The City of Oakley is currently studying if breaking away from the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office and forming its own in-house police department will best serve the residents of Oakley.
The City held a work session Tuesday night where the council received a report that highlighted that the cost per-deputy has increased 50% in 8-years while the Sheriffs contract over a 2-year period will have increased $1 million and has included no additional officers on the streets.
City Manager Bryan Montgomery stated Tuesday while as good as service had been with the Sheriff’s office, the City has had to deal with cost factors that the County has passed along to the city—impacting the General Fund.
“We have had to struggle quite frankly over the last several years to tackle these additional costs without having to add additional officers, but to have to continue to pay the costs as dictated by the county.” explained Montgomery.
With no one from the public in attendance, the City has scheduled 3-upcoming work sessions to allow the public a chance to provide input. Oakley does not have to do this, but they want to allow the public’s voice a chance to be heard before a final decision is made in the near future.
- Tuesday, February 24th – as a work session near the end of the regular City Council Meeting (approximately 7:30pm)
- Wednesday, February 25th – from 4:00pm to 6:00pm in the City Council Chamber
- Thursday, February 26th – from 6:00 pm to 8:00pm in the City Council Chambers
The public may continue to submit comments, suggestions and questions to [email protected]. To review the 31-slide power point presentation from the February 10th meeting, click here
As of Tuesday, the City Staff says they have surveyed 27-agencies as well as 30-components of police services where they compared agencies who provide services done in house versus those who contract out services.
10 comments
Good idea Oakley – remember, whether you’re elected, appointed or hired, your purpose is to serve the residents of Oakley, CA – while they may not always agree, the residents will have a little more respect for you if you include them in the discussions, give them a say, help them understand what your thoughts and reasons are for considering a change, especially one as huge as one of your MOST IMPORTANT responsibilities to the residents.
If Oakley really cared what the community thought, they would have asked the citizens before they wasted a year and money in studying this in the first place. Of course they will schedule 3 sessions in the middle of the week when people work. They want to do this to say they allowed an opportunity to the public to speak. Why 3 consecutive days? Why not 1 each week for a month on different days?
And where do you stand ECT?
Would you prefer them NOT to hold these meetings? 3 is better than 0 and ramming it through.
Personally, I have no opinion until a budget is shown.
I understand Tim M. It’s a start, and, if you think it should be done differently, then let them know. I do not live in Oakley, but seeing this is WAY better than the comedians who run the city of Antioch (not including Lori O. as I do not yet know what her stance is yet, and, how she will actually operate).
I think Tim is being a troll. Everyone can find something wrong with any date or number of meetings chosen. I believe Oakley does these sessions to give the appearance they care about peoples input when they really already have their mind made up and could care less what the public thinks.
Is dropping the Sheriffs contract good or bad? The City has already made up their mind or they would not schedule these meetings. I can’t think of any meeting that the city has held like this in which they reversed course. My only hope is the City is not using silly math which hurts us all down the road.
ECT
What kind of lame response was that? Oakley should have showed its council a budget. The fact you are not demanding one highlights you are not a journalist and you are in bed with Oakley to sell this stupid idea to the public. Anyone that knows how budgets work will tell you that short term this is great, but there is no proof officers will be added.
3 meetings in 1 week? That is ramming it down the peoples throats.
Oakley will regret moving away from the County and all the services its contract includes. Oakley Council needs to stop listening to Montgomery. Common sense says if crime is not a problem, do not change it just to change it.
If they can do it cheaper in-house (assuming they’re planning on actually funding pensions as they accrue instead of waiting for the big surprise later), why shouldn’t they? I think the county is making a tidy profit on the piece of the SO they rent to Oakley. Costs have gone up too dramatically over the last few years to indicate anything else.
All that said, I’d really like to see numbers and staffing levels before I commit to a yay or nay.
Our City is basically a broker of services. The City skims off the top of the taxes and contracts out the services. It is time to own our own services. The SO is a rented service. Oakley has already shown numbers it can put more cops on the street and for less. Go for it now. The money wasted should stay in Oakley. I bet some of the deputies would transfer over to the new department anyway.
Not as easy as putting more cops on the street for less money. Who is going to provide dispatch services? A police department comes with a lot of bills. Safety equipment, training, vehicles, maintaining vehicles, etc… The list goes on. The major concern you should have is attracting officers at a time where experienced officers do not want to leave jobs where their retirement (3% @ 50) is secure. Oakley will not be able to offer this formula, which means you will attract only brand spanking new cops. No good to start a department with no experience.
Comments are closed.