07-28-14 Common Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING JULY 28,201 people that we talked about that there are some key considerations, we estimate that there will be a $2 million receipt for 2015, not getting us down to two will jeopardize those fund. We will share the cost with the county moving forward. It is a good investment to the work that is being planned and expect that to occur in 2015. They highlighted the staffing effort in the consolidation. The staffing analysis was looking at our county and compared to others around the Midwest to begin consolidation, we will have 64 dispatch and supervisory roles. We will focus on the effectiveness of delivering 911 services to our residents. We will have 12 to 14 housing accommodations, training rooms, and technology. We are going to get down to two to not jeopardize the $2 million, when we get down to one, we can be more effective and more efficient. Communication lines are easier in live situations in hazardous situations. Staffing is more efficient with one center less on overhead and capital in supervisory. Mayor Deputy broke down the financial of the center and timeline of the new center with the new technology. Total operating budget of $6.1 million then adjusted with the $2 million state revenue with a net operating budget to $4.1 million in 2015. We will have a cost saving of $1.5 million with these changes. There is a net saving to the city. He went on to show illustrations of the cost analysis to now versus moving forward. Councilmember Dr. Ferlic- You stated that the two main considerations were the free land and the already existing infrastructures? We did not have free land and existing infrastructures in the City of South Bend? Jason Betney- Project Manager- 2211 E Jefferson- the site selection process with extensive review process began by developing an inventory of sites that met selection criteria, another was there was concern with a primary center effected with one gas leak or storm it would affect both sites instead of it being a backup. This site was considered most favorable after reviewing all of that material. Councilmember Davis- On that people were majority of them from Mishawaka or from South Bend, with political issues, what was the composition? Petitioner responded the site proposed was decided by the Executive Board, Mayor of both cities, and representative of the board of commissioners to compose sites, which narrowed to 7 sites, which 3 or 4 were in South Bend. The consideration was the duplication to back -up site that was not on the same infrastructure so you don't want on storm effecting both sites in terms of loss of power. Councilmember Ferlic, than it could have been in Mishawaka, what this points out if we were involved sooner we might have been able to bring it to South Bend but realized the horse is already out of the barn. You stated that 38% of the cost will be by South Bend, is that a tradeoff, will we have the same percentage in terms of bond payment or are they going to jack that up, in other words is 38% underestimating what our cost will be? Is the population of South Bend represented by that percentage or is it more or less? Petitioner that's not how the percentage was calculated but South Bend is 40% of the population, John can provide additional details on the cost calculations. John Julian- 112 Ironwood Drive, Mishawka- we looked at cost allocations, in taking that approach we looked at allocating cost on pure call volume, we looked at fixed costs, and a number of others. Net - sets evaluation as it is the traditional methodology for allocating public safety costs became the primary approach of 75% of the decision than the other 25% on the call volume. The other cost is the bond issue based on assessed value. The allocation percentage for service is approximately 29 %. A Public Hearing was now held at this time. Those wishing to speak in favor were none. Those were wishing to in opposition. Andy Edward- Sargent of the K -9 Unit- it's not that we are in opposition of the consolidation we are fine with that, put all your eggs in one basket. It is about not having your back -up to close to your primary as that is our point too. Actually there is only way in and way out and a lot can happen in 1 i minutes. The South Bend route is set to mirror the new unit so why not stay. We have no idea where those calls would go. Rebuttal- First the FOP set in to the board meeting and we respect the support and are in agreement on that. The idea of one or two centers in the county is that the expectation that if the two centers are not staffed to handle the call volume than they will have to rely on another call center. If center would go down there would be back up systems in place, along with the downsides would be. We have a higher level of safety with a signal site and have our own back -up system and supervision of our staff. The 21