Police Advisory Commission Agenda 03-15-1995AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO POLICE COMMISSION
Wednesday, March 16, 1996 - 7 p.m.
Members: Warren Smith, Jim Fleming, David Gerads, Liz Demarais, Brian
Stumpf
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held Wednesday, March 1.
3. Consideration of reviewing propased final draft of study comparing
contracting for police protection services versus establishing a local police
department.
4. Adjournment.
(~~ sr d 4~ ~ ~~ ~. r ~ e~ ~~ ~,.~, _~._. ,
C]
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING _ MONTICELLO POLICE ADVISORY COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 1995 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Warren Smith, Liz DesMarais, Dave Gerads,
Brian Stumpf Councilmember,
Rick Wolfsteller City Administrator
Also Present: Sheriff Dan Hozempa, Chief Deputy Linder.
This meeting was utilized to review a study undertaken by the
Police Advisory Commission. This study dealt with the pros and
cons of contracting protective services (Wright County Sheriff)
verses having a city provided police department.
The study was reviewed line by line and additions and deletions
made as necessary. The final draft will be completed and again
reviewed at the next scheduled meeting. The meeting adjourned at
9:22 p.m. with no other items discussed.
Next meeting scheduled for Wednesday, March 15, 1995 at 7:00 p.m.
at Ci y Hall.
h -~
ecretary,
Monticello Police Advisory Commission
C7
Special Police Commission Agenda - 3/15/95
3. Consideration of reviewin ro osed final draft of stud com ari.n
contractin for olice rotection services versus establishin a local
police department. (R.W.)
Since the initial review of the preliminary draft of our study, Chairman
Warren Smith has taken the comments and changes that were discussed at
our last meeting, March 1, and prepared a final draft copy of the study on
contracting versus having our own police department. A few additional
comments regarding the pros and cons of having a police department office
located in our own community were incorporated into the text after I had
received these comments from some police chiefs I had talked to. In
addition, an estimate of the patrol hours that the cities of Big Lake, Buffalo,
and Waite Park provide as part of their annual budget is included as we
discussed. While it is not possible to get the exact hours that each of these
communities may have in patroling, the numbers are estimates based on a
typical work year for a patrolman in each community and assumes that
three weeks per year are lost due to vacation and sick leave by each
patrolman.
Please review the draft copy of the study and make note of any changes or
corrections/additions you would like to see the members discuss. Hopefully
we'll be able to come to an agreement on a final draft that we can then
bring forward to the City Council at our March 27 Council meeting.
•
•
ANALYZING THE PROS AND CONS OF A POLICE FORCE
THE MONTICELLO POLICE COMMISSION'S
COMPARISON STUDY OF COUNTY CONTRACTING
vs.
ESTABLISI3ING A LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT
y~ ~~ -_._-.-~.----~ .FINAL DRAFT -MARCH 1996
Members of the Monticello Police Commission:
Warren Smith, Chairperson
James Fleming, Vice Chairperson
David Gerads, Secretary
Liz Desmarais
Brian Stumpf, City Council Representative
•
The number ane question asked of the Police Commission and the City Council
regarding public safety is "Why doesn't the City of Monticello have a local police
. department?" The question is really comprised of two specific allegations:
Wouldn't we be better off with our own force from both a ublic safet osition
and an economic stand oint? The factors of consideration in trying to answer
these implications are complex. Tn a major effort to fulfill our assignment to be an
advisory committee to the City Council, the Police Commission has undertaken a
comprehensive study of these issues to arrive at a determination.
CQNTENTS
1. Brief historical background of the police contract.
2. Data from other cities and counties in Minnesota with comparable
demographics to Monticello.
3. Some practical, political, and philosophical considerations of police
protection. ~'~~~ ~n,~~,~.~( ~,~
4. Estimate of start-u costs'in establishin a cit alice de artment
P g ~ YP P
5. Conclusions.
~~
POLSTt1DY: 3/8/95 Page 2
1. Brief historical back ound of the olice contract.
. In early 1971, the Monticello Village Council began debating the possibility
of switching to a contract with the Wright County Sheriffs Department for
police coverage. Debate focused on four main considerations--cost,
equipment, coverage, and traffic control. The village had concerns about
controlling all four of these factors. Final approval fox the county contract
came later in the year, a n~c~ on October 1 the new system became operative.
The cost of operatvn th police department was $28,000 (in 1970). The new ~~ 7 L
county contract was set at $20,400.
At the time of the change, Monticello employed a police chief and one o F~'~~~ ~'
~. They were "in uniform 17 hours per day...including the time it
takes them to complete paperwork" (Monticello Times, August 12, 1971).
The new county coverage gave Monticello 16-18 hours of patrol time in two
shifts. For the first full year (1972), the contract was for 5,840 hours.
Monticello was the third city to sign on with the County for police services.
The cities of Waverly and Cokato had begun contracts with the County in
1970.
The original county contract was renewed again January 1, 1.972, and has
been continually renewed since then by succeeding City Councils.
CHART QN CONTRACT HISTORY
Year Amount Hours
1972 $ 3.65 5,840
1976 6.00 6,504
1977 7.25 6,504
1978 9.00 6,504
1979 10.50 6,504
1980 11.50 6,504
1981 12.50 6,504
1982 13.25 6,504
1983 15.52 6,504
1984 16.50 6,905
1985 17.00 6,905
19$6 18.00 6,905
1987 18.50 6,905
1988 19.50 6,905
1989 19.75 6,905
1990 20.50 6,905
1991 23.50 7,321
1992 26.00 7,321
. 1993 28.50 9,176
1994 30.50 9,176
1995 32.00 9,176
PQLSTUDY: 3/8/95 Page 3
2. Data from other cities and counties in Minnesota with com arable
demographics to Monticello.
In order to look at the cost of running a city police department, the Police
Commission chose to study our two nearest neighbors (Buffalo and Big
Lake) and at least one other city of similar size (Waite Park). In addition,
we wanted to see how other similar county sheriff departments compared
costwise to the services offered by Wright County. For that we received
data from Anoka and Carver Counties. (Information was also received from
Sherburne County; but because Sherburne County only provides a contract
with one small city, it doesn't appear to offer much for comparison sake.)
The following charts present the information that was gathered. In the
categories that list itemized expenses, it was difficult to determine whether
"apples were being compared to apples." While the Police Commission spent
a great deal of time discussing the validity of specific expenses, it was
generally agreed that the bottom line "total expenditures" represents
reasonably accurate figures with which to make comparisons.
One particular line item was analyzed in detail, and that was whether fine
money has a significant impact an lowering actual net operating casts of a
police department. Right now, under the county contract, the City of
Monticello gets no money from fines, nor does the City pay any expenses for
prosecution. In reviewing the information from other surrounding
communities, it appears that, generally speaking, the fine monies generated
are offset by the legal cost of prosecuting the offenses. For example, the
City of Buffalo estimates it will generate $26,500 in fine revenue, but it
expects to spend $20,000 in court/prosecution/legal costs. The net result is
not a large revenue source far the City of Buffalo ($6,500) in comparison to
their overall budget. Likewise, the City of Waite Park expects to collect
$56,000 in fines but will spend $42,000 in legal fees.
Generally speaking, it does not appear that fine money by itself can be used
as a substantial source of revenue to offset operating cast because legal fees
absorb most of the revenue generated.
In analyzing the fine money that is currently being generated in the city of
Monticello that is returned to the County, we are averaging approximately
$25,000 in revenue. If this is an accurate reflection of what we could expect
with our own police department, then it also could be assumed our legal
expenses to obtain this revenue would likewise be $20,000 or mare.
It should be noted that the annual police budgets for those communities
with their own departments do not include any costs for general
administration by city hall.
POLSTUDY: 3/8/95 Page 4
When comparing contracting versus a city department, some other
"nonvisual" behind-the-scenes activities should be kept in mind, including:
a) investigators for difficult crimes
b) backup for emergencies
c) additional patrols for special events
d) administration and secretarial services
e) union grievances
f~ D.A.R.E. (Drug Awareness Resistance Education)
This study makLs its comparisons based upon the 9,176 patrol hours the
City of Monticello has in its current contract. The Police Commission
assumed that the City would want to continue operating with 9,176 hours of
patrol coverage. The above list points out that there are significant factors
involved in police services above and beyond patrol time. The result would
~ be that additional employees would be needed in order for a city police
department to maintain the current levels of services offered by the county
contract.
.`
~ j~~ j ~~"'' N~
•
POLSTUDY: 3/8/95 Page 5
•
•
•
CITY OPERATED
POLICE DEPARTMENT
COST COMPARISON SUMMARIES
1994 Budget
(contract)
Buffalo Bi Lake Waite Park Monticello
DIRECT EXPENDITURES
~ / 3c/c! a ~~ ~
~~~~---
Estimated annual " atrol" hours
p
~~
S ~
9,600 9,176
L~
C
r
'1
~ .__-
1) Personnel
0
.~
a,~
I ~"
a) Police chief, patrolmen, etc. $403,736 $182,600 $273,875 $279,868
see em to ee breakdown below
2) Benefits
a Benefits $75,114 $44,000 $86,404
b) Clothing allowance $4,000 $2,4D0 $3,316
c Other - trainin 5 400 1 200 $6 850
3) Equipment
a New vehicle(s) and/or annual de rec. cost $31,250 $9,OOD
b) Gas, oil, maintenance $17,000 $11,000 $16,750
c Insurance vehicle & eneral liability $34,411 $25,000
d Other a uip -radios, uns, radar, mist $6,500 $3,300
e) Office equip - computers, t ewriters, etc. $2,350 $23,000
f Patrol su lies 1 150
4) Office/Building Costs
a Rent or buildin costs $7,220
b) Utilities, heat, hone $2,000 $2,600 $5,9D8
c Su lies -office ex ense $15,250 $5,100 $1,600
d Miscellaneous $21 450 2 900 6 480
5 Court/Prasecution/Le al Costs $20 000 24 000 42 000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $633,111 $314,520 $478,4$3 $279,868
(doss not ind
liab. ins. casts
POLSTiJDY: 3/8/95
Page 5a
•
•
Buffalo
Bi Lake
Waite Park (contract)
Monticello
REVENUES
1 State aid
36,000
$20,000
$32 700
$24,000
2 a) Court fines $25,000 $50,000 $50,450
b Parkin fines $1,500 $500 $6 360
3) Other - miscellanecus
a) Trainin costs reimbursement
$2,500
$2,300
b Police re its co ies $500
c) Special police services $2,000
d Other, Dare Pro ram revenue, etc. $15,000 $4,500
e Sale of ro ert 2 000
TOTAL REVENUES 84 500 $75 000 $91 810 24 000
ANNUAL NET OPERATING COSTS (1994) $548,611 $239,52D $386,673 $255,868
(9176 hrs @
30.50/hr
MISC DATA -NUMBER OF E MPLOYEES
Chief 1 1 1
Sergeant(s) 1 1
Investi ator s 1
Patrolmen - FT 7 3/ 3 4
Patrolmen - PT 2
Secrets s 1 1/ 1 1
Reserve officers un aid 6
Total FT E uivalent De t Em to ees 12 6+ reserve 7
POLS`1'UDY : 3/8/9 5
Page 5b
COST COMPARISON OP CONTRACTED SERVICES
FOR POLICE PROTECTION
1994
(24-HOUR DAILY COVERAGE)
I~
•
Anoka
Count Sherburne
Count Carver
Count Wright
Count
Hourly Cost $34/hr $24 $35.86/hr $30.50
Cities Serviced Ham Lake Zimmerman 11 Communities Monticello
E. Bethel only -~ TOwnshi~ Albertville
Andover Examples: Clearwater
(1) Other Chanhassen Cokato
Chaska l7elano
Norwood Frankfort
Young America Hanover
Victoria Maple Lake
Watertown Montrose
Cologne Otsego
Hamburg Rockford
Mayer St. Michael
Waconia South Haven
Lake Tw Waverl
NQTE: Anoka and Carver Counties may allow same of their contract
cities to keep some of the fine dollar rev®nue, but prosecution costs are also
the responsibility of the community.
POLSTUDY: 3/$/95
Page 5c
3. Some ractical olitical and hiloso hical considerations of startin a local
police department.
C_ ity--Practical considerations included start-up costs in organizing a new
department and budgeting; forming a committee to determine procedures in
establishing a new police department, as well as a departmental operating
manual; making decisions on how large the local force would be; siting an
office; drafting an operating budget; purchasing equipment, cars, radios,
supplies, uniforms, etc.; setting police coverage, conducting background
checks, liability questions, and arranging for the prosecution process.
County--These things are in place.
There are two significant political considerations to be addressed. The first
is, does having a local force improve public safety? Secondly, is having a
police chief directly answerable to the City Council more or less
advantageous to the community's benefit?
One primary political problem the Police Commission discussed at length
was whether or not public safety is improved because hometown officers are
familiar faces to local residents and business owners. Strange faces make
us wary; unfamiliar faces wearing police uniforms can make us
uncomfortable. It goes without saying that familiarity adds a degree of
comfort. How important is this to public safety? It seems to be a matter of
degrees. Cold and distant officers--no matter who they represent--put
people off. Overly-friendly deputies run the risk of becoming non-objective.
The major point in favor of having local police is that citizens feel that the
force is a part of the community, not an outsider entity that comes in to
enforce the laws. However, it should be noted that it is the taxpayers that
"own" either of the two systems being discussed here--city ar county.
On the subject of familiarity, Wright County Sheriff Donald Hozempa,
several years ago, responded directly to Monticello's concern by initializing a
policy that officers patrolling the streets of Monticello consider it a longer-
term position. Currently, the plan is to rotate deputies in and out of
Monticello on a regular, longer-term basis to have a sizable group of officers
familiar with the needs and geagraphics of the community.
If Monticello were to hire a new police chief and deputies, chances are good
that these people would come from outside of Monticello; hence, the point of
familiarity would be negated. Also, in any department, city ar county, there
will always be turnover, as deputies (and officers) come and go. It's also
possible a city police department could become a "training ground" for
deputies that stay for a short while and then move on to bigger
departments. Another factor is growth. As a city's population base
increases, individual identities become less familiar. Rather than being
concerned that officers of the law are recognizable to local citizens, it is
more important that deputies on patrol are familiar with the city.
POLSTUDY: 3/$/95 Page 6
One potential advantage that a local police force may generate is the ability
of the longer-term patrol officers to establish contacts and informants
within a community. Discussions with area police chiefs that the
commission surveyed indicated that they did find this to be beneficial in
their communities by allowing their patrolmen to obtain information for "
helping and solving some crimes from informants. This is not to say this (.1 N
~Q~",,,~. ~e accomplished through our current contracting arrangement; ~srzt- N~
1 r!~"
that along-term informant type ~ S ~
relationship would be established with the olice department. ~ ~~ r ~d~~
.~• ~'~-~
From a logistic standpoint, a local police department would provide our
citizens with easier access to files and records such as crime reports and
accident reports that are now obtainable only through the sheriffs office in
Buffalo. While the commission members have not received any complaints
regarding the current access to this information, it only stands to reason
that a local police station in Monticello would probably be more accessible
by our citizens than making a trip to the county courthouse.
Is it better to have a police chief directly answerable to the Council
Council...or an independent county sheriff in charge of enforcing the laws?
This is a subjective political question that cannot be answered with
statistics. It is possible that a police chief will try to keep a city council
happy with his or her performance by telling them things they want to
• hear; hence, the risk of politics influencing justice. The county system
places police work beyond those particular politics; yet, there is no system
that eh.xnlnates politics completely. Under the present county system, the
City is not without a voice because the City is paying the bill and, therefore,
has direct input into public safety matters. Indeed, the establishment of
this Police Commission was to create improved communication and broader
understanding between the County and the City. The track record of 24
years has been exemplary. There have been no major disagreements
between the City Council and the Sheriffs Department, and the County has
always responded to the City's needs, working together to forge solutions to
public safety proble~s~~~~N;N~
4. Estimate of start-u casts in establishin a cit olice de artment.
Beyond comparing operating costs of different systems, a significant factor
in analyzing whether it would be feasible to revert back to a city police
department is the start-up costs involved. Obvious items would include
purchasing automobiles, radios, radar equipment, guns, telephones,
computers, furniture, office equipment, and other normal supplies for the
department personnel. While much of this cost would be a one-time ,.
expense, the amount would be substantial. It is estimated that the cost of '~
purchasing and equipping five patrol cars (which would be the bare
minimum of cars needed) would be well aver $100,000.
~S `~'~`~''`"' ~j ~ 1fi~ ~ w ~ 'ice ~ v,,,. s ~ dzh -~ -rp .~3--t ~; S f~-~' ~,, ~ ~~ ~~ ~~'~-I-~-~
~~,_.,,~- ~ •~ ~ 3-~s,,, x ~„~~Q ,E~c~.,~''a~~lz,G. y i r f ~. Kam. J (~ ~ ~ ~.~..."`~I
~ ~~, '
P4LSTUDY: 3 /95 ~ ~, ~ ~~~~~ Page 7
Another significant concern is space. The establishment of a local police
department would likely result in the City building or acquiring additional
space for the police department. Current government facilities would not
appear to have sufficient space for a police department. Either city hall
would need to be expanded, or a separate facility would have to be rented or
purchased. Although the cost is unknown, it would probably add hundreds
of thousands of dollars to the initial start-up cost if a facility was built for a
~ police department.
5. Conclusions.
No system employed by the City Council is going to eliminate crime, stop
speeding, and guarantee complete public safety. That's a fact of life. The
question before us is about degrees--when weighing the factors of cost and
effectiveness, what is the best system for the best price to fight crime,
monitor traffic, and ensure public safety in Monticello? Upon examining
and considering the information available to us, the Monticello Police
Commission makes the following statements:
1. The present system of contracting for police services with the Wright
County Sheriffs Department is clearly the mast cost-effective means
available to the City of Monticello for providing public safety.
2. The hopes of the 1971 Village Council--that switching from a local
police Force to the county system would improve effectiveness and
lower overall costs--have been generally confirmed by the track record
of over two decades.
3. Not only is the county system a more cost-effective system for law
enforcement than a local police department, but Wright County's
rates are competitive when compared to similar neighboring county
systems.
4. At the present time, all things considered, there are no compelling
reasons far the City of Monticello to consider establishing a local
police department.
i
Y ~
~..1. 4 ~ ~ ~ a, i .~~.~ F o-•(C 9 . ems.
~ ~
•
PQLSTLTDY: 3/8/95
Page 8