A county board comprised of representatives from a number of local emergency and enforcement agencies unanimously approved a previously disputed automated attendant system for the county’s 911 Center Wednesday.

The system was implemented after an audit of the 911 Center found emergency dispatchers handled a large amount of non-emergency calls, using time that could otherwise have gone toward responding to calls for assistance by emergency services.

Many present at the meeting said they felt the system had so far been effective, but some changes needed to be made to ensure its continued success.

A motion was made at the meeting to approve the system with three specific clauses: the city would not be forced to handle parking dispatch, a monthly audit of the system’s effectiveness be reported and a greater emphasis on public education be enacted to inform county residents as to the system’s use.

“Getting the word out is going to be critical to its success,” said Ald. Paul Skidmore, District 9, and Public Safety Communications Center Board member.

The board then passed the system unanimously.

The system, officially implemented in February by Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk, seeks to lessen the number of non-emergency calls handled by the county’s 911 Center. Prior to this, calls regarding directions, transfers to city agencies and parking were taken and addressed by dispatchers within the center.

A controversy over the system’s implementation brought representatives of Dane County and the city of Madison to court as recently as last Friday to address concerns over the system’s intention of routing calls pertaining to the dispatching of parking enforcement officers to the city of Madison.

At issue were costs associated with this dispatching and who had the authority to implement and modify operational practices within the 911 Center. Circuit Judge Juan Colas ruled the county could not force the city to foot the bill for dispatching officers, and the final authority of operating practices within the 911 Center rested with the Center Board.

John Dejung, director of the 911 Center, said 18 percent of all non-emergency calls received between March 1 and April 2 were handled by the auto-attendant system.

Had parking calls been included in the auto-attendant system, 25 percent of calls could have been handled without the intervention of human dispatchers.

Joel Plant, assistant to Mayor Dave Cieslewicz, elaborated on the concerns held by city staff, which, in addition to the parking dispatch, prompted the lawsuit.

“The legal issue in question was who has the authority to establish operating practices in the public safety communications center,” Plant said.

The implementation of the auto-attendant system was determined by Colas to be an operating practice rather than an administrative issue to be handled by Falk and Dejung.

Rather than having the implementation reversed, the city requested the Center Board officially approve the system’s implementation.