# Thank you for calling 911. May I have your credit card # please?



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

[SIZE=+1]*Tracy,  CA Residents Now Have To Pay For 911 Calls*[/SIZE]
http://cbs13.com/local/tracy.911.calls.2.1502690.html



> Residents can pay a $48 voluntary fee for the year which allows them to  call 9-1-1 as many times as necessary.
> 
> Or, there's the option of not signing up for the annual fee. Instead,  they will be charged $300 if they make a call for help.


----------



## Ken Morgan (Feb 21, 2010)

Wtf?


----------



## terryl965 (Feb 21, 2010)

WOW simply WOW  :erg:


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

WOW!!!  I could see having a small charge for calling 411, to have them look up a number for you, but to call 911....thats crazy.  I'm curious to know what the reasoning behind this was.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

A broke state, a broke city.


----------



## Ken Morgan (Feb 21, 2010)

So if you see a crime in progress, or an accident what are the odds you're going to call 911? 

It's a user fee, but many users call not for themselves but for others.


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Hubbard said:


> A broke state, a broke city.


 
Always a possibility.  Supposedly my state is in the red as well, yet the 2 casinos that we have here, give millions each year.  Where does that money go?  Hmmm...makes ya wonder.

Still, $300 every time you want to call?  Even the $48/yr is crazy.  I'm sure there're other ways to increase cash revenue if need be.


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2010)

Ken Morgan said:


> So if you see a crime in progress, or an accident what are the odds you're going to call 911?



I'd guess that chances are excellent, because the $300 charge is for medical emergencies only.

It sounds to me as if the PSAPs (the 911 centers) are trying for a piece of the health insurance pie, like ambulance drivers did when they billed the patient's health insurance for their services and provided them to the town for free.

What angers me is that E-911 lifeline service was an unfunded FCC mandate.   FCC made the rules that telephone carriers needed to meet a sert of standards for 911 service, and the carriers were required to bear all associated costs.  Billions of dollars wer spent with this upgrade.  In addition, American consumers are paying for this as well.  The "universal service fee" included in telephone bills is to help cover lifeline service for poor and rural subscribers.   Some states have taken this one step further and insisted that individual businesses/organizations that have more than a given number of phone lines must have their own connection to a local PSAP.

If the Federal government can require all operators and manufacturers to conform to a particular spec, on their own dime, than how can it be OK for a city to indiscriminately add an expensive toll to 911 service?


----------



## Flea (Feb 21, 2010)

A couple of fatalities and this will be sued out of existence.


----------



## Blade96 (Feb 21, 2010)

Ken Morgan said:


> Wtf?


 
exactly.


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 21, 2010)

I wonder if you get charged if you call their dispatch center direct? As in 555-5555 vs 911?


----------



## Marginal (Feb 21, 2010)

MJS said:


> WOW!!!  I could see having a small charge for calling 411, to have them look up a number for you, but to call 911....thats crazy.  I'm curious to know what the reasoning behind this was.


There seems a recent uptick in idiots using the service. 

"You're out of lemonade, McDonald's? I'm calling 911!"


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

Marginal said:


> There seems a recent uptick in idiots using the service.
> 
> "You're out of lemonade, McDonald's? I'm calling 911!"


 
I couldn't agree more with you.  8yrs ago, when I started dispatching, I should've started a journal, listing all of the crazy 911 calls that I've taken.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

Charge for non-emergency 911 calls?


----------



## grydth (Feb 21, 2010)

There was just an article here about the "frequent fliers" who abuse the ambulance services, even using them as taxis and then stiffing them on the bill.

Of course *these* people will be able to get off without paying, as always. 

What happens, though, to the working family just barely making ends meet that has to make a couple of calls to save a sick child.... how many of them have $600 just laying around? 

As far as Good Samaritan calls, how many will now make that call to save another person when they will later be hounded by collections? 

I wonder if other nonemergency numbers will now be deluged by callers.


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 21, 2010)

I thought that we all paid a 911 surcharge on our cell phones to pay for 911 service.


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> I thought that we all paid a 911 surcharge on our cell phones to pay for 911 service.


 
I know I do.  And IIRC, (I'll have to check my home phone bill) but I believe there is some sort of 'charge' that seems to cover stuff like this.


----------



## jks9199 (Feb 21, 2010)

We do pay a 911 access fee as part of our phone bill.  (I don't think it's included in cell bills, though I'm not certain.  That could be a small though not insignificant factor as more people are opting out of a landline phone...)

I'm not at all keen on the idea of charging for 911 calls; I don't want people hesitating to call 911, whether for rescue or police services.  I don't want them using 911 in lieu of a family doctor or a car service medically, or calling 911 for a three-week stale larceny... but I'd rather have them call than not!  We can always clear the emergency line.

I don't have a problem with ambulance fees.  In fact, where I work, they don't charge if you don't insurance; I'd rather they did charge everyone, and waive the fee on demonstrated hardship.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

This is a User Fee, not a tax.  There's a difference.

One's called a Fee, the other's not.

Duh.


----------



## grydth (Feb 21, 2010)

Flea said:


> A couple of fatalities and this will be sued out of existence.



Maybe even before that. 

I can see the ACLU or SPLC going after this as limiting access to emergency services only to the rich. Since this is a public service, that may be unlawful. You may see a judicial injunction issued.


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2010)

Marginal said:


> There seems a recent uptick in idiots using the service.
> 
> "You're out of lemonade, McDonald's? I'm calling 911!"


 
I agree. However, since the $300 charge is only for medical emergencies, this means the idiots would not be charged $300.  This also means that idiots would not have a reason to stop calling 911 for superfluous reasons.

This is all about grabbing money from people with heath insurance, and collecting the 50 bucks a year from the citizenry.

I went through the what I could find on 911/E-911 law. There is room to allow for regulation at the state and municipal level. As far as I can tell, there is absolutely nothing that prevents a town from charging whatever they like for 911 service.

I think this is regulated in Canada, where 911 is not necessarily free.

The rub: its an ugly loophole.

In the USA, the *service providers *are largely prohibited for charging a fee for 911. 

However, there is nothing in the laws that prevent the *municipalities* for charging a fee for 911.

I think this is a violation of the spirit of the law, even if it is not a violation of black letter law.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

I'm ok with it.
Drop the fee off my phone.

Do the same with police and fire.

Pay an $300 annual "Police Insurance Fee" or pay when needed, a higher rate of course.  Lets see, 2 cops per call, average call is an hour long, average pay is $35/hr, plus overhead, so that'd be what, $450 per call maybe?

Fire, do the same, except the average FD call would be say $5,000? Of course, that gets tacked onto your property insurance, or car insurance accordingly and paid through there.


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Fire, do the same, except the average FD call would be say $5,000? Of course, that gets tacked onto your property insurance, or car insurance accordingly and paid through there.


 
And what if you don't have property insurance or car insurance? 

I am not a homeowner. I am not required by the state of NH to carry renters insurance.

I'm also not required by the state of NH to carry auto insurance: I have the title of the car, there is no lien on the car.

So would I be on the hook for $5,000?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

Yup.  Same as if you're in a car accident.


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Hubbard said:


> I'm ok with it.
> Drop the fee off my phone.
> 
> Do the same with police and fire.
> ...


 
I'm still confused on the whole paying thing.  Wouldn't this fall into the money thats already taken from the citizens for taxes?  If so, why charge more?  

Regarding the underlined part...in the perfect world, it would only take an hour.  I dont know how other PDs operate, but its possible, depending on the call, for the cop to be out of service, writing on that 1 incident, for half the shift.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

Ahh! But these aren't Taxes.  They are Fees.
Come on, don't you folks know the difference? It's clear as mud.


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

Carol said:


> And what if you don't have property insurance or car insurance?
> 
> I am not a homeowner. I am not required by the state of NH to carry renters insurance.
> 
> ...


 
I figured that car ins. was the norm everywhere.  So, for example, if you and I got into a crash, here in CT., and it was your fault, and you didn't have ins., how do I get re-embursed for the damage to my car?  Or would this be the same as if I crashed with another CT driver, that didn't have ins....my ins co pays, under the uninsured motorist clause?


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Ahh! But these aren't Taxes. They are Fees.
> Come on, don't you folks know the difference? It's clear as mud.


 
So basically they're double dipping.  Forcing me to pay taxes, which is supposed to cover these things, AND they're now tossing in this fee.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

Yup.  NY does it on hundreds of things. Seems there's a legal limit to how many taxes they can institute, so when they hit the tax limit, they add "fees".

My guess is, the OP is a case of this.


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2010)

MJS said:


> I figured that car ins. was the norm everywhere. So, for example, if you and I got into a crash, here in CT., and it was your fault, and you didn't have ins., how do I get re-embursed for the damage to my car? Or would this be the same as if I crashed with another CT driver, that didn't have ins....my ins co pays, under the uninsured motorist clause?


 
It would likely be a faster resolution  under the uninsured motorist clause. 

You can, of course, sue me. That will not be quick, nor will it have a guarantee of having the results you want. But it is your right....


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

You mean, like drag on 5, 6 years dragging through courts, only to be tossed out because a judge has a golf game to get to?


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Yup. Same as if you're in a car accident.


 
OK. I don't have many valuables. I'll make sure that the few I do have are kept outside of my apartment...perhaps in nearby a storage space, or at a safety deposit box, or at a relative's home. 

That way, if see a fire, I can grab the cat and the laptop and get the hell out of dodge. I mean, I don't have $5000. So, it would be better if the fire burns to the point where it reaches one of my neighbor's apartments. Then they can make the decision as to whether they want to call 911 or not....and if they haven't planned ahead of time for such a decision? Meh...not my problem.


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Yup. NY does it on hundreds of things. Seems there's a legal limit to how many taxes they can institute, so when they hit the tax limit, they add "fees".
> 
> My guess is, the OP is a case of this.


 
I just think its a bit over the top.  I mean, we're talking about life and death here.  I can't believe they can't find nothing else out there to add a fee to, other than a 911 call.  



Carol said:


> It would likely be a faster resolution under the uninsured motorist clause.
> 
> You can, of course, sue me. That will not be quick, nor will it have a guarantee of having the results you want. But it is your right....


 
Thanks for the clarification.   So, what happens if you crash with another NH driver in NH?  You just settle amongst yourselves?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 21, 2010)

What does the State (or city, or Fed) care about Life/Death?  This is a cash grab which will in part go for what it says, but mostly go elsewhere for "overhead".


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2010)

MJS said:


> Thanks for the clarification.  So, what happens if you crash with another NH driver in NH? You just settle amongst yourselves?


 
Anytime   Thw "non-compulsory auto insurance" applies to most of us that have paid for our cars, but not all.  If a driver is determined to be a high risk by the state, then that driver is required to carry a certain level of liability insurance on their car.

So...if it was a NH-legally-uninsured driver vs. another NH-legally-uninsured driver, then yes...it would be up to the individuals and the civil courts to work out the matter.

However, I think the vast majority of us understand that having car insurance is a darn good idea.   I keep full comprehensive coverage on mine, even though it was paid off two years ago.


----------



## jks9199 (Feb 21, 2010)

MJS said:


> I'm still confused on the whole paying thing.  Wouldn't this fall into the money thats already taken from the citizens for taxes?  If so, why charge more?
> 
> Regarding the underlined part...in the perfect world, it would only take an hour.  I dont know how other PDs operate, but its possible, depending on the call, for the cop to be out of service, writing on that 1 incident, for half the shift.


As a general rule... if it takes half the shift to do the paper on a single call, someone's milking the hell out of it.  There are plenty of exceptions -- but most calls shouldn't be taking that long to document.

But, you're right, the time on scene is only part of the time involved in a call.


----------



## MJS (Feb 21, 2010)

jks9199 said:


> As a general rule... if it takes half the shift to do the paper on a single call, someone's milking the hell out of it. There are plenty of exceptions -- but most calls shouldn't be taking that long to document.
> 
> But, you're right, the time on scene is only part of the time involved in a call.


 
Its funny how some cops that I know, can process a DUI within an hour, including all the paperwork, and be right back on the road, while others make it an all night affair.

Just last night, I sent an officer to a call.  Mother called up stating that her 15yo daughter took the car and drove off.  He milked that for close to 2hrs.  I'm sorry, but 2hrs...thats a bit much IMO.  Its a simple missing person report, with info about the car attached.  The officer in the adjoining dist. even called up, asking if the other guy was still working on that same call.  

Of course, you'd think the supervisors would be questioning this, but that'd be asking for a miracle. LOL.


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 21, 2010)

There wasn't a lot to go on in that OP. I'm wondering if this is a reporter translating fees on 911 false alarm calls (as in false burglar alarms) vs. 911 "Emergency" calls. Some places have been placing a fine/fee table on alarm calls because of the large number of false alarms that require police attention.

Just throwing that possibility out there.

Edit: The story stipulates "medical emergency" though so this is probably NOT the case.


----------



## Carol (Feb 21, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> There wasn't a lot to go on in that OP. I'm wondering if this is a reporter translating fees on 911 false alarm calls (as in false burglar alarms) vs. 911 "Emergency" calls. Some places have been placing a fine/fee table on alarm calls because of the large number of false alarms that require police attention.
> 
> Just throwing that possibility out there.
> 
> Edit: The story stipulates "medical emergency" though so this is probably NOT the case.


 
Many cities are opting for a private ambulance service, which can be done at no-cost/low-cost to the town, because the bulk of their expenses are paid by a $550 transport fee, that is passed on to the patient's insurance company.

http://www.eagletribune.com/punewsnh/local_story_050234223.html

The town seems to want a piece of the health insurance pie....or, alternatively, scaring its citizenry in to paying $48 for a year of service.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Feb 23, 2010)

Not that I agree with this, but thought I would add my two cents:

1.  This is not a fee for 911, therefore the fee that you pay on your phone bill is something different.  This is a fee for medical emergency services.

2.  You do not pay for these services with your taxes.  Money paid for in taxes to the city go into the city's *general fund*, unless the citizens have voted, or the city enacted, a special tax which goes to a specific budget issue.  Therefore, you don't pay for emergency medical services.  What you do is give money to a city and your mayor / council members do with the money what they will, which *may* be to pay for such services.


----------



## chaos1551 (Feb 24, 2010)

Carol said:


> OK. I don't have many valuables. I'll make sure that the few I do have are kept outside of my apartment...perhaps in nearby a storage space, or at a safety deposit box, or at a relative's home.
> 
> That way, if see a fire, I can grab the cat and the laptop and get the hell out of dodge. I mean, I don't have $5000. So, it would be better if the fire burns to the point where it reaches one of my neighbor's apartments. Then they can make the decision as to whether they want to call 911 or not....and if they haven't planned ahead of time for such a decision? Meh...not my problem.


 
Hell, I could pay my renter's insurance bill for 20 years with $5000.  Then I could leave the laptop and cat and get new ones.


----------

