Home › News › Local News
Ventura OKs fee for 911 service
$1.49 to be added to telephone bills
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from Local NewsSeizing on a way to free up money to hire additional police officers and firefighters, Ventura will become the first city in Southern California to levy a monthly fee on telephone users for emergency 911 service.
The monthly $1.49 fee for "Emergency Services Access," approved by the City Council on Monday night, is scheduled to take effect May 1 and will be collected on all Ventura cellular and land-line telephone bills.
Critics say the fee is a tax in disguise and should be put to voters. Others argue the city should live within its existing $90 million annual operating budget.
With an estimated 158,000 eligible phone lines, city leaders say they will recoup $2 million to $2.5 million of the $3.3 million they currently pay annually for 911 services. That would free money to hire six police officers and three firefighters. Phone bills in Ventura will be a little bit higher, but response times to 911 calls ultimately will be quicker, city officials say.
"The bottom line is that this is a reasonable fee for an essential service that we need immediately," Mayor Christy Weir said.
Several Northern California cities charge monthly fees for 911 service, although some have been invalidated by judges who ruled they were essentially taxes that needed voter approval.
First of its kind in state
Ventura added a new wrinkle to strengthen its legal case: Residents can opt out of the monthly fee by agreeing to pay $50 any time they call 911 for a personal emergency.
That alternative — believed to be the first of its kind in the state — was designed for phone lines reserved for fax machines and high-speed Internet service, not primary telephones, officials said. But it will be open to anyone.
Skeptics cast the $50-per-call charge as a bad idea that will discourage people from reporting emergencies and create a regulatory nightmare to administer as city officials start reviewing individual 911 calls.
"There is a real possibility that it would repress calls for real emergencies," said Councilman Neal Andrews, who cast the lone no vote in Monday's 6-1 approval.
Andrews said a government fee by definition is charged for a service that is elective. "I do not regard 911 as an elective service," Andrews said. "This is a basic-level service that we should guarantee to every resident."
Stockton fee ruled invalid
A San Joaquin County Superior Court judge handed taxpayers a victory in June, ruling that Stockton's 911 fee was invalid. The judge said the fee had all the hallmarks of a tax. An Alameda County Superior Court ruling invalidated Union City's 911 telephone tax in April for similar reasons.
Stockton continues to collect its fee while the case is on appeal, Stockton City Attorney Ren Nosky said. "We have not conceded that our 911 fee is a tax," he said.
Nosky declined to comment on Ventura's per-call alternative but implied it was a good legal move. "I know Ventura is working with some smart people," he said.
Don Facciano, president of the Ventura County Taxpayers Association, said the 911 phone fee should go to a citywide vote.
"This is a tax," Facciano told the council Monday night. "This was proposed initially as a tax. The Taxpayers Association opposes any tax that is disguised as a fee."
Ventura voters were asked to increase the local sales tax by a quarter-cent in a 2005 ballot measure aimed at generating money to hire 14 police officers and nine firefighters. About 62 percent voted yes, but the measure fell short of the needed two-thirds approval.
Resident Lisa Woodburn, a married mother of two teenagers, said the $1.49 fee might not sound like much, but the cost adds up quickly in a household with four cell phones and two land-lines.
The fee "would cost us about $90 a year," she said. She told the council that if adding safety personnel was so important, "you should allocate your existing funds accordingly."
The council defended its spending, pointing out that 52 percent of its $90 million budget already is committed to police and fire services. Ventura collects less in user fees than other cities in the county, and the California Constitution allows cities to impose cost-recovery fees for specific services without voter approval, officials said. "This city runs pretty lean," Weir said.
Whether other Ventura County cities will follow Ventura's lead remains to be seen.
No plans in Oxnard, Simi
Oxnard is not actively studying a 911 fee, nor is Simi Valley. "Our council has given us no such direction to look at this," Simi Valley City Manager Mike Sedell said.
Simi Valley spends $29 million on police services and has 125 sworn officers for a population of roughly 125,000, Assistant City Manager Laura Behjan said. Ventura spends $29.2 million and has 134 sworn officers for a population of 106,000, but has to respond to more 911 calls than Simi Valley, officials said.
City officials repeatedly emphasized the $50-per-call option was elective. Exemptions to the $50 fee will be granted for those witnessing a possible crime or reporting an emergency on behalf of someone else.
The charges could be appealed. The city would review individual 911 calls and have a "liberal policy" to exempt them from the $50 fee, officials said.
Low-income residents enrolled in the state's discount "LifeLine" service also will be exempt. Businesses will pay the monthly fee on up to three phone lines when using a multiple-line, or trunk-line, service. That will amount to about $4.47 a month.
Councilman Bill Fulton said he doesn't think many people will sign up for the $50 alternative. "The practical reality is that people will pay the monthly fee," he said.
Under the plan, residents will have 60 days after May 1 to sign up for the per-call option and can revert to the monthly fee at any time.
Posted by smithjc on January 30, 2008 at 2:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ok, star, how about some information on where we go and who we contact to opt out of the monthly charges?
Posted by smithjc on January 30, 2008 at 6:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
maybe the reason that we live in a "low crime area" is due to effective policing. we need to have police, we just don't need to pay again for services that we are already paying for twice, through our taxes and the "fees" already added to our phone bills.
Posted by briz21 on January 30, 2008 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Christy Weir enjoy your last stint as mayor. We should recall you and Cole.
Posted by Jacksprat on January 30, 2008 at 8:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
$1.49 that is less than some of you pay for a pack of Cigrette,or a cup of Coffee at one of the coffee shops. You will not even notice it. I can see a problem for business with many phones, but there is a way to cut that back too, but maybe they will have enough civic pride to just pay it. They pass on the cost most likly any way.
So big deal, get over it and get a live, it may mean that the parmedic get to you house in time to save your life.
Posted by interested on January 30, 2008 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think the reason why they don't give any information on how to sign up for the $50.00 fee is because they don't want people signing up for it so they are making it difficult to do so. It is so obvious. I for one have never called 911 and they know that if a lot of people don't call, then they wont make any money off us. I think everyone should sign up for the $50.00 fee, I bet the city wouldn't like that too much.
Posted by KatieTeague on January 30, 2008 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I can't believe Neal Andrews was the only council member that had any sense on this matter. It is a basic service that should be provided.
Posted by SF1943 on January 30, 2008 at 9:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with INTERESTED. I too, have never had to call 9-1-1. If I ever have to report an emergency or a crime, I'll just call the non emergency number and I'll get the same response time. They already put this 1/4 cent tax mess to a vote and it was defeated. I say we all band together and defeat this back door double dealing again by opting out of the monthly service charge. Lets all start emailing Joe Howry and Rick Cole to give us the information we need to opt out.
Posted by bbbdugout on January 30, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Taxation without representation - the city council should be ashamed of themselves - walks like a duck, quacks like a duck - yep probably a duck - also think about it - the signs on the freeway say call 911 when you spot a drunk driver - really - as a voting member of society I'd say to the city council - shove it......
Posted by ThatsRubbish on January 30, 2008 at 9:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
OK here is my 2 cents. $1.49 per month or $50.00 per call. This fee (TAX) is going to 911 communications and is writing as a communications fee. So can someone please tell me how we get 6 Police Officers and 3 Firemen? If the fee is for communications shouldn't it there?
Hum sounds like typical government spining the truth.
Posted by bbbdugout on January 30, 2008 at 10:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The current mayor says the city runs pretty lean - who are you kidding - if you look at the benefits and retirement packages these people get you'd know the word lean doesn't mean many city paid employees - recall time might be upon us
Posted by thegreatpumpkin on January 30, 2008 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ventura City Police is mad because they are getting calls for service at night. Have you tried to call their business line after 6pm? The department is CLOSED! The ONLY way you can get a police officer is by calling 911. So if you are going to "incoviencence" the Ventura Police Department and call them away from their usual hang-outs behind the old city hall or the nearest Ralphs or Vons, you are going to have to pay.
And God help you if you want them to take a report on a burglary, theft, or traffic collision that occured on private property. They WON'T! If you are lucky, they will send you your own report in the mail.
Oh yeah, don't ask them to enforce a Child Custody order either. According to Lt. Fenwick (the watch commander who receives complaints), they are "too vague" and "the court's responsibility, not ours."
Poor housing market or not, I'm moving to Camarillo. The City of Ventura is a joke.
Posted by thegreatpumpkin on January 30, 2008 at 10:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe the citizens should come together and demand the city be patrolled by the Sheriff's Department.
Or maybe we can request "To Protect and Serve" be removed from the doors of every Ventura City Police car. If they won't remove it, I'll sue them for false advertising!
Posted by InaHurry on January 30, 2008 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What would happen if residents called the Sheriff's Dept. in an emergency instead? Can't they then provide access for ambulance, fire etc? Or would this even be a way to sidestep the tax (fee)? Just curious if anyone knows.
Posted by Franko on January 30, 2008 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This sounds like the town back east that charges non residents 150.00 per police response when involved in a traffic accident to recover police costs.
How about a toll to cross the bridge on the Santa Clara and Ventura River?
Great ideas.....NOT!!
Posted by szampese-perez on January 30, 2008 at 11:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am just curious... When I have called 911 in the past I have waited for the police to show up and maybe after a half hour or so I have to call again sometimes it is even busy then what happens are we charged everytime even though they are not showing up to an emergency? I think this whole thing is silly, I think we as tax paying citizens should be allowed to call for emergencies without being charged. I hear all the time people don't want to get involved when there is a problem that they see, this will now add to that thought and they really will not want to call. What is wrong with Politics it is always about the money and not the PEOPLE...
Posted by Wendy_Halderman on January 30, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ideally, the city should be looking to reduce the costs of the call center, and then use the savings to fund the desired new safety positions. The call center is way too expensive at around $9,400 per day. The highest percentage of calls received are from people looking for food and shelter.
If the 911 call center ONLY fielded calls for true emergencies, it would cut operating costs dramatically, and eliminate the need for any new taxes. Perhaps an automatic call-routing system is in order.
Taxpayers should not be asked to fund limitless expenses for operations which have little or no accountability for cost-effectiveness.
Posted by docventura on January 30, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Let's not be choosing between two alternatives ($1.49 or $50.) that we don't want but explore other options. We should charge an amount for calls to 911 that are not emergencies,say a $100. fee.How many calls are now received that are non-emergency? The non-emergency phone number should be advertised so we know it as well as 911.How many votes for this idea?
Posted by stnerhno on January 30, 2008 at 12:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Next time you see any of these councilmen's name on any ballot vote against them. Better yet recall the mayor. When the appeal in the Stockton case is upheld the city is going to be in a bind to repay the public. The same thing is going to happen in the city of Ventura.
Posted by rebel123 on January 30, 2008 at 12:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Clearly the opt out option is punitive by design. Monthly fees for a year will be $17.88. How do one tithey justify a per call fee of $50 for those who opt out?
Posted by shaver_one on January 30, 2008 at 12:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why are businesses being limited to only three lines, and regular citizens have to cough up for every line?
Does Ventura consider Big Business more important than the citizens that elected them to office?
But, Big Business has more money to pay under the table.
Posted by babsb45 on January 30, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would really hope that the city council is taking note of the negative response that the citizens of Ventura are giving to their illegal tax, but I doubt it. In their arrogance they figure that no one will even take notice. They don't advertise how to opt out because they know that if enough people did it, their little plan would not work. They make it hard to opt out by requiring you to apply in writing to the treasurer why you want to opt out and then, after review, he will send you the paperwork to do so. They figure most people won't take the time or effort to do it and just accept the monthly fee (which for me will be $107.28 a year).
I didn't vote for these people and I would completely support a recall of all that voted for this TAX, which would be all but 1 of the city council.
Posted by tnotg on January 30, 2008 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And here is how to protest this illegal tax.
(805) 654-2380 is the number for the Ventura County Sheriff's Department. Save it in your cell phone now. When you have an emergency...call them. Do you think they dare *not* handle an emergency coming in on that line? I would think not.
Civil protest...sometimes the only way to enact change when the government breaks the law.
Posted by anonrp on January 30, 2008 at 1:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How does this make since...The Fire Department and AMR is dispatched through County Fire. How do you call sending a letter to a burglary victim customer service? Why not send someone over to look for fingerprints so there can be an arrest later on? That why to punk will face a longer prison term and the victim may recover some of their belongings. There is already a E9-1-1 fee on the phone bill to pay for maintenance.
Posted by anonrp on January 30, 2008 at 1:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Calling 9-1-1 automaticly routers your call to Ventura on a landline. On a cell phone, (depending on where you are and carrier) it will send the call to Ventura PD or Ventura CHP. If you call the Sheriff's Dept. they will just tell you to call Ventura PD.
Posted by DoctorDude on January 30, 2008 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Count me out. I ain't paying.
Posted by DoctorDude on January 30, 2008 at 2:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One way to save money for more firefighters is to have engine 2 on Seaward cut back on their daily sightseeing trips through the beach communities of Pierpont and the Harbor. They can save a bundle on the diesel fuel it costs for these excursions.
Posted by BeaHappi on January 30, 2008 at 4:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I've long thought that there should be a non-emergency three-digit number, just like 9-1-1. So call 911 for an emergency and let's say 511 for regular police business.
I'm guessing that many of the non-emergency calls made to 911 are simply because people don't know the regular # and don't want to take the time to look it up.
Posted by smitty29 on January 30, 2008 at 4:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is rediculous. A tax is a tax! I agree that the city needs to charge the people abusing the system not those who actually need to use it. Charge people $50 for non emergencies and they will ultimately reduce those calls which will lower the costs of the call center and then they can utilize that money for more officers and firefighters. Our taxes already pay for this and other city's are able to make due. How can they charge for a cell phone when we are already being taxed by our cell providers for 911? I smell a rat! I love how City Council makes these decisions for us. Great job you fools!
Posted by hfciv on January 30, 2008 at 4:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Everyone should sign up for the $50 per call option and use the non-911 numbers below as needed:
From the ventura police dept. website
Contact Information
Emergency 9-1-1 Business Phone 805-339-4400 After Hours or Non-Emergency Phone 805-650-8010
Posted by NothingButTheTruth on January 30, 2008 at 4:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
At least I can say I didn't vote for any of these knuckleheaded council persons in the last election. Are they going to give CHP $1.49 for calls that come into CHP dispatch center for VPD?
Posted by pfg93003 on January 30, 2008 at 6:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hmmm, let see we pays sales tax on EVERYTHING we buy, income tax, property tax, car tax, utility tax, and on and on. you give the city $1 and they spend $1.10 and they always come back with we need more police. You do support the police and fire dept. dont you? I see many are sick of it also. Opt out of the $1.49 and change your phone to VOIP and get your cell phones from outside Vta.
With the redlight cameras costing $2500 each per month (10,000 per intersection) cut all those out and pay for the officers. I would rather see money spent on a human than a camera that only enforces one law. Time to elect a better council
Posted by lrgvanman on January 30, 2008 at 7:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
To jmcgaw3046 and the many other supporters: it is the principals...you are already being charged and now you will be charged again. Charge the abusers, but you know that'll never happen like that, will it? Time to make money even if it ain't right.
Posted by THX1138 on January 30, 2008 at 8:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I checked my phone bill and sure enough under "Gov Fees & Taxes" it lists:
#11: 911 Emergency System - .11
#13: Local Tax - $1.15
So this new "fee" is more than doubling the exiting tax!
It would be interesting to see what non-essential programs are still being funded[?!]. It goes without saying that we need to employ a council that can live within the existing budget.
Like many others I hope this fee/tax is appealed like it was in Stockton...
Posted by VCNative on January 30, 2008 at 9:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Typical unions, when they passed the 3% @ 50 retirement for the police, they said there's plenty of money in the budget to cover the additional millions it cost the city. Then a few years later Ventura tried to pass a sales tax increase because the police department was broke. When that failed (the public voted against it) they sneaked in a "fee" on the 911 service. Check out what a Ventura cop gets on his retirement to see where all the money goes, talk about waste, fraud and abuse.
Posted by Face on January 30, 2008 at 9:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Land lines are so 90's. I use VOIP and cell phones that are not taxable by local authorities. I grew tired of unknown and illegal taxation of my lines.
Posted by 50Luva on January 30, 2008 at 9:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
While I don't agree with government passing fees or taxes without voter approval, they're going to do it anyways. However, there are ways to go throught the proper channels to fight them.
Seriously, growlerboy, a waste? Do you put on a bulletproof vest to go to work every day? I bet not... if you did, you'd have a differing opinion. It's all relative.
Posted by charlese on January 30, 2008 at 9:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It seems very simple. Rick Cole and the City Council will not be happy until the middle class has left Ventura. And Rick will do it by nickle and diming us to death.
Posted by VCNative on January 30, 2008 at 9:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
50Luva,
The point I'm saying is that we are already paying for this service. So when the unions keep asking for more and more where does the money come from? Answer, taxpayers! There is no free lunch. No I don't wear a bulletproof vest, but I also can't retire at age 50 with guarranteed benefits such as fat penisions, medical, annual COLAs. It is all relative. If the unions ran the department unchecked, it would bankrupt the city!
Posted by hkwahl on January 30, 2008 at 9:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is scary. There are vague promises that calling on behalf of another won't incur a charge. But if my child is ever hurt, I don't want anyone to waste time thinking "Is this one of those exceptions? Or do I have to pay $50? SURELY someone else will call."
They might as well have called it the Samaritan Tax. If City Council goes through with this, they'd better set aside all the money they collect, because all it takes is ONE person dying from this terrible plan, and they can mail all their Samaritan Tax money to the victim's family's lawyer.
Posted by shaver_one on January 31, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Here's an idea that just came to mind.
Let Wal-Mart build in Ventura and use the sales-tax money generated to pay for 9-1-1 services.
Posted by interested on January 31, 2008 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How do you opt out?
Posted by stnerhno on January 31, 2008 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am just curious, how many of you were at the council meeting to oppose this tax in person rather after the fact?
Posted by GravyTrain on January 31, 2008 at 9:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm sure that all the Government cell phones and landlines will be exempt! Just like the licence plates that you see on the county vehicles are "Ca Exempt" while they are sitting in front of restaurants and stores like Fry's, ect...(Not counting police and Fire Vehicles!!). You do not see this often, BUT, If you are looking you will see them there at times! You have to keep your eyes open! You will see it!
So now here is a question that I did not see in this article or the comments list...What happens when someone comes into the cell area in Ventura from say Santa Barbara and calls 911? Do they get the $50.00 fee added to their phone bill or are they going to get a sneeky $1.49 added to their bill and not notice it? Humm?
Welp any way, My vote for this mess is to opt out if I can find the form to fill out for my cell phone and my two land lines that I have!
Posted by Face on January 31, 2008 at 9:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here is what you do, when you have a heart attack, call 911 and tell them, "I think I am being robbed, and I am having a heart attack." You are not lying, and then you may not have to pay the $50.00.
Posted by alhynson on February 1, 2008 at 7:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This mess has me angry as of 2/01/2008. The council passed the s c gas franchise with a fee increase for additional emergency support. The council also has plans for a fee increase to the s c electric franchise which I will now oppose. I will contact s c electric to inform them to oppose any such fee increase to their franchise renewal.
Sorry cops & firefighters. Your council blew it. There will be expensive lawsuits & litigation over the phone service fee. Who's going to pay the legal services.
I was comfortable with the idea of service fee on the gas & electric franchises. Now, who must I contact to sign petitions to stop this pompous mismanagement.
There's going to be protests & possibly a riot at city hall should the council even suggests a service fee to the s c electric franchise.
Posted by carebear on February 1, 2008 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ok, maybe this is a stupid question but what about disturbance calls? I have had to call 911 to turn someone in for excessive noise after midnight. I tried calling the line for non-emergencies but was instructed to call 911. To me that was not an emergency but a nuisance and calling 911 seemed unnecessary. So what now? Do I need to decide which I would rather lose...sleep or $50.
Posted by Jesus on February 1, 2008 at 9:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is the same people who gave Mr. Cole a $400K interest-free loan to purchase a house in Vta. when he took the job. They also have rented city property for $100/mo. to Aloha restaurant.
But what I really want to know is how do we recall the mayor and fire Mr. Cole??? I am willing to do the leg work if someone comes up with the legal knowledge to do so.
Posted by miles2david on February 1, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
e-mail citymanger@ci.ventura.ca.us
Call city manager rick cole at 654-7740
They will ack dumb and send you to watch commander for answers, (339-4398 call him also) which he has none. But take 2 minutes and do this anyway just to show were watching them try to sneak in this_tax_ without a vote. Maybe its
time to change some jobs around.
Posted by cheese94000 on February 1, 2008 at 11:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
WELL LETS SEE FIRST IF THIS IS A PROBLEM IM TALKING ABOUT THE $$$$$ THEN HOW DID WE DO IT THESE PAST YEARS. LET FIGURE SOMETHING HERE IF WE EXPECT TO HAVE LESS 911 CALLS THEN WHY WOULD WE NEED THE EXTRA POLICE OR THE EXTRA FIREMEN,WHY DONT WE TAX A $.25 TAX ON ALL LAND AND CELL PHONES AND GIVE THE EXISTING POLICE AND FIREMEN A RAISE. ONE MORE THING IF OUR CITY HALL IS HAVING $$$$ PROBLEMS MAYBE WE NEED SOMEONE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BRING TAXABLE STORES AND SHOPS WHO WILL NOT ONLY BRING TAX MONIES BUT HELLO PEOPLE JOBSSSSSSS TO OUR CITY. THIS IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY NO 911 CALLS MORE CRIME AND EXISTING COPS DONT GET PAID WHAT THEY SHOULD SO THEY DONT CARE THATS WHY WHEN U SEE THEM NOW THEY ARE ALLWAYS ON THEIR CELL PHONES.
Posted by cheese94000 on February 1, 2008 at 11:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
People think about what is going on housing market it is going down and guessssss what peoples property value is going down. Some people are going down to the city to have there taxes evaluated because there homes are worth less and the county is lowering there tax bill so less city tax tooooooo so there is the excuse of a 911 tax. So its a masking tape. Some one for the city messed up on that calculator projected funds sorry yes only projected. yup not this year.
Posted by stnerhno on February 1, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What about pre paid cell phones they have no bill!
Posted by cheese94000 on February 1, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
EXAMPLE A OLD LADY HAD A CAR ACCIDENT WITH A WALL WORTH $50 RISK, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER SLIPPED INTO A DITCH NOT WORTH $50 BUCKS JUST LIKE 1/2 VENTURA LIVING PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK.
Posted by nlss143 on February 2, 2008 at 3:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In response to DoctorDude, get a life, would you rather firefighters sit in the station all day? How due you know they (Medic Engine 2) were not on or clearing a non emergency call? it is called knowing your sector, interacting with the public, and public education. Stick to being a doctor, leave the public service/ safety to the firefighters and cops!
Posted by yotonto on February 3, 2008 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's going to cost more to administer the program than people think. Whatever they take in via this tax is utimately going to the staff of personnel sworn and non-sworn to see which calls are valid or not. So what good did the tax do. The original intent of it was spent somwhere else.
Posted by stnerhno on February 4, 2008 at 1:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Telephone customers in California currently pay a monthly surcharge that supports the 911 emergency telephone system. The current surcharge rate is 0.72 percent (under current law, it can be increased up to 0.75 percent of a customer’s monthly bill for phone calls made within the state). The surcharge applies to each telephone bill a customer may receive. Revenues are used to reimburse government agencies (that would be Ventura Police and fire) and telephone companies for equipment and related costs associated with California’s 911 system.
Posted by 50Luva on February 4, 2008 at 8:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All of you that are so concerned with police being on their cell phones... they have work cell phones that they communicate to dispatch and each other with regarding WORK. This frees up the radio traffic for emergency purposes. Just so you know...
Posted by bill on February 4, 2008 at 9:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I know a good lawyer to contact for the first family to have someone die because no one would call 911 due to the fee...I would wager a local jury would award a mighty large award against the City of Ventura, probably much more than they will take in from the fee. By the way, I will opt out of the tax.
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
There are 57 comments to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.