House approves retirement reclassification for dispatchers amid fiscal and precedent concerns

The Utah House on March 2 approved HB 115, which classifies state public‑safety dispatchers as public safety officers for retirement benefits. Representative Power, the bill sponsor, told the chamber that dispatchers face intense, repeated exposure to traumatic incidents and that many have been misclassified in retirement systems.

"They are essentially law enforcement personnel," the sponsor said, arguing that dispatchers perform critical, high‑stress duties and should have the option of public safety retirement benefits. He stressed the provision is voluntary for counties and cities and that the state's fiscal note covers only state employees.

Opponents questioned whether the change extends benefits to employees who do not face the same physical danger as firefighters and police officers and raised concerns about precedent and costs. Representative Fossum asked whether the intent was to make the benefits more attractive to potential hires; others noted the potential to extend such classifications more broadly in the future.

Representative Noel questioned the fiscal note, noting an ongoing state cost of about $309,000; Representative Power and others clarified the fiscal estimate covered state dispatchers and that counties would decide locally whether to adopt the same classification for their employees.

Supporters including Representative Perry and others countered that dispatchers are central to emergency response and that reclassification would help recruitment and retention. "Their lives really are on the line just as much as anyone else in public safety," the sponsor said in response to concerns about parity with field personnel.

House bill 115 passed with a final tally of 49 yea and 21 nay and will be transmitted to the Senate for further consideration.