County officials jumped the gun and attempted to circumvent an open, objective review that is necessary to consider something with such magnitude as nullifying the long-standing arrangement with Calfire to consolidate with the City of Hollister Fire Department.
Supervisors made the appropriate move last week by taking several steps backward to follow a similar path as the ones taken before the county contracted with Santa Cruz 9-1-1 for dispatch services, and before supervisors considered a law enforcement consolidation that appears unlikely at this point.
County supervisors in 2010 spent $10,000 to conduct a feasibility study to consider contracting for 911 dispatching and then spent another $10,000 for half of the cost to study law enforcement consolidation. Each of those examinations produced results that spurred officials to head in widely varying directions, so it is safe to assume that an outside, professional study might result in questions that could potentially prevent the move to spurn Calfire and merge with the city department.
Although supervisors are now taking the appropriate steps, it appears there was too much discussion behind closed doors – that some officials were keen on moving forward without Calfire – before supervisors officially considered the item last week. County Administrative Officer Rich Inman noted at last week’s meeting that he had met with Hollister officials to discuss the possibility of the city providing fire service if the Calfire contract is not renewed beyond June. Based on that initial meeting, Inman listed such benefits as reduced costs of $78,000, nine additional firefighters, a half-time fire marshal, the ability for responding to hazardous materials incidents and more local control.
It sounds as though somebody scratched out the analysis on a dinner napkin a few days before the meeting. And taxpayers deserve much more assurance they will not only get the most cost-effective deal, but also that response times – already disturbingly high in some areas – aren’t going to drop dramatically as a result of the change.
The only objective way to make such conclusions is by having an outside analyst present the benefits with quantifiable data. By promoting the self-proclaimed savings before officially considering an arrangement with Hollister, it underscores that at least some county officials are leaning in one direction, perhaps heavily, without having any real data to support their pursuit.
