California leaders are hoping to roll out the state’s modernized 911 system as quickly as possible in light of the project’s delays and ballooning cost.

The California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services released an implementation plan last week outlining how the agency plans to transition to a new approach for a more modern 911 system after state leaders decided last year to scrap the design that cost California more than $450 million.

On Wednesday, members of Cal OES 911 Advisory Board, which is made up of leaders from various stakeholder groups, had an opportunity to discuss the latest plan. They had concerns about the state’s “ambitious” timeline, how much California has already sunk into the project and whether the agency has a backup plan in the event more challenges arise.

“I’m advising, on behalf of the group that I represent, to have a new plan B for when things either go right or go wrong, so you have better tracking and less money is spent on something that ends up getting scrapped,” Santa Barbara County Deputy Fire Chief Garrett Huff, a board member, said Wednesday.

The implementation plan comes after the delayed project has attracted scrutiny from both national and state leaders, who have raised public safety concerns and alarm about the potential misspending of public dollars.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr sent Gov. Gavin Newsom a letter last week demanding information about the project and accusing the state of mismanaging federal funds. Shortly after, two California Republicans proposed oversight legislation and requested a state audit of the 911 modernization effort, citing similar concerns listed in the FCC’s letter.

“We definitely take seriously the responsibility that comes with building a high-technology system across the state of California, understanding the taxpayer money doesn’t grow on trees,” Steve Yarbrough, Cal OES deputy director of public safety communications, said. “We need to definitely be prudent with every dollar that we invest in the system.”

Vendor said plan ignores why Cal OES scrapped original design

One of Newsom’s first priorities as governor was to retire California’s legacy 911 infrastructure in favor of a more modern system that could better locate callers seeking emergency services and allow people to communicate using text messaging and video calls. Cal OES hired several contractors to build out a regional system that contained backup measures to ensure people could always reach 911 dispatchers, even if one provider went down.

When Cal OES started rolling out the new system in 2024 issues arose. The state paused the rollout of the new system, and the following year Cal OES informed several of the vendors that it planned to adopt a new statewide design and eventually end their contracts with the state. Cal OES said in those letters that the vendors were not at fault for issues with the system.

The state is now in the process of redesigning a new system that will rely on two statewide 911 providers, one to act as a primary provider and another as backup.

One of the vendors whose contract with Cal OES is ending said that the agency has still not provided evidence that the existing regional Next Generation 911 system is unsafe or nonfunctional.

“What is missing from the plan is a transparent, data-driven analysis comparing the current system to the proposed alternative,” said Don Ferguson, the co-founder and CEO of NGA, one vendor that is the Next Generation 911 provider in two of the state’s four regions. “To date, there has been no published cost-benefit evaluation, no independent engineering assessment, and no clear explanation for why abandoning an operational system is preferable to completing it.”

When asked about why Cal OES considers the current regional design flawed, department spokesperson Anita Gore said that working with multiple vendors is more complicated than just coordinating with a single company.

Ferguson said that Cal OES hasn’t provided an explanation for why the call for “simplification” is necessary. Given the project’s significant bill to taxpayers, the state should be conducting a “transparent, independent, data-driven review” of why a new design is needed, he said.

Latest plan lays out “ambitious” timeline

During the November advisory board meeting, members expressed frustration with the lack of details and timeline for the eventual rollout of the updated system. According to the latest timeline, Cal OES hopes to transition all public safety answering points, or dispatch centers, to the Next Generation 911 system over the next four years.

Yarbrough said Cal OES was working to move the end date of the project closer because the current legacy infrastructure the state’s 911 system relies on “isn’t getting any younger” and to ensure communities receive the benefits of Next Generation 911. Cal OES plans to prioritize transitioning dispatch centers in the Los Angeles region to the Next Generation system in preparation for the 2028 Olympic Games when the state expects an influx of visitors.

Currently, 23 dispatch centers use elements of the more advanced emergency communication system, but none of the state’s more than 450 911 call centers have been fully transitioned to the modern 911 system.

Board member and Santa Clara County Sheriff Bob Jonsen noted that Cal OES’ plan was “very ambitious.” The sheriff expressed concern about the timeline, given the amount of time it has taken California to partially transition a handful of dispatch centers to the Next Generation system.

Under the newly released timeline, Cal OES plans to issue a request for proposal next month and hopes to select a vendor by the fall. In May, the agency plans to begin transitioning dispatch centers from the regional providers to the current statewide provider, Atos Public Safety. By spring of next year, the agency plans to end services with the regional providers.

To help speed up deployment of Next Generation 911, Cal OES plans to rely on the legacy providers, AT&T and Frontier, for locations services, instead of the regional vendors. Martinez City Police Chief Andrew White asked whether that decision would result in less quality of services, but a Cal OES official said that those companies are able to provide location data on a statewide basis.

Yarbrough said that the deadlines outlined in the implementation plan are “ballpark time frames that we’ve sketched out.” Once a new vendor has been selected, the agency plans to provide more concrete details.

Advisory board has concerns about its role

One board member raised concerns that Cal OES was merely providing updates to the board, rather than seeking its advice.

“Between now and when the (request for proposal) goes out and then stuff comes in, does the board have any say?” White said.

Additionally, White said one of the biggest pieces missing from the implementation plan was an estimate of how much more California would need to invest in the project. He said that board members like himself and others are the closest with local communities and taxpayers, who have questions about the total cost of this project.

Cal OES’ spokesperson, Gore, said that the agency can’t provide an estimate for the project’s future cost until a contract is in place.

Former Napa Police Chief Jennifer Gonzales said that in addition to the need for fiscal responsibility, Cal OES needs to ensure that there is a backup plan in the event that the project runs into future challenges.

“Now that we’re on plan B, (plan) C needs to be on deck,” she said.

____

©2026 The Sacramento Bee. Visit at sacbee.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.