emergency 9-1-1 service and the public safety services data networks, (7) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001, and each fiscal year thereafter, the collection, maintenance and reporting of emergency medical services data, as required under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subdivision (8) of section 19a-177, provided the amount of expenses specified under this subdivision shall not exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars in any fiscal year, (8) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001, and each fiscal year thereafter, the initial training of emergency medical dispatch personnel, the provision of an emergency medical dispatch priority reference card set and emergency medical dispatch training and continuing education pursuant to subdivisions (3) and (4) of subsection (g) of section 28-25b, and (9) the administration of the enhanced emergency 9-1-1 program by the Office of State-Wide Emergency Telecommunications, as the commissioner determines to be reasonably necessary. The commissioner shall communicate the commissioner's findings to the chairperson of the Public Utilities Control Authority not later than April first of each year.

(d) For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2016, and each fiscal year thereafter, any municipality that has not joined with two or more other municipalities to form a regional emergency telecommunications center shall not be eligible to receive any funds pursuant to this section.

[(d)] (e) The office may apply for, receive and distribute any federal funds available for emergency service telecommunications. The office shall deposit such federal funds in the Enhanced 9-1-1 Telecommunications Fund established by section 28-30a, as amended by this act.

[(e)] (f) The office shall work in cooperation with the Department of Public Utility Control to carry out the purposes of this section.

Sec. 2. Subsection (a) of section 28-30a of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2010):

(a) There is established a fund to be known as the "Enhanced 9-1-1 Telecommunications Fund". The fund shall contain any moneys required by law to be deposited in the fund, including, but not limited to, any federal funds collected pursuant to subsection [(d)] (e) of section 28-24, as amended by this act, and fees assessed against subscribers of local telephone service and subscribers of commercial mobile radio services, pursuant to section 16-256g. The Enhanced 9-1-1 Telecommunications Fund shall be held separate and apart from all other moneys, funds and accounts. Interest derived from the investment of the fund shall be credited to the assets of the fund. Any balance remaining in the fund at the end of any fiscal year shall be carried forward in the fund for the fiscal year next succeeding.

Sec. 3. (Effective from passage) (a) The Office of State-Wide Emergency Telecommunications shall conduct a study to determine the optimal arrangement of public safety answering points, including, but not limited to, which number of answering points would achieve the most cost-effective and efficient use of resources, which answering points should be consolidated, what consolidation of police, fire, emergency medical services and any related services is necessary and any and all costs associated with all aspects of consolidation, including municipal and state costs. Such study shall be paid for out of the Enhanced 9-1-1 Telecommunications Fund.

(b) The Office of State-Wide Emergency Telecommunications shall, not later than July 1, 2011, submit a report containing the findings of said study to the joint standing committee of the General Assembly having cognizance of matters relating to public safety, in accordance with the provisions of section 11-4a of the general statutes.

The following Fiscal Impact Statement and Bill Analysis are prepared for the benefit of the members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and explanation and do not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose. In general, fiscal impacts are based upon a variety of informational sources, including the analyst's professional knowledge. Whenever applicable, agency data is consulted as part of the analysis, however final products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any specific department.

OFA Fiscal Note

State Impact:

Municipal Impact:

Explanation

Section 1 requires municipalities to join regional Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) by July 1, 2016, to continue receiving subsidies for services, training, equipment enhancements and potential capital expenses through the E 9-1-1 Telecommunications Fund (E 9-1-1 Fund).¹ The potential reduction to the annual subsidy of any municipality that does not join a PSAP in accordance with the bill would vary according to the size of the municipality, but could range from $19,000 to over $100,000. Municipalities that are currently not part of a regional PSAP could incur transition costs, which may be reimbursed in full provided that the Office of State-Wide Emergency Telecommunications (OSET) makes sufficient funds available from the E 9-1-1 Fund. (The potential fiscal impacts on the E 9-1-1 Fund and municipalities are described in more detail below.)

Section 3 results in an estimated one-time cost of $200,000 to $250,000 by requiring OSET to conduct a comprehensive study of regionalizing PSAPs. The study would be paid out of the E 9-1-1 Fund. The projected FY 10 balance of the E-9-1-1 Fund will sufficiently cover the cost of the study.

Impact on the E 9-1-1 Fund in 2016

Scenario A: All municipalities regionalize.

This will result in an overall cost to the E 9-1-1 Fund. The regional PSAP subsidy would be extended to all newly eligible municipalities for an annual cost of up to $2.9 million. In addition, OSET can approve reimbursements to be paid by the E 9-1-1 Fund for transition costs incurred by municipalities.² The current FY 10 budget allows for $1.25 million for the transition grant program, but is limited in availability. The $2.9 million cost to extend the PSAP subsidy would be partially offset by annual savings estimated to be $744,000, plus the cost of unneeded new equipment, due to a reduction in the number of local PSAPs.

Scenario B: No new municipalities regionalize.

This will result in savings to the E 9-1-1 Fund due to the elimination of funding to non-regionalized municipalities. The total potential savings is estimated to be $6.8 million.

Scenario C: Some new municipalities regionalize.

It is uncertain what effect this will have on the E 9-1-1 Fund. There are potential costs in new subsidies and transition funding but also potential savings from fewer local PSAPs and from the funding ineligibility of non-regionalized municipalities. The fiscal impact will vary depending upon how many municipalities regionalize (see Municipal Impact).

Municipal Impact

Impact from Regionalizing

(1) Transition Grants: Municipalities that join a regional PSAP can apply for a reimbursement from the E 9-1-1 Fund for certain expenses incurred due to the transition. A municipality may still incur a cost in transitioning due to the limited availability of transition grants which are also subject to approval by OSET.

(2) Regional PSAP Subsidy: A stand-alone municipality that regionalizes will receive a new per capita regional subsidy.³ For example, a municipality with a 20,000 capita would receive approximately $48,400 in new subsidies. ⁴ All funding for which the municipality is eligible will be directed towards their new regional PSAP.

Impact from Not Regionalizing

(1) Municipal PSAP Per Capita Subsidies: Any municipality that does not join a regional PSAP by July 1, 2016, will lose funding for the Coordinated Emergency Medical Direction (CMED) services subsidy and the PSAP training subsidy. This would cost a municipality of 20,000 capita approximately $8,000, and will vary depending on the population size.⁵

(2) Equipment Funding: Any municipality that does not join a regional PSAP by July 1, 2016 will lose funding for equipment enhancement. The cost is approximately $11,100 per municipality, plus the cost of any necessary new equipment.

(3) City/Multi-Town Subsidies: Any municipality that does not join a regional PSAP by July 1, 2016 which has a population in excess of 40,000 or is part of a multi-town PSAP would lose a subsidy stemming from these qualities in addition to the equipment and subsidy funding outlined above. For example, a municipality that has a population of 40,000 and therefore received a subsidy based on population size will lose approximately $96,800.⁶

(4) Capital Expense Subsidy: Cities that do not join a regional PSAP by July 1, 2016 will lose access to capital expense subsidies offered by the E 9-1-1 Fund.

The Out Years

The ongoing potential municipal cost described above would continue beyond 2016, subject to inflation.

OLR Bill Analysis

sSB 312

AN ACT MANDATING THE REGIONALIZATION OF PUBLIC SAFETY EMERGENCY TELECOMMUNICATION CENTERS AND A STUDY OF CONSOLIDATION.

SUMMARY:

This bill:

1. beginning in FY 2016, makes municipalities ineligible for any E 9-1-1 funding if they have not joined with two or more municipalities to form a regional public safety answering point (PSAP) and

2. requires the Office of State-wide Emergency Telecommunications (OSET), which administers the state's E 9-1-1 program, to use money in the E 9-1-1 Telecommunications Fund to study PSAP regionalization issues and submit its findings to the Public Safety and Security Committee by July 1, 2011.

PSAPs are facilities that receive 9-1-1 calls and dispatch emergency response services (e.g., fire and police) or transfer the calls to other public safety agencies. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon passage for the OSET study; October 1, 2010 for the remaining provisions.

E 9-1-1 SYSTEM FUNDING

OSET Funding to Towns

Currently, OSET pays for all of the towns' 9-1-1 equipment and reimburses them at 10 cents per capita for costs incurred to train and certify telecommunicators (people who take 9-1-1 calls and dispatch emergency services). It also offers financial incentives to encourage towns to (1) establish multi-jurisdiction PSAPs and (2) consolidate PSAP operations by eliminating secondary answering points (facilities to which PSAPs transfer 9-1-1 calls instead of dispatching emergency services or transferring the calls to another public safety agency). OSET provides:

1. annual subsidies to towns with PSAPs that receive and process 9-1-1 calls for three or more towns (regional emergency telecommunication centers) and towns with PSAPs that receive and process 9-1-1 calls for two towns (multi-town PSAPs);

2. one-time, transition funding to help towns offset the cost of forming regional or multi-town PSAPs;

3. (a) annual subsidies to towns that have more than 40,000 residents and (b) reduced funding for each year that they continue to use a secondary answering point; and

4. service credits to encourage dispatch centers to regionalize (CGS §§ 28-24 et seq. & Conn.  Agencies Regs. §§ 28-24-1 et seq.).

Beginning in FY 2016, the bill eliminates funding to all municipalities that have not joined with two or more municipalities to form a regional PSAP. It also specifically prohibits OSET, on or after July 1, 2016, from paying to replace existing 9-1-1 equipment for any PSAP that is not part of a regional PSAP (see BACKGROUND).

OSET STUDY

The bill requires OSET to conduct a study to determine:

1. the optimal arrangement of PSAPs;

2. the number of answering points that would be most cost-effective and efficient;

3. which answering points should be consolidated;

4. what consolidation of fire, police, emergency medical services and related services is necessary; and

5. costs associated with consolidation, including state and municipal costs.

BACKGROUND

E 9-1-1 System

Currently, there are (1) seven regional PSAPs serving 73 member towns; (2) nine multi-town PSAPs; (3) 22 towns receiving subsidies based on the 40,000 population threshold, with four receiving reduced funding because they operate secondary answering points; and (5) 60 towns that get no subsidies because they operate stand-alone PSAPs and do not qualify for the population-based subsidy.

Funding Source

Funding for the E 9-1-1 system is generated by a monthly surcharge levied on all phone lines (CGS § 28-30a). The current rates start at 47 cents per line per month, and customers with multiple lines are rated on a sliding scale. (CGS § 16-256g limits the maximum charge to 50 cents per line). Customers pay the surcharge to their telephone service provider which, in turn, remits it to OSET monthly for deposit in the E 9-1-1 Telecommunications Fund.

COMMITTEE ACTION

Public Safety and Security Committee

Joint Favorable Substitute

¹ The E 9-1-1 Fund is a non-appropriated state fund that generates funding by a monthly surcharge on all phone lines (CGS 28-30a). The Fund is administered by the Office of Statewide Emergency Telecommunications (OSET). According to the OSET Annual Report 2009 the estimated FY 10 operating budget is $45,271,595, which is partially covered by a $24,746,790 carryover from FY 09.

² Transition grants are one-time only funds that are limited in availability and subject to approval by OSET.

³ Any municipality that has a population in excess of 40,000 or is part of a multi-town PSAP already receives a subsidy comparable to the regional PSAP subsidy per Conn. Agencies Regs. §§ 28-24-3 et seq.

⁴ This calculation is projected using the formula in Conn. Agencies Regs. §§ 28-24-3.

⁵ Currently the CMED subsidy is $0.30 per capita while the PSAP training subsidy is $0.10 per capita.

⁶ This calculation is projected using the formula in Conn. Agencies Regs. §§ 28-24-3.