My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2019-02-14 (draft) Cost of Government Commission minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Office of the Mayor
>
Cost of Government Commission
>
Minutes
>
2018-2019
>
2019-02-14 (draft) Cost of Government Commission minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2019 3:18:27 PM
Creation date
3/13/2019 3:18:24 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Cost of Government Commission <br />February 14, 2019 meeting minutes <br />Jones: It is like hitting a moving target because the information keeps coming in in spits <br />and splatters, then when we asked for information we got information we could make <br />some decent recommendations now that we are at the end of the commission all kinds <br />of new information is available in the newspaper. So I am questioning how are we able <br />to come up with decent recommendations when we can’t even get a simple answer to a <br />simple question for example what are the costs and who would of thought that the costs <br />associated with giving stipend to the police would have anything to do with rank at all. It <br />is a cost, it’s a vehicle, you use your vehicle. <br /> <br />McIntosh: Rank always plays even military it’s a big difference <br /> <br />Jones: So when you are talking you are replacing a fleet of vehicles with people and <br />compensating them to use their vehicle it doesn’t cost a sergeant any more than a <br />private to drive their own vehicle. It should be a fair compensation to compensate them <br />for using their vehicle. I mean even the basis of all this is getting a little bit nuts <br /> <br />Buehler: Unless it becomes part of the salary package <br /> <br />Jones: Then when we take all of these vehicles away are considering that a cut to the <br />salary to the police of this county. It is supposed to be the use of their vehicle it is not <br />supposed to be part of compensation because it is a vehicle exchange situation. So <br />then is it based on their performance? <br /> <br />Buehler: My preference is to just keep it at 100,000 foot level here and promote the <br />concept to say we need to move forward on this because there is potential savings for <br />the tax payer but we want to first put out the fact that a vehicle that offers the officer <br />more safety and get the savings to boot. But 61,502 per vehicle, based on my <br />discussions with the manufacturer representative, that’s wild. <br /> <br />(22:07): It appears to have some premium in there, that’s a whole lot of bells and <br />whistles <br /> <br />Buehler: Well I know about that but there are rebate programs and I don’t think that <br />number includes that rebate this one guy told me, you go to the local dealer for chevy, <br />chrystler you make your deal and then the dealer gets this huge like 10 grand kick back <br />per vehicle. So I do not know if that is included in that number or not unless the dealer is <br />keeping it. <br /> <br />(22:35): So this is the only comment I want to make on it is that your estimate is <br />extremely conservative on multiple levels. So if there is truly a decision against this. <br />There has to be something involved with the decision that doesn’t include financial <br />savings. And police officer safety and you know all of the other benefits that come with <br />having a police fleet. <br />McIntosh: I am reading the news article and it is almost sounding like they chose to go <br />with a hybrid program because they didn’t have enough money to a complete fleet of <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.