05-25-2005 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Joel Hanson -om: nt: i0: Subject: Importance: neat beets@ci.roseville.mn.us Wednesday, May 18, 2005 11:25 AM James Bownik; Matt.Fulton @newbrightommn.gov; Joel Hanson; jmarch @cityofnorth- oaks.com; msather @whitebearlake.org; t.schwerm @ci.shoreview.mn.us; Kurt Ulrich; gurban @cityvadnaisheights.com; MichelleW -AH; wwysopal @ci.north- saint- paul.mn.us County Consolidated Dispatching and Funding High Distinguished Colleagues, Is it worthwhile for us to meet, talk, and do something about consolidated 9 -1 -1 dispatch? For our conversation to be worthwhile, several things have data projecting dispatching costs under various scenarios. guess in comparing the dollar impact on our residents over inflation in operating costs each year) if we were to cut - dispatching equipment and to occur. First, we need good For example, what is our best the next 8 years (assuming 3% over to 800 MHz compliant (a) we were to continue our current dispatching system and contracts [I know this isn't going to a happen for most of us, but I am interested in this as a baseline for evaluating other scenarios]; vs. (b) we were to use the county's proposed consolidated dispatch center; vs. (c) we were to use a north suburban dispatch center supported with county property taxes that were allocated to the center based on the amount of county uroperty tax paid by the residents of the cities dispatched by that center; vs. we were to use a north suburban dispatch center supported by revenue _om contracts for dispatching service that are based on call loads. Though I don't have thoroughly reliable data, my best guess is that our residents will pay substantially more for dispatching services under the County's consolidated dispatch concept as contrasted with what our residents would pay under other scenarios. This is because the County proposes to fund one dispatch center for all of Ramsey County through county property taxes. Yet, 70% of the 9 -1 -1 calls in this County, and therefore 70% of the operating costs for such a center, are and are likely to continue to be generated in St. Paul, mostly by and for St. Paul residents and businesses. Because roughly 50% of total Ramsey County property taxes are paid by suburban property owners, this means the suburbs are helping to pay for (subsidizing, if you will) dispatching service in St. Paul. If this reasoning is correct, then the Worst Case Scenario under the current County dispatching concept is that our suburban residents will pay substantially more for substantially worse dispatching service, and they will be subsidizing St. Paul's dispatching costs for the indefinite future. The Best Case Scenario under the current County concept is that the merger of the County and St. Paul's and Maplewood's dispatch operations will be a tremendous success -- in terms of the quality of dispatching service provided and in terms of achieving on -going efficiencies of scale in capital purchases and operational expenses. Moreover, though our residents may pay more through the county property tax, under the County's concept we remove this cost center or cost item from our city budget thus freeing up city levy dollars. But we need good data as to the financial issues. other factor bearing on whether a meeting would be productive involves speculation about .,e County Board. Specifically, is it likely that the County Board may compromise regarding its plans for the consolidated dispatch center if we develop sufficient pressure? But what is sufficient pressure? And where would the votes come from on the County Board to modify the -13-