A judge ruled in favor of the city of Madison Friday, following a suit the city brought against Dane County in February, designating which groups have the authority to determine policy within the 911 Center.

Judge Juan Colas ruled that it is the Public Safety Communications Center Board, not County Executive Kathleen Falk or Dane County 911 Center Director John Dejung that will set policies and operating practices for the center, which has seen controversy in recent months regarding its automated attendant system.

The system directs non-emergency calls, previously handled by dispatchers within the 911 Center, to the automated system that routes calls ranging from complaints and questions on ordinances to their respective departments, freeing up the time of the dispatchers.

Implementing this system was a facet of the revamping of the 911 Center following an audit as to how to best handle emergency dispatch and response throughout the county.

The system’s directing of parking enforcement calls and dispatching of officers to the city of Madison prompted the disagreement between the city and county. City officials noted this development could cost the city as much as $33,000 annually.

On February 19, Judge Colas ruled the county could not implement the parking enforcement function of the system. Falk put the system, with the aforementioned exception, into effect the following day.

Marcia MacKenzie, attorney for the county, disagreed with the city’s position that the power of the board, rather than that of the 911 Center or Falk, was the determining factor.

“Is this advisory? No. Is this policymaking? No,” MacKenzie said.

She added it was the county’s position that the board was merely an advisory body to the 911 Center. Colas ruled although Dejung serves as the administrator for the department and Falk holds veto power over decisions with significant financial impact, the board’s authority cannot be overlooked.

The board is comprised of agency representatives from a range of Dane County municipalities not strictly of the county, City Attorney Michael May said, citing the service of the Madison Police Department’s Capt. Carl Gloede on the board.

Colas ultimately decided the ability to establish practices or alter existing ones is a power resting solely with the Public Safety Communications Center Board. The February implementation, he said, should probably not have been carried out without explicit approval and support from the board.

“I don’t think that the ordinance intrudes on the administration of the county executive,” Colas said.

May noted it was not the system itself that was the focus of the city’s lawsuit, simply the portion that would require the city to pay to dispatch parking enforcement officers. He then requested that Colas’ previous decision to prevent further changes within the center be maintained until the board meets again.

A meeting of the Public Safety Communications Center Board is set for this coming Wednesday to discuss the implementation of the system and the implications of this ruling.