My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1991 Ramsey County Law Enforcement Consolidation Study
Roseville
>
Studies, Task Forces, Special Committees, Reports
>
1991 Ramsey County Law Enforcement Consolidation Study
>
1991 Ramsey County Law Enforcement Consolidation Study
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 12:08:48 PM
Creation date
10/4/2012 2:06:13 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
�, <br />� <br />Iniroduction <br />� �n August 1, 1991, members of Ramsey County Chiefs of Police agreed to commit staff <br />resources to the task of developing a conceptual model of whafi Ramsey County policing <br />could be in the future. The following individuals were chosen to work on this project: <br />� <br />�� <br />� <br />� <br />Dave Brick - Mounds View Police Depart�ent <br />Steve Bornus - New Brighton Police Department <br />Joe Corcoran - St. Paul Police Department <br />Debbie Erickson - New Brighton Police Department <br />Mark Johnston - St. Paul Police Department <br />Cecil Meredith - White Bear Lake Police Departrnent <br />Patricia Moen - Ramsey County Sheriff's Department <br />Mike Ryan - Maplewopd Police Departxnent <br />Carol Sletner - Roseville Police Department <br />Mike Wolf - North St. Paul Police Department <br />� `i'hey were given the fallowing charge: <br />To create a realistic proposal to provide non-patrol police services to at least the <br />� Ramsey County geo-political entity via a special police services taxing dis� ict, and to <br />submit the proposal to the Ramsey County Chiefs of Police Association by 4rtober 2, <br />1991_ <br />� This charge was amended by Chief Kelley to remove the limita#ion pertaining to patrol <br />services. <br />� The group met a nuznber of times. In the course af those meetings, members of the group <br />sought clarification regarding whether its recommendations should be supported by <br />specific cost/benefi# analysis and should include operational strategies. In pollingthe Chiefs <br />� on these issues, #he group found no consensus. Therefore, due largely to time constraints, the <br />group limited its discussions to developing conceptual issues. <br />After considerable debate, the group agreed to propose two models. The first presents a list <br />of functions that may be suited #o consolidation. The second presents a fully consolidated, <br />but decentralized agency. It should be noted that the proposals are not mutually exclusive. <br />It may be possible #o develop a fully consolidated department in phases� beginning with <br />those identified in #he first proposal. <br />� Members of the committee e�ressed a willingness to consider meeting as a group to explore <br />related issues such as implememtation and cost estimates should the Chiefs deem it <br />desirable. Mennbers would also like #o thank the Chiefs for giving them the opportunity to <br />� be a part of this consolidation effort_ <br />Consolidation working notes and minutes are available upon request. <br />� <br />� 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.