Des Moines County officials raise alarm over last‑minute appropriation language letting state bill local 911 boards

3443751 · May 22, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Des Moines County officials told the Board of Supervisors on May 22 that a provision added at the end of the state appropriations bill could allow the statewide 9‑1‑1 system to bill local joint 9‑1‑1 boards for services, potentially reducing funds the county currently controls.

Des Moines County officials told the Board of Supervisors on May 22 that a provision added at the end of the state appropriations bill could let the statewide 9‑1‑1 system bill local joint 9‑1‑1 boards for services, potentially reducing funds the county currently controls.

County staff said the county receives 60¢ of every $1 collected from the 9‑1‑1 surcharge, with local boards retaining 40¢; those surcharge dollars are used for equipment, tower maintenance and local radio projects. “We get 60¢ of every $1 back here. Locally, they retain 40¢ of every $1, and that's the 9‑1‑1 surcharge that we all see on our cell phones and landlines,” the staff member said.

The county official said the change was inserted “in the very final section” of the appropriations bill and that the provision does not specify an amount or other limits, only that the state 9‑1‑1 system may bill local joint 9‑1‑1 boards for services. The official added that bills under the new language could be served with 30 days to pay, and said the county is concerned because the surcharge fund is one of the few county funds that may be rolled over for future projects and is audited with documented plans for use.

Supervisor Tom Broker identified the state bill by file number during the meeting, saying, “I believe it's Senate File 659.” The county official said they would email the board the relevant text; supervisors asked for the bill language to be circulated and for staff to track any action by the governor.

County staff said there has been local media attention and outreach to seek a line‑item veto of the provision, and that the county is monitoring whether the governor will remove the paragraph. The staff member said the county has had prior proposals that would have reduced local shares — citing a previous bill that would have reduced the county share to 50¢ for three years and then to 55¢ — and said the current provision appears to shift more of the burden onto locally collected surcharge dollars rather than local property tax dollars.

No formal action was taken by the supervisors at the meeting; supervisors asked staff to send the bill text to the board and to continue tracking developments.

The issue affects the county's DESCOM (dispatch) operations and ongoing radio projects that have been paid for out of the surcharge fund, according to county remarks. The board requested further details and written language for review before any formal county action.