Bill Summary for Bill Number HB09-1041

Date: 01/20/2009

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB09-1041

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Votes: View-->	Action Taken:
Moved to refer House Bill 09-1041 to the Committee	PASS

01:31 PM

The chair, Representative Peniston, called the meeting to order and made opening comments concerning the bills assigned to the committee and upcoming meetings.

01:35 PM -- House Bill 09-1041

Representative Gerou, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 09-1041, concerning a fire protection district board's authority to set fees for emergency medial services. Representative Gerou discussed the role of fire protection districts to respond to certain emergencies and distributed a handout to the committee concerning the number of fire protection districts impacted by the bill (Attachment A). She discussed the need for the bill to clarify the powers of fire protection districts to assist districts that have smaller budgets. The bill would allow fire protection districts to charge a fee for services for the arrival of an ambulance, the rescue or extrication of trapped or injured parties, and lane safety or blocking provided by district equipment. Representative Gerou responded to questions about the bill, specifically whether insurance companies would pay fees allowed by the bill, and how the bill would affect the relationship between ambulance districts and fire protection districts. She also responded to questions from the committee members regarding the costs of services incurred by a fire protection district, and she talked about specific costs that fire protection districts incur for emergency response services.

01:54 PM

T.J. Carney, volunteer firefighter, Foothills Fire Protection District, testified in support of the bill and talked about his role in organizing the budget of the Foothills Fire Protection District. Mr. Carney discussed the need to clarify state law to allow fire protection districts to continue assessing fees for the specific emergency services provided in the bill. He explained that fire protection districts are usually first responders to emergencies and discussed the relationship between fire protection districts and ambulance companies. Mr. Carney clarified that the bill does not allow fire protection districts to charge for fire fighting, but rather for specific emergency services provided to individuals that do not live in the district. He responded to questions regarding the costs of emergency services provided by fire protection districts and the collection of fees. Mr. Carney talked about the collection process by fire protection districts, discussed the budgets of fire protection districts, and explained that typical emergency services can cost districts between $800 to $1,500 and extractions from a vehicle could cost $2,000 to $3,000.

02:14 PM

Mr. Carney and Representative Gerou responded to questions concerning the intent of the legislation and the need for fire protection districts to assess fees for emergency services.

02:21 PM

Nick Boukas, Deputy Chief, Evergreen Fire and Rescue District, testified in support of the bill and explained the need to help fire protection districts like the Evergreen Fire and Rescue District assess fees for specific emergency services. Chief Boukas discussed the characteristics of the Evergreen Fire Rescue District and explained the collection procedures for emergency services provided by the district. Mr. Boukas responded to questions concerning the costs for a fire protection district to provide emergency response services and explained that some districts are not authorized to charge for vehicle extraction based on the service plans of each district.

02:28 PM

Paul Cooke, Executive Director, Colorado State Fire Chiefs, testified in support of the bill and distributed a handout to the committee (Attachment B). Director Cooke discussed the definition of emergency services and fire protection, and talked about the authority to assess emergency response fees according to state law and the service plan of a fire protection district. He explained that emergency response and rescue calls are increasing while the need for fire protection is decreasing for many fire protection districts that were originally formed specifically for fire protection. Director Cooke responded to questions regarding the need for clarity in state law for the specific authority of fire protection districts to charge for the emergency response services outlined in House Bill 09-1041. He explained that the service plans of fire protection districts do not always provide for emergency services to individuals who did not live within the fire protection district.

02:40 PM

Representative Gerou addressed questions from the committee concerning taxation of fire protection districts and she explained the bill would provide the authority to assess a fee for emergency services, which is allowed under Section 20, of Article X of the state constitution (TABOR).

02:43 PM

Brandon LaSalle, representing American Family Insurance Company, testified in support of the bill and discussed emergency services and insurance policies. Mr. LaSalle explained that the bill would only provide a technical change to state law regarding fees assessed by fire protection districts. He discussed insurance coverage for emergencies and explained that fees for damages could be claimed through the liability coverage of a guilty party if pursued by an insurance claim.

02:47 PM

Brian Zoril, Foothills Fire Protection District, testified in support of the bill, and discussed the need to clarify state law. Mr. Zoril talked about the costs of emergency vehicle extraction and explained that fire protection districts do not always have the authority to collect for the costs of extraction. He discussed the process for districts to collect for the cost of providing emergency services.

02:52 PM

Representative Gerou entered closing comment on the bill and asked for the committee's support.


BILL:	HB09-1041
TIME:	02:53:00 PM
MOVED:	Middleton
MOTION:	Moved to refer House Bill 09-1041 to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed on an 11-0 vote.
SECONDED:	Acree
		VOTE
	Acree	Yes
	Bradford	Yes
	Liston	Yes
	McKinley	Yes
	Middleton	Yes
	Schafer S.	Yes
	Tipton	Yes
	Vigil	Yes
	Waller	Yes
	Soper	Yes
	Peniston	Yes

Final YES: 11 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

02:55 PM

The committee adjourned.