Approved 6/16/05
LAW ENFORCEMENT
May 26, 2005
Minutes
Members Present: Debbie DeLeon, Deb Nolan, Dale Copedge, Marc Thomas,
Don Vickers and Board Chairperson Mark Grebner
Members Absent: Randy Schafer
Others Present: John Neilsen, Jerry Ambrose, Gene Wriggelsworth and Matthew Myers
The Special Meeting was called to order by Chairperson DeLeon at 4:54 p.m. in Conference Room B of the Ingham County Sheriff’s Office, 630 North Cedar, Mason.
Additions to the Agenda: None
Limited Public Comment: None
1. Controller’s Office – Long Term Objective: Exploring Alternative Law Enforcement Funding
Chairperson DeLeon explained that the purpose of this meeting is to explore alternative funding options for law enforcement.
Mr. Neilsen reviewed his memorandum to this Committee dated this date. Attached to his memorandum were four legal opinions from Mr. Cohl’s Office on the Sheriff’s Office Road Patrol.
a) The January 11, 1996 opinion pertains to: Is the Sheriff’s Office Road Patrol a mandatory service? And What Authority does a Township have to seek additional road patrol services from a Sheriff.
b) The February 8, 1996 opinion is a supplement to the January 11, 1996 opinion and offers a more detailed analysis on a Township’s ability to fund police services.
c) The April 15, 2004 opinion pertains to: Can there be a special millage/election district that would geographically encompass the portions of the County that do not have their own police force and rely on the Ingham County Sheriff’s Office for their primary law enforcement?
d) The June 1, 2004 opinion is a supplement to the April 15, 2005 opinion and addresses the question, could the local units of government design the ballot issue so that it only requires a simple majority of the citizens within the entire special millage/election district for it to pass, regardless of whether it fails in one of the special millage/election district municipalities or would the tax levy be placed on only the properties of the citizens that reside in a municipality that voted for this ballot issue in this special millage/election district?
Mr. Neilsen stated these documents may be helpful to the Committee in their discussions. These opinions could be discussed at a future meeting with the County Attorney if that is the desire of this Committee.
Mr. Myers stated Delhi Township contracts with the Sheriff’s Office for law enforcement services. Twenty-four Office employees are assigned to the Delhi police division. Webberville has contracted with the County for law enforcement services since the mid 1990’s. This contract is due to expire soon and is expected to be renewed.
The Village of Stockbridge contracts with the County for law enforcement services. The Village has contracted for two positions until recently when it reduced the number of positions to one due to budget concerns. Mr. Myers stated the Office has received verbal notice that the Village will develop its own law enforcement services. Before the Village can start to its own division, it must pay the County its remaining contract balance.
A contract with Alaiedon Township for law enforcement services has been dropped after four years.
Mr. Myers stated the Office has 30 deputies assigned to road patrol duties. Fifteen of the 30 deputies are deputy/paramedics. They have a dual function since they provide paramedic services and road patrol services.
The Office has previously used Tahoe’s; they have been replaced with sedans to save money.
Mr. Myers stated his understanding that the Office must maintain the same number of traffic deputy positions it had when it first began receiving grant funds. This grant is a Secondary Road Patrol Grant. Mr. Neilsen stated the Office receives $275,000 to $300,000 per year from this Grant. The amount fluctuates from year to year.
Mr. Wriggelsworth stated five deputies are assigned to road patrol per shift. This is a small number of deputies to patrol the entire County. Mr. Myers further explained the deputies are assigned to specific shifts in an effort to keep deputies on the roads at all times.
Chairperson Grebner stated his belief that the actual number of paramedic calls has dropped over the past five to ten years. Mr. Wriggelsworth stated there may be a ring of truth to that statement.
Mr. Myers explained that Leslie and Stockbridge Townships and NESA deputies are paid on an on-call basis. County paramedics will reach a call first; and then, the area paramedic unit will relieve the County paramedics once they arrive. The Office still responds to many paramedic calls.
Chairperson Grebner stated that some day it would make sense for the County to have a cost efficient paramedic service. He stated having two separate units responding to a paramedic call is not cost efficient.
Comm. Thomas asked for clarification regarding the Secondary Road Patrol Grant. Mr. Neilsen stated he would verify the benchmark for the County to continue to receive this Grant.
Chairperson DeLeon stated it would be helpful to this Committee to see information regarding the type of calls that are received by the Office and the frequency of the calls. Mr. Myers stated the current computer software is not designed to provide this type of information.
Chairperson Grebner stated this Committee should develop a long-term strategy for the exploration of alternative law enforcement funding. The Clinton County strategy would not be appropriate for this County. He also stated that general-law townships do not pay enough to adequately cover law enforcement services. The Board of Commissioners should make those townships decide on what level of services they want to receive. A menu of law enforcement services should be drafted for the townships to consider when selecting services. He suggested that an “A” level of services be the current level of services which are provided to the townships. A “B” level of services would contain a much lower level of services. Townships may be interested in such a menu of services.
Mr. Wriggelsworth stated he is not prepared to inform townships that they will only receive certain law enforcement services. Comm. Nolan stated this Committee is interested in hearing the Office’s opinion regarding a tiered-level of services. She proposed this Committee set regular special meetings until this matter is resolved. Mr. Wriggelsworth stated he would try to have the Washtenaw County Sheriff, or a representative, speak with this Committee regarding their law enforcement program. The Committee agreed with Mr. Wriggelsworth’s recommendation.
Mr. Myers suggested the County develop millage language similar to the language used in the Juvenile Justice Millage ballot. Requesting a Public Safety Millage would determine the communities’ interest. He then stated the Office would be less sympathetic to areas which did not support such a millage.
Comm. Thomas stated he would be interested in seeing a sample of the deputies’ daily activity log. Mr. Myers explained the daily log would only contain arrest responses.
Mr. Ambrose stated the Board of Commissioners needs to determine the County’s level of responsibility for providing law enforcement services. Chairperson DeLeon asked how the County would provide law enforcement services to everyone if a millage is approved and the County is in control. Chairperson Grebner stated a millage could cause more problems than one could imagine, however, it may work. Comm. Thomas stated the Human Services Advisory Committee is discussing the possibility of having a Human Services millage. There are other organizations which are also considering the possibility of a millage.
Chairperson Grebner stated if the County approved a law enforcement services’ millage, those funds would be returned to the municipalities where such millage funds were raised. He stated he would draft ballot language for the County Attorney’s review. Comm. Vickers stated he would need more information regarding the proposed millage before he can determine his support or non-support of same. The Committee discussed this issue further.
Mr. Wriggelsworth informed the Committee that he has made the Road Commission Weigh Masters special deputies on the advice of counsel. It is not his intent to make them full deputies. He just wanted the Committee to be aware of this matter.
Chairperson DeLeon expressed her appreciation for the information this Committee has received from the Sheriff’s Office. She stated she believes the Office is willing to work with this Committee on the issue of law enforcement funding. This Committee’s next special meeting will include a presentation by the Washtenaw County’s Sheriff’s Office. Chairperson Grebner stated he would also try to have draft ballot language prepared for that meeting.
Announcements: None
Public Comment: None
The meeting adjourned at 6:29 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra Neff