Since that time, a joint implementation committee was formed with representation from both municipalities. Joint staff created numerous detailed reports that portrayed a hypothetical budget, a sample funding formula and delineated how the governance of a merged department would function.
Elected officials on both sides have indicated that they expect a merger would include at a minimum three components listed as follows
1) enhanced services,
2) financial efficiencies or at least no additional costs and
3) a “true” merger that recognizes the importance of the departmental contributions from both communities.
During a recent meeting with Chief Walsh and interim Chief Peterson, we concluded that, realistically; a merger could not likely accomplish all three of these goals at this time.
We believe that a merger would provide nearly immediate enhanced services to both communities. This goal and perceived outcome has never been a question in our minds.
In attempting to identify financial efficiencies, we think that one of the initial assumptions used as a requirement for a merger precludes us from saying with certainty that a merger would cost the same or less than the combination of our departments financed independently.
The assumption that no one would lose their job in a proposed merger is counterintuitive and likely serves as the best source of potential savings. We are not saying that we disagree with this early prerequisite, but in our opinions the stipulation does limit our ability to be creative.
We believe that a lot has been learned through this process. In fact, we believe that it is the knowledge that we have gained that has shaped the increasing doubts for the need to proceed further with the merger investigation.
During the interim period under effective departmental leadership, the following items have been noticed:
- Grand Chute’s Police Department can be properly equipped through budget action
- Grand Chute Departmental morale improves with effective leadership
- Grand Chute can revise our departmental policies and procedures
- Grand Chute could maintain it’s identity and have a highly functioning department
Nevertheless, while we may be at a crossroads that casts doubt on the value of continuing the merger feasibility analysis, the process we have undertaken has revealed numerous opportunities for collaboration that can be achieved without consolidation of the two organizations. In fact, many of the strengths associated with the merger are within reach through operational collaboration. Several key areas worthy of consideration have been preliminarily identified as follows:
- Increased cross jurisdictional responses to enhance response times in critical situations and in circumstances where geography and staffing deployment issues impede service delivery
- Consistency in policy development to enhance cross jurisdictional service opportunities
- Unification of key operational components based on function; e.g., PSL
o A unified approach to the PSL function would ensure constant coverage in PSL absences, standardization of policies between law enforcement and the School District, Child Protective Services, etc., and enhanced information sharing
- Technology/data sharing in areas such as criminal intelligence, crime mapping, and crime analysis trends.
- Consolidation of the crime scene processing function, including equipment purchase
- Joint deployment of a single Crime Scene Unit
- Sharing of technical criminal investigative capabilities; e.g., computer and audio/visual forensics capabilities
- Collaboration on equipment and program research, grant funding opportunities, and volume buying
- Consolidation of the training function for the purpose of affording each agency access to the other’s instructional staff and in-house training opportunities
In light of these many opportunities, our joint recommendation is to transition the proposed discussion on a merger to a proposed analysis of ways that the Grand Chute Police Department and the City of Appleton Police Department can share services on an administrator defined level. Should this shift in philosophy find support, it would be advisable to consider an extension of the Memorandum of Understanding between the two communities, in which the City has agreed to provide the Town with an Appleton Police Department Deputy Chief to act as the interim police chief. This will enable the two chiefs to fully explore the range of possibilities for such a collaborative approach toward administrative and operational policing activities.
We have also concluded that if future financial incentives for mergers become available at the Federal or State level that this issue should be reexamined at that time. The full exploration of all opportunities for collaboration between our two independent police departments would only serve to enhance renewed merger discussions should the aforementioned financial incentives present themselves.
In closing, we would respectfully request consideration of this proposal by the Grand Chute Town Board and the Appleton Common Council in the spirit of cooperation that has prevailed during the 17 months of merger feasibility research.
