Public safety contracts with the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and Rural/Metro Corp. cost the Town of Fountain Hills $8.1 million for the current fiscal year, roughly half the General Fund Budget (45 percent).

This week The Times has asked the two candidates for mayor and the six candidates for Town Council is it time to contemplate public safety options?

Ginny Dickey: We appreciate and rely on our first responders. Yes, options should be on the table, not only regarding the budget but also community priorities. Have they changed? If so, can they be met through continuing contracts or do we look at bringing those services into the town?

We may want to consider increased attention in law enforcement on community policing, code enforcement, substance abuse, speeding and campus safety. (I’ve learned there are strong steps that can be taken to mitigate risk at our schools.)

We’ve had very tragic incidents recently. They appear to be anomalies rather than trends… that is for experts to determine. However, pedestrian and overall street safety is drawing concern as a more consistent problem, not only locally but across Arizona. EVIT driver ed for all ages and the posse could assist.

We can work with MCSO to create contracts that address community priorities. Even with the increases, comparisons show that FH is being served at a lower cost than most municipalities. A FH police force is financially out of reach.

Unlike law enforcement, the Rural/Metro contract is only for personnel, making an in-house department available for discussion. We will view any changes with an eye on future costs… which now are about average… and possible changes in service needs. Districts, fees and subscriptions are not likely remedies.

Recognizing that public safety is our #1 responsibility, thoughtful fact-driven consideration of options is always appropriate.

My hope would be for citizen involvement in this vital review.

Cecil Yates: Seeing the costs of “in house” public safety in other communities, and how expenses increase over time, Fountain Hills has kept costs low by utilizing the service contract. Fountain Hills’ police / Fire departments are not employees, but a service provided by outside entities.

Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) provides ALL of our law enforcement services; personnel, equipment, back-up etc. within their service contract, and utilize space in Town Hall. Our fire service is a contract with Rural Metro to provide personnel utilizing our equipment and facilities.

Having said that, we should review ALL of our service contracts on a regular basis to ensure we receive services contracted for and services needed. Over time, demand for services can change. Our contracts should adjust accordingly. These contracts are competitive and seemingly less expensive. Of east valley cities, we have the least cost for law enforcement services, and second to Queen Creek for least cost per capita.

Having spoken to the sheriff, captain, prosecutor, staff and our residents regarding the department oversight by the court, everyone agrees we can improve on our patrolling coverage.

The town owns all the fire department’s assets. If the contract becomes too costly, a plan is ready where all of our fire personnel can become town employees. Although we should definitely look at the law enforcement contract, the capital expenditure on equipment, fleet and assets may be too costly to bring the service “in-house” at this time, but a plan should be in place, just in case.

Sharron Grzybowski: We need to stay on top of our expenses. One way to keep expenses down is using contract services. There are many benefits to contracting out these services. We aren’t using the town’s Human Resource Department for staffing needs.

If we need more or less public safety coverage, or are having personnel issues, we could contact the company directly, and they handle the situation. We are not responsible for paying employment taxes and benefits, nor completing the corresponding paperwork. If someone goes on vacation or gets sick, our void is filled by the company.

Fire/Rescue - During my conversations with some of our residents, one of the suggestions that comes up fairly regularly is a volunteer fire/rescue service. Our community has a very active fire/rescue service. Volunteers would not be able to keep up with the demand. My husband and I have been involved with volunteer services in the past and have seen these problems first hand.

Our cost per personnel is significantly less than the average of East Valley jurisdictions -- our police cost IS the lowest -- and our fire/rescue cost is lower than the average.

Public safety is one of the biggest concerns of our citizens. I hear that with almost every conversation. This is not one of those budget-line items that we should try to skimp on. The Council will need to work together to come to some common-sense decisions that will improve the health and safety for the people of FH and their possessions.

Alan Magazine: The council and staff (Vision Fountain Hills Survey) have identified public safety as its #1 priority. I will continue to look for ways to reduce costs, even though the town staff recently reaffirmed that our existing contracts for services are a good deal.

Nevertheless, many citizens have suggested that the town should have its own fire and police department. I have concluded that in the best interest of everyone that we should have an independent, professional firm perform a comparison study. I understand that many oppose spending funds for studies. However, in this instance I believe it is justified.

Statistics indicate that what we pay Rural Metro for fire services seems reasonable. Staff analysis indicates that if fire and emergency services were taken over by the town, it would cost approximately $800,000/year more.

Regarding our contract with the Sheriff’s Office, our cost per capita is the second lowest in the East Valley. According to the National Association of Chiefs of Police the number of officers per 1,000 residents should be 2.5. We have 1.8. Staff estimates that taking over this service would cost 2 to 3 times more than we now pay MCSO.

Given the town’s delicate financial situation, and that public safety is nearly 50 percent of our budget, I think a review is needed. In doing this the council will again demonstrate that it listens to our residents and attempts to be transparent in its decision-making.

Mike Scharnow: Yes. And no.

It’s always wise to continually evaluate services provided by the town, whether they are done in-house by our own departments or privatized through outside contracts.

This would apply to public safety contracts as well as services such as street sweeping, traffic signal maintenance, landscaping, maintaining Fountain Lake’s water quality, etc.

Cost efficiency is certainly a priority, but other factors can weigh in during such evaluations – quality of service delivery, citizen interaction results, accountability to the town, complaints, etc.

So that’s the “yes” answer.

As for police protection, I say “no.”

The die was cast years ago when the Marshal’s Department was disbanded and the decision made to solely contract with MCSO. The Marshal’s Department was gearing up to become a full-fledged police department, but trying to start our own right now would be too costly.

We do lose some local control by contracting with MCSO…perhaps we could evaluate our level of protection and make adjustments, but I don’t see anything beyond that.

The contract with Rural/Metro is a different matter.

Scottsdale, Rio Verde and Fort McDowell all jettisoned R/M and went with their own personnel and departments.

Right now our cost situation and contract with R/M is advantageous, but the parent company could make dramatic changes or significantly increase our contract costs in the future.

Then it would be wise to seriously examine going on our own.

Our fire service costs would go up significantly if we hire our own crews right now, so it’s best to wait.

David Spelich: Here are the facts: Over half of the General Fund Budget is designated for public safety.

Since the beginning of 2017 Fountain Hills has seen an increase in crime (source: Index Crimes).

MCSO has lost hundreds of Posse Members across the county, which in turn has negatively affected Fountain Hills.

The new sheriff (Penzone) does not have the strong ties to our community, as did Sheriff Joe—who was a strong advocate for our community.

Fountain Hills Times no longer has access to daily crime reports--Why?

This is not a criticism of the fine men and women of MCSO or Rural Metro, who I believe are all heroes. MCSO takes orders/direction from Sheriff Penzone. Police presence is a deterrence to crime. When the issue of changing our law enforcement structure is discussed in public forums we are told “it can’t be done.”

Perhaps, it is time we do a thorough and thoughtful analysis of need, costs, and available resources to determine what is the best decision in today’s climate. We need to take a serious look into all public safety contracts to ensure that we are getting the most for our dollars.

Well-patrolled streets raise the value of our homes and community in the same way that well-tended houses do. We are blessed to have in our community large numbers of retired police officers/firefighters whose knowledge, experience and insight could be utilized to help tackle this important issue.

Let’s stop saying everything is impossible and do some due diligence!

Marcus Bulow von Dennewitz: Our town faces a challenge: paying our proportionate share of Maricopa County Sherriff’s Office (MCSO) pension contribution into the Arizona Public Safety Personal Retirement System (PSPRS). This liability contributes to our budget short fall and as that liability grows it erodes our ability to balance our budget and fund obligations.

How do we address the challenge? Town leadership must join lobbying efforts to persuade the State to either (1) Increase the state’s shared revenue to Arizona’s municipalities: offsetting our rising contribution costs or (2) Reverse the cost shift burden the state placed on the counties during the last recession which would help lower our PSPRS contribution costs. Municipalities throughout the state have called for these reforms. Yet, Fountain Hills has been silent on the issue.

Other options: (3) analyze our existing contract to determine cost saving measures, (4) determine if our own force is feasible (any change must yield a material reduction in expenditures and not impact service). Or, (5) consider a public safety fee.

Our rising pension problem has not been clearly communicated to the public. It is an issue impacting all municipalities to the point where some (Bisbee, AZ) teeter on bankruptcy. If one city declares bankruptcy all other municipalities must pay more into the PSPRS to make up for the loss. That scenario would have a devastating impact on our General Fund.

I urge voters to educate yourself on this issue. No matter what option we attempt to pursue the liability will haunt us until reform occurs.

Gerry Friedel: As a financial professional for approximately 39 years I was taught that it is sound practice to review plans and options on an annual basis. Things change all the time. The towns needs change, laws change, and there are a myriad of other changes that necessitate reviews.

With public safety taking up nearly half the General Fund I was pleased to see that our council recently renegotiated the Rural Metro contract. Things changed and the contract was renegotiated. It is always prudent to review your biggest expenditures.

There is never a bad time to review your options, to be sure that your options still cover what is needed for the town and its residents. That way you can be sure if anything has changed in both training and technology in the area of public safety these advancements are or will be included for our town and its residents. The last thing we would ever want to be is behind in the latest advancements in public safety. These advancements help protect our town, its assets, and our residents alike.