County, City Emails Regarding Merger

Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
Friday, February 20, 2015 12:59 PM
Donna Myers; Jackie Roberts; Jennifer Burns
FW : Police Merger
Police Merger-Reply-scanned.pdf
From : Gail Gordon

Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:59:22 PM
To: Jonathan Hart; Jackie Roberts
Subject: FW: Police Merger
Auto forwarded by a Rule
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:58 PM
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 8:32AM
To: Lee Smith; Frances Rasmussen
Please seethe attached from Mayor's Jackson's office.
From: Sharonte Turner [mailto:STurner@Savannahga.Gov]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 2:21 PM
To: ALScott; Lee Smith; Stephanie Cutter
Cc: Gail Gordon; Renee Higgins; Edna Jackson
Subject: Police Merger
Good Afternoon,
Mayor Jackson asked that I forward this letter to you. Please confirm receipt.
Thank you,
Sharonte Turner
Executive Assistant to the Mayor
City of Savannah
PO Box 1027 (31402)
Phone: 912-651-6444 Fax: 912-651-6805
sturner@savannahga.gov
1
Edna Branch Jackson

Mayor
June 16, 2014
Chairman Albert J. Scott
Chatham County Commissioners
PO Box 8161
Savannah, GA 31412
Dear Chairman Scott:
I received your June 13, 2014 letter, via hand delivery, on today, June 16, 2014 regarding the
Police Intergovernmental Agreement. As you are aware, we discussed this at the last meeting. I
was of the opinion that we would wait tmtil you hired a County Manager before we have a
meeting. This is a conversation that I feel we should have before it is discussed with your County
Commissioners, and our City Council Members.
I am requesting a meeting with you, Cotmty Manager William Lee Smith, and City Manager
Stephanie Cutter, on Tuesday, June 24th at 11a.m. in my office. If this time is not available for
you, please have your office contact my assistant, Sharonte Tumer, to coordinate a more a
suitable hour.
Please be aware that I will not be available prior to June 24th due to the Georgia Municipal
Association's Annual Conference scheduled for June 20-24, 2014 here in Savannah.
Unfortunately, I will be in Atlanta meeting with the Governor on Tuesday of this week and will
not return until Wednesday.
I will also be leaving to go out of town from June 26-29, 2014. Hopefully we can meet before I
leave.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Edna Branch Jackson

Mayor
CC:
Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

William Lee Smith, County Manager
ejackson@savannahga.gov P.O. Box 1027 Savannah, Georgia 31402 (912) 651-6444 Fax (912) 651-6805
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jonathan Hart
Friday, February 20 , 2015 12:57 PM
FW : Meeting RE: Police Merger
From: Gail Gordon

Subject: FW: Meeting RE: Police Merger
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 1:00PM
To: Sharonte Turner
Subject: RE: Meeting RE: Police Merger
You're more than welcome.
From: Sharonte Turner [mailto:STurner@Savannahqa .Gov]

Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:59 PM
To: Gail Gordon
Cc: Renee Higgins
Subject: RE : Meeting RE: Police Merger
No problem . Thanks Gail.
Sharonte
From: Gail Gordon [mailto:gfgordon@chathamcountv.org]

Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:08 AM
To: Sharonte Turner
Subject: RE: Meeting RE: Police Merger
He will be there; however, he needs to leave at 10:45. He has an 11:00 in his office.

Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11 :03 AM
To: Gail Gordon
Cc: Stephanie Cutter; Renee Higgins
Subject: FW: Meeting RE: Police Merger
Hi Gail:
The meeting will need to be at lOam instead of 9:45am . Please confirm Chairman Scott' s attendance for lOam .
Tha nks again,
1
Sharonte Turner
City of Savannah
PO Box 1027 (31402)
Phone: 912-651 -6444 Fax: 912-651-6805
From: Sharonte Turner

To: 'Gail Gordon'
Cc: Stephanie Cutter; Renee Higgins
Subject: RE: Meeting RE : Police Merger
Hi Gail :
Mayor Jackson states t hat 9:45am works fo r her calendar. We look forward to seeing Chairman Scott t hen.
Thanks for everyt hing
Sharonte Turner
Execu tive Assistan t to the Mayor
City of Savannah
PO Box 1027 (31402)
Phone: 912-651 -6444 Fax: 912-651 -6805
From: Gail Gordon [mailto:qfqordon@chathamcounty .org]

To: Sharonte Turner
Subject: Meeting RE: Police Merger
Good morning,
Chairman Scott will be available on Tuesday, June 24 at 9:45a.m . o r 10:00 a.m. He has meetings in his office beginning
at 11:00 .m. Please advise ifthe meeting can be scheduled at the suggested times. Thank you .
~Y.~
Admi11istrative As:rista11t to the Chairman
(9 12) 652-7878- Qtfice
(9 12) 652-1880 - Fax
P.O. Box8161
Savannah, GA 3 14 12
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jonathan Hart
FW: Pol ice Merger
From: Gail Gordon

Subject: FW : Police Merger
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 2:19PM
To: Lee Smith; Linda Cramer; Michael Kaigler; Jonathan Hart; Jennifer Burns
Cc: Frances Rasmussen; Donna Myers
Good afternoon,
Chairman Scott would like to meet with you tomorrow morn ing at 10:30 a.m . to discuss the above subject. Thank you.
~y ~
Adlllinislrafit;e A.r.ri.rftml to tbe Cbairllla/1
(9 12) 652-7878 - O.ffi'"e
(9 12) 652-7880 - .l-'ax
P. 0. Bo.\." 8 161
SC/71(1111/ab, GA 3 1412
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
FW : Police Merger
from mayor jackson.pdf
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Frid ay, February 20, 2015 12:51:48 PM
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Thu rsday, February 12, 2015 8:26AM
To: 'cbell@savannahga .gov'
Good morning,
Chairman Scott asked that I forward to you the attached letter from Mayor Jackson. Thank you .
~Y.~
Administrative Assistant to the Chairman
(912) 652-7878 - Office
(912) 652-7880 - Fax
P.O. Box 8161
Savannah, GA 31412
gfgordon@chathamcoun(). org
Edna Branch Ja~kson

Mayor
February 9, 2015
Mr. AI Scott .
.
.
Chairman, Chatham County Commission
Chatham County Courthouse
Savannah, GA 31491
Mr. Lee Smith
County Manager, Chatham County
Savannah,_GA 31401
BY HAND
Dear Chairman Scott and Mr. Smith:

We have reviewed the County's latestdraft of the police merger agreement, which was sent to us on
January 21, 2015, and approved by the County Commission on January 16, 2015. We do not believe that
It would be In the interest of Savannah taxpayers to accept this proposal without further changes.
Essentially, the County's proposed agreement, if implemented, would substantially Increase the share of
pollee costs being paid by Savannah citizens, by reducing the share of costs paid by residents of the
unincorporated area. City taxpayers are already paying over 70% of the costs of the merged
department. Viewed another way/ City taxpayers are paying approximately $318 per year per capita,
while unincorporated areas residents are paying $190 per capi~a. We are not willing to substantially
increase this disparity.
As you knoW1 the City has already made substantial concessions in these negotiations. We have agreed
to your request that the County Mar1ager have the final supervisory control over precinct and beat
boundaries,. staffing levels and other matters which only affect the unincorporated area. we have
agreed that all routine property crime Investigations will be handled at the precinct level, and that we
will shift the cost of th~ officers handling property crimes to the budget of the patrol division, for which
. City'taxpay~rs already pay 78% of the cost,
We .have not agreed to the Countts proposal to separate all responsibility for patrolling to separate City
and County precincts. Th.ls would lead to confusing boundary lines, and Inefficient patrol routes,
particularly in the Southern and Southwe~tern parts of the county1 where jurisdictional boundaries often
weave in and out of the City limits.' We believe that Implementation of the County's proposal would
increase the number of precincts, arid the resulting overhead for all taxpayers, and. that this Is
unnecessary and Inefficient.
We continue to believe. that a merged department Is In the interest of all of our residents, as well as our
businesses and qur millions of visitors, upon whom our economy largely depends. We urge the County
to come to the bargaining table to try to resolve the remaining issues.
ejackson@savannahga.gov P.O. Box 1027 Savaimah, G~orgia 3~402 (9~) 651.644~ Fax (912) ~Sl-6805
Mr. Scott
Mr. Smith
Page2
February 9, 2015
We are prepared to enter Into non-binding mediation, using an independent professional mediator
upon whom we would both agree. The Chamber of Commerce has generously offered to pay the cost of
this mediation. We recommend that the members of the Polley Committee represent their respective
governments In this mediation. We hope that the County will enter the mediation i~ the best interest of
our community.
Verytrulyyour~s
~~~r:L ,
t~
Edna B. Jackson
Mayor
cc:
Donna Myers
From :
Sent :
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
FW : Police Merger
frommayor jackson.pdf
From : Gail Gordon

Sent: Friday, February 20, 201 5 12:51:34 PM
To : Jonathan Hart; Jackie Roberts
Subject : FW: Police Merger
A uto forwarded by a Rule
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 8:26AM
To: 'AidermanJohnsonl@aol.com'
Good morning,
Chairman Scott asked that I forwa rd to you the attached letter from Mayor Jackson. Thank you.
~Y.~
/lrlmillislratil'f A.rsistanl to the Cbairma11
(912) 652-7878- O.fjlte
(912) 652-7880 - F'a.'\'
P. 0. Bo:>.: 81 6 I
SatJmllwb, G/1 31412
g(gordon@dJatbaJJJ(O!tll(Y org
Edna Branch Ja~,:kson

Mayor
February 9, 2015
Mr. AI Scott .
.
.
Chatham Counti{ Courthouse
Savannah, GA 31401
Mr. Lee Smith
Savannah~GA 31401
BY HAND

We have reviewed the County's latest draft of the police merger agreement, which was sent to us on
January 21, 2015, an.d .approved by the County Commission on January 16, 2015. yve do not believe that
it would be In the interest of Savannah taxpayers to accept this proposal without further changes.
Essentially, the County's proposed agreement, if implemented, would substantially increase the share of
police costs being paid by Savannah citizens, by reducing the share of costs paid by residents of the
department. Viewed another way, City taxpayers are paying approximately $318 per year per capita,
while unincorporated areas residents are paying $190 per capita. We are not willing to substantially
As you know, the City has already made substantial concessions in these negotiations. We have agreed
to your request that the County Manager have the final supervisory control over precinct and beat
boundaries,. staffing levels and other matters which only affect the unincorporated area. We have
will shift the cost of the officers handling property crimes to the budget of the patrol division, for which
. Ctty'taxflay~rs already pay 78% of the cost.
We.have not agreed to the County's p.roposal to separate all responsibility for patrolling to separate City
and County pre.clncts. This would lead to confusing boundary llnes, and inefficient patrol routes,
particularly in the Southern and Southwe~tern parts of the county, where jurisdictional boundaries often
weave in and out of the City limits: We believe that Implementation of the County's proposal would
increase the number of precincts, and the resulting overhead for all taxpayers, and . that this Is
We continue to believ~ that a merged dep13rtment is In the interest of all of our residents, as well as our
ejackson@savannahga.gov
P.o..Box 1027 Savaimah, G~orgia 3~402 (9~) 651.644~ Fax (912) 6516805
Mr. Scott
Mr. Smith
Page2
February 9, 2015
governments in this mediation. We hope that the County will enter the mediation i~ the best interest of
our community.
Verytrulyyours~ ~
A~r:L,
- lz~
Edna B. Jackson
Mayor
cc:
Donna Myers
From :
Sent :
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
FW : Police Merger
frommayor jackson .pdf
From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:51 :19 PM
From: Gail Gordon

To: 'tbordeaux@savannahga .gov'
Good morning,
Chairman Scott asked that I forward to you the attached letter from Mayor Jackson. Thank you.
~ff.~
Admini.rtratiiJ(~ A.ui.rtant
to the Cbaimmn
(912) 652-7878 - Qffia

(912) 652-7880 - Fa.\.
P.O. Box 8161
SmJCllmab, GA 3 14 12
g(gorrlol!@cbatbamcoml(J'.Org
Edna Branch Ja~kson

Mayor
February 9, 2015
Mr. AI Scott .
.
.
Chatham CountY Courthouse
Savannah, .GA 314~1
Mr. Lee Smith
Savannah~. GA 31401
BY HAND

January 21, 2015, an_d .approved by the County Commission on January 16, 2015. We do not believe that
It would be In the interest of Savannah taxpayers to accept this proposal without further changes.
pollee costs b.elng paid by Savannah citizens, by reducing the share of costs paid by residents of the
Increase ~his disparity.
boundaries, staffing levels and other matters which only affect the unincorporated area. We have
agreed that all routine property crime investigations will be handled at the precinct level, and that we
. Clty .taxpay~rs already pay 78% of the cost.
We .have not' agreed to the .county's proposal to separate all responsibility for patrolling to separate City
and County precincts. This would lead to' confusing boundary Jines, and Inefficient patrol routes,
particularly in the Southern and Southwestern parts of the county, where jurisdictional boundaries often
increase the number of precincts, and the resulting overhead for all taxpayers, and . that this is
unn.ecessary and Inefficient.
We continue to believ~ that a merged department Is in the interest of all of our residents, as well as our
businesses and qur millions of vi.sitors, upon whom our economy largely depends. We urge the County
ejackson@savannahga.gov P.O. Box 1027 Savaimah, G~orgia 3~402 (9~) 651-644~ Fax (912) 6516805
Mr. Scott
Mr. Smith
Page 2
February 9, 2015
governments In this mediation. We hope that the County will enter the mediation in the best Interest of
our community.
Verytrulyyours~ ~
~t4~r:L '
Edna B. Jackson
~~
Mayor
cc:
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
Donna Myers ; Jackie Roberts; Jennifer Burns
FW : Police Merger
From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

To: 'jhall@savannahga .gov'
Good morning,
~ff.~
Admini.rtrati/;e ASJirkmt to the ChriimJmi
(912) 652-7878 - Qfflce
(912) 652-7880- rll.'\'
P.O. Bo."'- 8161
{//)(l/l/lrlh, G.,,1 31+12
g(gordon@c!JatbaJJJ(OJIII()'.org
Edna Branch Ja~kson

Mayor
February 9, 2015
Mr. AI Scott .
.
.
Savannah, GA 314~1
Mr. Lee Smith
Savannah,_GA 31401
BY HAND
Dear Chairman Scott and
Mr. Smith:
We have reviewed the County's latest -draft of the police merger agreement, which was sent to us on
January 21, 2015, an.d approved by the County Commission on January 16, 2015. We do not believe that
it would be In the interest of Savannah taxpayers to accept this proposal without further changes.
We .have not agreed to the County's p,roposal to separate all responsibility for patrolling to' separate City
and County precincts. This would lead to confusing boundary lines, and inefficient patrol routes,
weave in and out of the City limits.' We believe that Implementation of the County's proposal would
We continue to believe. that a merged department Is In the interest of all of our residents, as well as our
ejackson@savanmthga.gov P.O._Box 1027 Savaimah, G~orgia 3~402 (9~) 651p644~ Fax (912) ~516805
Mr. Scott
Mr. Smith
Page2
February 91 2015
this mediation. We recommend that the members of the Policy Committee represent their respective
our community.
J
lz~
Verytrulyyours~
~~~r:L '
'
Edna B. Jackson
Mayor
cc:
Donna Myers
From :
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
FW: Police Merger
From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 8:27 AM
To: 'mosborne@savannahga.gov'
Good morning,
~Y.~
Admini.rtmtille A.rsistant to the Chairma11
(912) 652-7878 - Qffice
(912) 652-7880 - Fa.Y
P.O. Bo:x:8161
S aJ;amJab, G./1 31412
g(gordo n@chathmllco!tll{J'. org
Edna Branch Ja~kson

Mayor
February 9, 2015
Mr. AI Scott .
.
.
Savannah, GA 314~1
Mr. Lee Smith
Savannah,.GA 31401
BY HAND

We have reviewed the County's latest -draft of the police merger agreement, which was sent to us on
January i1, 2015, and approved by the County Commission on January 16, 2015. yve do not believe that
it would be In the Interest of Savannah taxpayers to accept this proposal without further changes.
Essentially, the County's proposed agreement, if Implemented, would substantially Increase the share of
department. Viewed another way, City taxpayers are paying approximate ly $318 per year per capita,
agreed that all routine property crime lrwestlgatlons wlll be handled at the precinct level, and that we
. Clty.taxpayers already pay 78% of the cost.
We .have not' agreed to the .county's proposal to separate all responsibility for patrolling to" separate City
and County precincts. This would lead to confusing boundary lines, and inefficient patrol routes,
weave in and out of the City lfmits: We believe that Implementation of the County's proposal would
We continue to believ~ that a merged department Is In the interest of all of our residents, as well as our
ejatkson@savannahga.gov P.O~ Box 1027 Savaimah, G~orgia 3~402 (9~) 651.644~ Fax (912) ~516805
Mr. Scott
Mr. Smith
Page 2
February 9, 2015
our community.
J
t~
Verytrulyyours~
~~~r:L,
Edna B. Jackson
Mayor
cc:
Donna Myers
Jonathan Hart
FW: Police Merger
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

To: 'eshabazz@savannahga.gov'
Good morning,
~ff.~~
AdmilliJtrati1 f A.r.ri.rta11! to t!Je CIJair111a11
1
(9 12) 652-7878- Qffice

(9 12) 652-7880 - f:<ax
P.O. Bo.Y 8 16 1
SmJa/11/ab, GA 31..f- 12
g(gordon@d;atbamco!lll(J'. org
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
FW: Police Merger
From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

To: 'tthomas@savannahga .gov'
Good morning,
Chairman Scott asked that I forward to you the att ached letter from Mayor Jackson. Thank you.
~ff.~
Administrafi!e .Assista11t to t!Je C/JaimNm
(912) 652-7878- Ojjlce
(912) 652-7880- Pa.Y
P.O. Bo:\: 8161
Smi(JJJJ!ah, GA 31412
g(gordon@tbat!JaJJJCO!IIl{J'. o1:g
Donna Myers
From :
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
FW : Letter to Chairman Scott and County Manager Smith
Ltr to Scott, Smith 2-9-15.pdf
From : Gail Gordon

Subject: FW: Letter to Chairman Scott and County Manager Smith
From: Sharonte Turner [mailt o:STurner@Savannahga.Gov]

Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 4:30PM
To: ALScott; Lee Smith
Cc: Gail Gordon
Subject: Letter to Chairman Scott and County Manager Smith
Good Afternoon,
Mayor Jackson asked that I forwa rd this to you . The origina l is being hand delivered this afternoon .
Thank you,
Sharonte Turner
City of Savannah
PO Box 1027 {31402)
Phone: 912-651-6444 Fax: 912-651-6805
Edna Branch Ja~kson
Mayor
February 9, 2015
Mr. AI Scott .
.
.
Savannah, GA 314~1
Mr. Lee Smith
Savannah,_GA 31401
BY HAND

January 21, 2015, and approved by the County Commission on January 16, 2015. yve do not believe that
it would be In the Interest of Savannah taxpayers to accept this proposal without further changes.
boundaries,. staffing levels and other matters which only affect the unincorporated area. W~ have
We .have not agreed to the .county's proposal to separate all responsibility for patrolling toseparate City
and County precincts. This would lead to' confusing boundary lines, and Inefficient patrol routes,
particularly ln the Southern and Southwestern parts of the county, where jurisdictional boundaries often
increase the number of precincts, arid the resulting overhead for all taxpayersi and . that this Is
We continue to believ~ that a merged dep~rtment is In the interest of all of our residents, as well as our
businesses and QUr millions of v{sitors, upon whom our economy largely depends. We urge the County
ejackson@savanDilhga.gov P.O. Box 1027 Savaimah, G~orgia 31402 (9~) 651.644~ Fax (912) ~516805
Mr. Scott
Mr. Smith
Page2
February 9, 2015
governments in this mediation. We hope that the County will enter the mediation in the best interest of
our community.
Very truly yours~,
A~rJ-
---------;
~~~
Edna B. Jackson
Mayor
cc:
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jonathan Hart
FW: Police Merger Agreement
From : Gail Gordon

Subject: FW: Police Merger Agreement

Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 4:56 PM
To: ALScott
Cc: Gail Gordon; Lee Smith; Stephanie Cutter; Carol Bell; Tom Bordeaux; Johnson, Van R. (aldermanjohnsonl@aol.com);
Mary Osborne; John Hall; Mary Sprague; Estella Shabazz; Thomas, Tony (aldermanthomas@aol.com); Edna Jackson
Subject: Police Merger Agreement
Good Afternoon Chairman Scott,
Mayor Jackson asked that I forward the attached letter to you . The original is being hand delivered to your office.
Thank you,
Sharonte Turner
City of Savannah
PO Box 1027 (31402)
Phone: 912-651 -6444 Fax: 912-651-6805
Edna Branch Jackson

Mayor
February 12, 2015
Mr. AI Scott
Savannah, GA 31401
BY HAND
In response to your letter of February 11, the City Manager and I are authorized to negotiate the terms of the
Police Merger Agreement, subject to Council's final approval. The City Council reviewed your recommendations
and did not agree.
For the reasons stated in rny letter of February 9, we will not recommend approval of the County's latest offer,
without additional changes. We will not agree that City taxpayers should substantially increase their share of
police department costs. As you know, the City's taxpayers already pay over 70% of these costs.
We feel strongly that rather than sending drafts back and forth, it would be in the public interest for us to sit down
and discuss the proposals which you have made, and tho~.e which we have made, in an effort to reach a
compromise. This process has gone on far too long, and needs to be resolved one way or the other.
We believe that a mediator would facilitate this discussion, but mediation will be successful only if both parties
have an ihterest in reaching a fair settlement. We feel that, to date, all of the concessions have been made by the
City, and that it is time to discuss frankly whether the County Commissioners wish to make an agreement.
If the Commissioners reaHy believe that creating a separate department would be good for our community, it is
time to call a referendum and let the people of Chatham County decide this issue once and for all.
Again, we feel that one department is stronger than two, and that duplicating services would be more expensive,
a nd would move the County in the wrong direction. We do not believe that the County needs two SWAT teams,
two major accident investigation units, two criminal investigation divisions, two internal affairs departments, two
canine units, or even two chiefs.
We hope that the County will accept our proposal to come to the bargaining table.
Very truly yours,
Edna Branch Jackson

Mayor
C:
County Manager
City Manager
Aldermen, City of Savannah
ejackson@savannahga.gov P.O. Box 1027 Savannah, Georgia 31402 (912) 651-6444 Fax (9U) 651-6805
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Tony Center <TonyCenter@comcast.net>

Thursday, October 02, 2014 9:28 AM
' Mary Ellen Sprague'; tbordeaux@prodigy.net
Docs
SCM PD Data for TC.pdf
Mary Ellen, Tom ,

Here are the documents from yesterday.
Please forward same to Tony Thomas.
I don't have his emai l address.
TC
Crime stats are reported t o the state and t he state reports t his to the FB I. The FBI is usually a fu ll yea r behind in releasing
the information so th e on ly full year data was 2012. The FBI allows you to obtain the data but only fo r cites w it h a
popu lation ove r 10,000. I have compiled a table w ith all the stats for the cit ies within t he county using various resources
including GBI, FBI and community info. Let me know if t his w orks for you.
I
2012 Crimes by City within Chatham County

location
-..1
Murder
Rape
Robbery
Assault
Burglary
larceny
Vehicle
Theft
Part
I
Crime
Rate
Tot al
Bloomingdale
45
60
2185.79
Garden City
Pooler
4
4
18
96
162
11
11
112
219
367
39
31
538
537
6036.13
2607.05
Port Wentworth
78
126
2066.93
9
4
26
Tybee Island
1
0
14
98
119
3880.01
Thunderbolt
73
10
108
4152.25
23
25
491
2
339
21
SCM PO
2083
5583
659
9203
3979.07
Chatham County
24
34
526
462
2426
6463
756
10691
3867.47
~ 1lA ~ 6~ 51Awn
7-1/~
~~ /u
~~
~c0{3~
Cto . "X5D
City of Savannah
Part I Stats 2004 to 2013
Homicide
Rape
Commercial Robbery
Street Robbery
Residential Robbery
Agg Assault w/ Gun
Agg Assault Other Weapon
SUBTOTAL VIOLENT
co
Commercial Burglary
Residential Burglary
Purse Snatch/Pick Pocket
Shoplifting
Larceny from Auto
Larceny Yard, Bldg, Bike
Other Larcenies
Auto Theft
SUBTOTAL PROPERTY
""
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
2004
23
136
192
1005
2005
25
65
120
402
47
180
233
1072
2006
25
56
106
450
69
146
202
1054
2007
22
66
98
506
74
172
225
1163
2008
25
33
98
583
64
184
170
1157
2009
29
37
91
438
53
176
166
990
2010
17
25
56
336
25
106
177
742
2011
24
31
70
331
36
132
144
768
2012
2013
21 q,
29
19 7<1
39
100 e,c, 76
280
303 1
32
38
122 ] 8 ~ 151
166
178
779
775
474
1511
99
906
2738
1868
435
1193
9224
587
1541
80
884
2765
2008
566
1216
9647
465
1144
59
1048
1885
2103
318
1039
8061
471
1339
- 72
1060
1756
2031
292
997
8018
464
1916
74
1074
1901
2326
201
1056
9012
309
1894
64
1140
2106
2142
181
960
8796
195
1888
74
1109
1713
2015
118
534
7646
247
1586
68
1260
1576
2402
151
634
7924
199 /S41557
64
1107
1651
1724
104
589
6995
65
123
418
48
Total
240
1549
63
1298
1648
1569
158
648
7173
Change
Percent
8
20
-24
-23
6
29
-12
4
0.5%
41
-8
-1
191
-3
-155
54
59
178
2.5%
I
TOTAL PART I CRIME
10229
10719
9115
9181
10169
wl ~ 1lA~ F
9786
a5cM\
8388
8692
7770
7152
182
/3'D)o ~ ~ ~
2.3%
Chatham County
Part I Stats 2004 to 2013
\.0
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Homicide
Rape
Commercial Robbery
Street Robbery
Residential Robbery
Agg Assault w/ Gun
Agg Assault Other Weapon
SUBTOTAL VIOLENT
2004
2
11
21
23
10
31
60
158
2005
6
21
17
49
15
21
43
173
2006
4
9
18
36
11
24
26
128
2007
3
14
14
40
12
19
53
155
2008
1
4
18
37
4
28
36
128
2009
1
9
2010
3
7
2012
2
6
2013
1
10
15
39
6
22
46
138
22
10
18
38
103
2011
2
5
12
33
6
22
41
121
21
30
5
15
24
103
Commercial Burglary
Residential Burglary
Purse Snatch/Pick Pocket
Shoplifting
Larceny from Auto
larceny Yard, Bldg, Bike
Other Larcenies
Auto Theft
SUBTOTAL PROPERTY
132
401
17
186
745
652
199
228
2560
105
348
6
171
687
505
194
194
2210
84
346
6
115
465
568
98
181
1863
85
422
2
159
408
509
82
167
1834
81
513
11
266
604
557
50
156
2238
42
407
12
305
476
404
37
175
1858
38
431
11
296
295
366
29
90
1556
40
368
12
273
405
430
31
96
1655
TOTAL PART I CRIME
2718
2383
1991
1989
2366
1996
1659
1776
Change
Percent
12
5
12
29
72
-1
4
-18
-18
0
-3
5
-31
-30.1%
20
307
6
255
303
344
25
70
1330
17
319
6
383
223
230
30
77
1285
-3
12
0
128
-80
-114
5
7
-45
-3.4%
1433
1357
-76
-5.3%
Historical Cost Data- 10 Years

Millions
.._..,.f'l'"
a-fiV_P 4 ....
TV,_..#,.. . . . . .
"'
~
i!
4.4
~
~
IJI
* The first combined year of SCMPD operations was

2005. The chart be low provides a snapshot of SCM PD
operating costs before the me rger and ten years after .
the merger:
lNU1
Year
County SSD
2003
$ Jf6. 'lo/o
2013
$ Z.~ .<oi'o 14.5
$Increase
%Increase
7.8
6.7
46.3%
8(1()'1'
J t ~ -If.'&
Cotlnty M&O
$ l .C co;, 3.4
$1. 0/o 4.7
$
1.3
28.1%
Savannah
$ n:~elo 31 .7
;q1-.t? I
$ (/! .~% 41.8
0.1 .0 T
10.2
24.3%
!3~ta
Jl a1 ~"'{ . ~
SCMPD Expense Summary - Payment by Jurisdiction (in Millions)
Paid by County*
Paid by Savannah
'1o
Total, by Calendar Year
.....-.
2012
2013
8/. ~
8!7--
$18.32
$39.34
$19.31
$41.55
81-5"
$19.24
$41.84
$57.66
$60.85
$61.09
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
zjp.,_
'Z-1-"l
2--~ - v
L.'i -1-
30
$12.59
$35.49
$14.70
$39.04
$15.30
$39.05
$17.47
$43.48
$18.05
$42.01
3/. 3
$17.96
$39.50
$48.08
$53.74
$54.35
$60.96
$60.06
$57.46
* excludes additional expenses on County ledger for CNT and vehicles. Annual cost is approximately $2 million.
'L~ I ~
----------
t,...Ut.tX
2A:7Ds--
?1?13
C~J)
:.
How were 2013 Costs Divided?

Patrol - Geography
Savannah 77.65% (2014 rate is 78.o1%)
County 22.35% (2014 rate is 21.99%)
Rate will change annually based on annexations
0\
Non Patrol - Population (Census Data)

Savannah 64.9%
County 35.1%
City invoiced a rate of 61% City I 39% County for 2013 using 2010
Census Data
Non Shared Cost Centers are 1oo% paid by either City or

County, based on which cost center it is (examples: CNT,
Animal Control, Mounted Patrol)
6
- - - - - -- - - -- ------------
-------- --
--
$2,07],158, 3%
$4, 641,132 , 8%
Not Shared -Savannah

$54,368,209 , 89%
11
Not Shared- County
!I Shared
Cost Centers
Not Shared means that the City or County pays 100% of the department's
cost. The City pays 100% of Mounted Patrol, Savannah Impact and
Savannah Impact- Work Ventures. The County pays 100% of Animal
Control, Marine Patrol, CNT and EMS Administration.
----
---
$10,705,363,18%
$6,718,290, 11%
Patrol
Criminal Investigations (CID)
~
a E911
Other
Not Shared
$35,142,669, 58%
$7,617,858, 12%
The Cost Center "Other" includes the following departments:

Police Chief, Special Operations, Traffic, Canine Unit, Information
Management, Support Services, Aviation & Professional
Standards/Training/Internal Affairs.
Paid by County,
$19,243,798 132%
....
Paid by Savannah,
$41,842,701 , 68%
(pCb- 3
"1-
This cost ratio has been fairly consistent since 2009.
SCM PO Staffing Chart
Function
M&OBudget
Counter Narcotics
Marine Patrol
Animal Control
2003 County Staffing

sworn
ClvUian
Parttlme
Total
42
6
49
12
0
0
6
l3
M&O Budget
Counter Narcotics
Marine Patrol
Animal Control
County Pollee
Office of the Chief
Patrol Division
Criminal Investigations
Support Services
lntemal Affairs
CCPDTotal
Courrty Total
3
72
28
4
l
County Pofict
Office of the Chief
Patrol Division
Support Services
Internal Affairs
CCPOTotal
9
73
6
4
3
30
0
31
36
113
38
153
162
57
221
County Total
CIVilian
Part-tirne
Total
Function
2003 City Staffing

Function
Civilian
Part-time
Total
42.
8
7
0
49
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
19
70
Part-time
Total
11
427
General Fund
Office afthe Chief
Patrol
Crlmlnallnvestlgatlon.s
Support Services
Information Management
Savannilh Impact
Public Safety Communications Fund
Pollee communlcation.s
fire dispatch
Grant Fund
Aggressive Driving task Force
City Total
TOTAL-All
Sworn
5
288
93
11
u
7
15
20.52
0
323.52
103
10
14
23
2
43
7
s
422
584
116
173
20.52
22.52
2013 City Staffmg {SCMPD)

swom
Civilian
General Fund
Office of the Chief
Patrol
SARIC
Traffic Unit
Mounted patrol
Canine Unit
Support Services
Information Management
Office of Professional Standords
Savannah Impact (SIP)
Crimestoppers
Savannah Impact Work Ventures
411
82
9
19
6
6
1
2
16
16
0
0
------- -- -------- ---------- --
- - - - -- -
0
0
21
10
19
1
l
0
0
0
0
20
7
16
28
0
0
17
30
22
103
6
6
3
14
3
103
0
0
0
106
787
433.52
654.52
Public Safety Communications Fund

City Total
TOTALAll
3
568
,_619
The Counter Narcotics Team iS supplemented by 30 sworn personnel form the City of Savannah, iiS well as other officers from thevilrious municipalities within Chatham County. Civilian
------
l3
SSO Budget
SSD Budget
......
2013 Courrty Stiffing

Swam
Function
- -------------- - - --
219
238
857
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tony Center
Monday, February 16, 2015 2:16 PM
Tony Center
FW: Questions-Police Merger
From: Mary Sprague[SMTP:MSPRAGUE@SAV ANNAHGA.GOV]

Sent: Monday, February 16,2015 2:16:16 PM
To: Tony Center
Subject: Questions-Po1ice Merger
Auto forwarded by a Ru1e
Tony,
I will not be able to get the answers for you from the city by tomorrow as everyone is gone for the holiday.
However, if you go to www.savannahga.gov/documentcenter/view/6866 you will find the city's budget. The total budget
for SCMPD excluding the 911 call center starts on computer page 128 (written page 109).
Question 1: The budget does not break down the costs between city and county so I cannot give you the exact
information you requested. However, the Patrol and Special Operations Division is $36,661,138 It is already allocated
between city and county by location of beats. It is why the city residents are already paying more for police services. The
city has more beats per capita than the SSD.
Of the other costs, you can take out the CNT, Marine and Animal Control as they are paid for by all Chatham County
residents using county wide taxes.
The remaining cost is ( $64, 112,160 minus $41,748,340(patrol, CNT, Marine, & Animal Control) =$22,363,820.
The $22,363,820 is currently allocated between the city and county based on popu lation. However the county is still using
the old numbers (64.9% city, 35.1% county) based on the last numbers in the merger agreement. In reality the county
should be giving us a greater allocation based on the 2010 census (see 2003 merger agreement at
www.chathamcounty.org). I don't have the SSD 2010 population figures so I don't know how to do that allocation.
However, I think it is more of a 60/40 split. Using that number the city should be paying the cost of their city patrol +
approximately $13,418,292. The county should be paying the cost of their county patrol + 40% or $8,945,528.
Remember if there is a split the city will still require the county to pay the city what it owes based on the 2010 census.
Question 3: Obviously, if there is a demerger the city will not want to pay more than the $13,418,292 for administration.
Since there are few departments we ca n cut completely we would probably reorganize the existing departments into
smaller units since there would be a smaller population to serve. In terms of assets, I guess the split would be very
messy and expensive. Suddenly, we would need two of everything. However, I'm not sure how you split up buildings that
have been funded since the merger by SPLOST allocations. All very messy and unnecessary!!!!
Question 4: How much would it cost to fill all of SCMPD's vacancies tomorrow? The beginning salary for an officer right
out of the academy w ithout experience or college education is $34,115. However that does not include benefits or
outfitting the officer with car, uniforms, guns, technology.... The budget gives that number at $105,764. Keep in mind
that a 5% vacancy rate is not unusual in any organization .
Tony, I would also add legal bills to the cost of a demerger. The city is prepared to immediately petition for a county
wide referendum with pro bono attorneys should the county commission walk. We will also litigate to get the money we
are owed from the 2003 agreement. We will also have to split all the assets and figure out what to do about pensions,
employees .... It will take a great deal of time and effort that the city would prefer to use to FIGHT CRIME rather than
fight the county. What you are doing makes no sense. As crime is down since 2003, the merger has been successful,
albeit expensive for everyone. However, the effort should be to contain costs, not fracture the agreement. The city
1
manager and new chief are already finding multiple ways of saving money without increasing crime. That should be what
we all emphasize!
Do you still want the answers to your questions even if the answers come late?
Mary Ellen
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mary Ellen Sprag ue <memesprague@juno.com>

Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:16PM
TonyCenter@comcast.net
RE: Questions-Police Merger
RE Questions-Police Merger
Tony,
This is my "rant". It is also not meant to irritate, but explain my thoughts.
1. Referendum: 2003 merger agreement page 3 "The MPD will not be a separate legal entity but will be an instrument of
the city government". It further goes on to make all SCMPD city employees. I believe there is enough ambiguity in the
language t o ask a judge to render a decision. I don 't know why the city would ask for an opinion now. We won't need
this unless the county walks. I am also confident that the majority of county residents li ke the merger and will vote to
keep it. Why would the county commission contest this? Aren't you democratic? Don't you want the people to make an
informed decision? It is my understanding that it is stat e law that requires the referendum . I don't think past law suits
are the least bit relevant. I have no problem w ith a conso lidated government. In t alking to a commissioner from Macon
it seems to be working quite well. However, I am also only one vote.
2. Please read the 2003 police merger if you truly believe the city is due nothing. It states very clearly that the allocation
numbers will be changed based on the 2010 census.
3. The city has also sent over offers which the county has not voted on. It is the city's belief that the city has given all it
can give and has received nothing in return. Remember, this is not the city's fight. We are perfectly happy with the 2003
agreement as long as y'all pay according to the 2010 census. You are the aggressors. We are just responding in order to
do what we bel ieve is best for all the citizens of Chatham county. You picked a fight . We did not.
4. I don't know anything about cutting off water. If that was mentioned, it was not seri ous. It was just someone venting
f ru stration .
5. Incorporating the unincorporated areas ce rta inly has some appeal.
Howeve r, it is not a silver bullet. There are still county wide needs that should be taken care of at the county level such
as SWAT teams, bomb squads, crime labs ....
6. LOST negotiations will still be necessa ry as long as Savannah provides jobs, hospitals, social services to the poo r,
homeless, mentally unstable, cultural events .... When other municipalities take on the needs of a the whole community
then we will no longer need LOST 7. The merger has had an effect on crime. Even ifthe numbers are off somewhat
based on poor reporting, the numbers still speak vo lumes. I will send you some figures. It doesn't matter what you or I
think. Facts are facts.
8. The vaca ncies have been a concern for as long as I have been on cou ncil.
Chief Lovett sai d he was doing something about it, but we never saw that.
Credit Chief Lumpkin for committing to making a difference. Any money not used for salaries would be put back into the
general fund at t he end ofthe fiscal year. We charge the co unty only money that is actually expend ed, not money just
budgeted . How much the city and county will pay for officers depends upon where Chief Lumpkin deploys them. If t hey
are needed as patrol officers than they will be charged to the city or county depending on the beat that they are
assigned t o.
8. I believe t hat the County Commission does have a great dea l of power over the police department. So does the City
Council. I truly believe that both entities need to do a better job of policing our police force. We have been asking Chief
Lumpkin to prese nt updates on a monthly and sometimes bimonthly basis. Y'all should do the same . Ch ief Lovett was
given way too much latitude. The cameras were actually free. Laser Internat ional gave them to us with a purchase of
t asers and software. However, I thought all purchases effecting both the city and county over $25,000 would go before
before both entities. I will ask about that.
9. I don't think it matters who is part of a mediation team as long as eve ryone participating is committed to making the
merger work. The concern has been all along that Chairman Scott is not really interest ed in a merger.
The feeling is that he really wants his own police department and has made the terms of the agreement so ridiculously
expensive to city residents that no one in their right mind could agree to them. Remember, city residents already pay
more per capita for policing because there are more beats in the city. Saying crime is more pervasive in the city
therefore city residents should pay more is absurd. Ardsley Park doesn't have any more criminals than Isle of Hope. We
ALL live in Chatham county. We all need to pay for the benefits and problems associated with living in an urban area.
Just saying.
Mary Ellen
Please note: message attached

From: "Tony Center" <TonyCenter@comcast.net>
To: "'Mary Ellen Sprague"' <memesprague@juno.com>
Subject: RE : Questions-Police Merger
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 10:38:43 -0500
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tony Center
Monday, February 16, 2015 2:16 PM
Tony Center
FW: Questions-Police Merger
From: Mary Sprague[SMTP:MSPRAGUE@SAVANNAHGA.GOV]

Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 2 :16:16 PM
To: Tony Center
Subject: Questions-Police Merger
Tony,
However, if you go to www.savannahqa .gov/documentcenter/view/6866 you will find the city's budget. The total budget
information you requested . However, the Patrol and Special Operations Division is $36,661,138 It is already allocated
The remaining cost is ( $64,112,160 minus $41,748,340(patrol, CNT, Marine, & Animal Control) =$22,363,820.
The $22,363,820 is currently allocated between the city and county based on population. However the county is still using
the old numbers (64.9% city, 35.1% county) based on the last numbers in the merger agreement. In reality the county
Since there are few departments we can cut completely we would probably reorganize the existing departments into
out of the academy without experience or college education is $34,115. However that does not include benefits or
outfitting the officer with car, uniforms, guns, technology .... The budget gives that number at $105,764. Keep in mind
that a 5% vacancy rate is not unusual in any organization.
employees .... It will take a great deal of time and effort that the city would prefer to use to FIGHT CRIME rather than
fight the county. What you are doing makes no sense . As crime is down since 2003, the merger has been successful,
1
we all emphasize!
Mary Ellen
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mary Sprague <MSprague@Savannahga.Gov>

Monday, September 22, 2014 11:08 AM
Tony Center
RE: Bacon Park Meeting & DBA meeting
Dear Tony,
I am will to meet at City Hall as well. I talked with the mayor and she is all for us giving a go at it. Tony Thomas wants to
meet as well. I would also like to have both CFO's present. I think the first thing we need to do is agree on what is the
current situation. You have been getting one set of facts. We have been getting another. We aren't under the impression
you are getting a "bad deal". We need to understand why you think the current formula is unfair. We also need to
understand why you have not paid the money you owe us under the current agreement and why you have not complied
with putting CNT under the police department. Both are areas that make us very unhappy and distrust your ability to
abide my any future agreement. Not a good place to start, but here we are. Please understand that we are county
residents too and we pay both city and county taxes. We don't understand why the unincorporated areas should get a
better deal than the rest of us. I'm all for being fair. I'm not for being the county's personal cookie jar whenever y'all
would like more money to spend. AI Scott got at least $2.5 million (4 million minus jail fees) from the LOST negotiations
and will get even more as the economy grows. He then went after Hutchinson Island. Now he wants more money for the
police. When is his constant attacks on the city budget going to end? If you don't have all the money you would like to
spend then lobby the state for more discretion in spending or raise county taxes. Stop coming after us!!!
Mary Ellen
From: Tony Center [tonycenter@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 5:38 PM

To: Mary Sprague
Subject: RE : Bacon Park Meeting & DBA meeting
Only one person at the meeting.

Plus me, Helen, and a CNT officer.
The meeting was about renters who are not taking care of lawns and possibly dealing drugs.
As to my comments, would you please be more specific. I don't remember saying anything that could even be
considered controversial. As a I told the crowd, I wanted to know their thoughts, that I was not there to argue
one side or the other.
Also I have offered to meet anyone at City Hall to discuss my concerns/ideas. Bordeaux said he would meet,
and Tony said he would meet. Edna asked me, I said yes, yet no one scheduled a time.
Given the response Stephanie and Brooks sent Tuesday, I now think de-merging is gonna happen.
Am still willing to meet any and all at City Hall.
TC
-------- Original message -------From: Mary Sprague

Date:09/19/2014 4:15PM (GMT-05:00)
To: tonycenter@comcast.net
Subject: Bacon Park Meeting & DBA meeting
1
Dear Tony,
Someone finally sent me a copy of Elizabeth Scott's letter. She did not send it to me. Please let me know what the
meeting was about and roughly how many attended. Were there any city staff there? What were the concerns of the
citizens? I did at one time take on Elizabeth Scott. I played a recording at one of her meetings of the foul language she
used to address me. The residents were horrified, not at her, but at me. They said that no matter how bad a constituent
is, an alderwoman should take the high ground . I learned my lesson. While I will not listen to her tirades, I also will not
stoop to her level. I think people expect a certain level of dignity from their elected officials. I have resolved since then
to do everything I can to help Bacon Park, with or without Elizabeth's help.
I was surprised at your comments to the DBA crowd the other night. My experience has been that the public hates it
when public entities do not "get along". They hate it when Congress deadlocks. They hate it even more when their local
officials can't make things work. Most people don't care who is "right" and who is "wrong". They only care that they get
good police service at a reasonable price. However, the press loves it because conflict sells newspapers. They will take a
small conflict and blow it all out of proportion . They also will publicly keep a conflict going long after the parties involved
have made up and moved on. I think the best route is to let the police policy committee hammer out a compromise as
soon as possible. If the conflict continues for long, everyone will end up with mud on their faces whether they are a city
alderman or county commissioner. Creating conflict will only loose us supporters and votes. Airing our dirty laundry will
help no one.
When the city council voted to make Rochelle-Small Toney the city manager, it made news for 6 months. We had long
gotten over the unpleasantness but the press persisted. When I subsequently went door to door, my constituents were
not happy with the conflict. They did not care whether I was right or wrong about the choice of city manager. They only
cared whether I got along with my fellow aldermen. If you don't believe me, keep asking people the same thing you said
last night.
with kindest regards,
Mary Ellen
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mary Ellen Sprague <me mesprague@juno.com >

Monday, November 03, 2014 10:51 AM
TonyCenter@comcast.net
Re: Problems at Habersham and Stephenson
Problems at Habersham and Stephenson
Tony,
My district. I have asked the City to send to the police.
If you hear anything more, please don't hesitate to forward to me or have them call or e-mail me.
Thank you for all you do for Chatham County.
I also think we should keep meeting concerning the police merger agreement.
I have no faith in our joint leaders hip to come to an agreement. Our meeting puts pressure on them to move ahead
swiftly.
Mary Ellen
Please note: message attached
From: "Tony Center" <TonyCenter@comcast.net>
To: '"Lee Smith"' <leesmith@chathamcounty.o rg>
Cc: "'Ald. Estella Shabazz'" <EShabazz@savannahga .gov>, "'Mary Ellen Sprague'" <memesprague@juno.com>,
<tthomas@savannahga.gov>
Subject: Problems at Habersham and Stephenson
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:21:09 -0400
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Saturday, November 01, 2014 12:21 PM
Lee Smith
'Ald. Estella Shabazz'; ' Mary Ellen Sprague'; tthomas@savannahga.gov
Problems at Habersham and Stephenson
Lee,
I am writing t o you , asking that you forward this request to Chief Tolbert.
Estella, Mary Ellen , and Tony, I am copying you because I don't know which Alderman represents th is area.
In the last two weeks, I have had two different citizens ask me to contact the SCMPD about the Motel 6 at
Habersham and Stephenson. They both say it has become an open house of prostitution and is decaying the ent ire
area.
I don't have direct access t o Chief Tolbert , or I would deliver t his myself.
Thanks.
Tulf#' Curte~
Chatham County Commissioner,
District 3
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tony Center <tonycenter@comcast.net >

Wednesday, February 18, 2015 6:29 PM
tonycenter@comcast.net
Qs to Mary Ellen
Mary Ellen, would you please help me.

I want to learn, fiom the City, not the County, before my workshop Tuesday, what the City is paying now for
SCMPD and what the city anticipates paying if it has no merger.
I would also like to know what it would cost if SCMPD filled all its vacancies tomorrow.
Thanks.
TC
Jackie Roberts
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Tuesday, February 17, 2015 10:39 AM
'Mary Ellen Sprague'
RE: Questions-Police Merger
Thanks so much, Mary Ellen.

Yes, eventual ly, even if just as a citizen of Savannah, I would li ke the numbers.
I th ink it would help the City to know the numbers also .
Now, please excuse the following "rant". It is not meant to irritate, but only to explain my thoughts.
The referendum law has been mentioned a lot lately.
Bi ll Hubbard was the first , after Brooks Stillwell mentioned it to him.
Tom Bordeaux and I also discussed it at length.
I even suggested the City fi le suit to clarify the law. Tom felt the County shou ld file suit .
I know this is facetious, but the County has had a better record in court than has t he City.
We didn't lose a $12 million tree suit, or a $17 mil lion construction suit, and the court dismissed us from the Ben
Tucker case.
I read the law several times. At the time the law was passed and today the County had and still has a police
department.
It would be an extreme position for the City to now say the PD belongs to the City only.
That is the de facto position the County believes the City has been taking all along and would only be cemented by
the City making its "referendum " position official.
Of course the County would argue that t he "C" in SCMPD stands for Chatham, that the agreement was a merger
not a sale, and that the County st ill owns equipment , pays pensions and benefits, and a host of other facts.
And, the original agreement contemplated a termination, either by years or by decision of either party.
Would termination have been included in the language if the Count y had to hold a referendum to terminate.
The law does not require a referendum.
And , even if it did and a referendum were held, the entire County, including all other municipalities, not just
Savannah and the SSD , would vote. It could turn out into a Savannah vs. Everyone campaign. That would not be
healthy. And , other issues, such as consolidated gov't could be included.
There is the option that the City sue for all it believes it is due.
The County staff has a very strong opinion, backed by facts that the City is due nothing.
I know you don't agree, and for relationship purposes, I would be willing to pay the amounts.
But I am one, lonely vote.
And, even if we de-merge, fee lings still have to take a second seat to reality and good government.
Were I to make my decisions based on my reaction to what has been said to me, direct ly and through the Mayor's
speech last week, I would already have voted to take a hike on everything.
Instead, I voted to send yet another offer to the City a month ago.
Regar dless of what happens, we, as the LOST j udge said, all live in the same area and have to get along.
Were th e City to adopt any "nuclear " options , the Governor and legislature would take over and all us locals would
have no say so at all.
Wou ld the City cut off water to al l County residents . Could you live wi t h that decision.
1
Wou ld the federal government allow such a decision.

Wou ld the fact that the "cut off" residents would be predominant ly white and the cutter offers predominantly
black have any impact on feelings.
The "payback" alternatives are a lot harsher on the public than simply de-merging.
I have several times suggested we consolidate the governments.
If efficiencies are good for one department , why not for a ll.
I have even suggested that the SSD be required to incorporate, either join contiguous cit ies , or form its own
municipality.
I named it Farrellville and suggested Pat be the mayor.
If all territory were incorporated, the Count y could shrink its government, handle only the Sheriff , courts, hea lth
facilities, CNT, libraries, and whatever the state const itution demands.
All other matters , po lice, roads, parks, etc would be up to the municipalities.
LOST negotiations would no longer be necessary.
So , you see , I have been thinking and thinking and even pronouncing.
But again, I am one, lone ly vote. I don't set the agenda. I don't cal l t he meet ings.
I am willing to work with the City.
I personally don't believe the merger has had any affect at all on reducing major crime.
Tony Thomas has said for years the SCMPD was not reporting correct numbers.
There are officers who have said the merger has helped , others who say it hasn't.
I know morale on the SCMPD is low, and even some of the most decorated officers have told me they are leaving
because promotion decisions have too much of a racial component.
Whether we dil ute the numbers or not , we must work to reduce the crime.
I learned a lot at our 3 on 3 meeting, particular ly about the CNT.
I agree t hat SCMPD should have a comparable "street level" operation.
I wonder why the Mayor, after four years at the helm, and 12 before that on Council , is just now concerned about
the 70 vacancies. And, I have been told that the starting number is also t oo low, so maybe it is in reality 100
vacancies.
I asked about how much that would cost , because that is a facto r .
Where is the money going to come from .
Pat Farrell thinks if the City has it, it should have been shared with the County as a savings.
If t he City does not have it, it will have to raised .
What input would the County Commission have on raising that money. (We had none on purchasing body cams.)
The County , in its last offer, ceded basically lOO'Yo contro l t o t he City Manager.
We did change the payment formula .
Stephanie Cutter would not even put that on the agenda for a vot e.
I know we differ, and the difference may come down to money (which I as a City resident will pay), but the County
has to be fair to SSD resident s. They have no vo ice at all on Cit y counc il, yet their money is being used.
If the County is going to tax a resident , shouldn't the County have a say on how t hose taxes are used.
Without shared contro l of the PD , t he County has no say.
OK, that is all I am going to vent for now. But at least , if you read this, you know some of my thoughts.
I very much appreciate your t aking time to explain the budget and computations. I will look more deeply into the
online f igures.
If ther e is mediation , I hope I will be allowed to at tend.
2
I would prefer at least two Commissioners and two Alderman part icipate also.
I don't have final say so on that.
Thanks again.
TC
From: Tony Center [mailto:TonyCenter@chathamcounty.org]

Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 2:16PM
To: Tony Center (tonycenter@comcast.net)
Subject: FW: Questions-Police Merger
From: Mary Sprague[SMTP:MSPRAGUE@SAVANNAHGA.GOV]

Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 2:16:16 PM
To: Tony Center
Subject: Questions-Police Merger
Tony,
However, if you go to www.savannahqa .gov/documentcenter/view/6866 you will find the city's budget. The total budget
information you requested. However, the Patrol and Special Operations Division is $36,661,138 It is already allocated
The remaining cost is ( $64,112,160 minus $41,748,340(patrol, CNT, Marine, & Animal Control) = $22,363,820.
The $22,363,820 is currently allocated between the city and county based on population. However the county is still using
the old numbers (64.9% city, 35. 1% county) based on the last numbers in the merger agreement. In reality the county
Since there are few departments we can cut completely we would probably reorganize the existing departments into
out of the academy without experience or college education is $34,115. However that does not include benefits or
outfitting the officer with car, uniforms, guns, technology .... The budget gives that number at $105,764. Keep in mind
that a 5% vacancy rate is not unusual in any organization.
3
employees.... It will take a great deal of time and effort that the city would prefer to use to FIGHT CRIME rather than
fight the county. What you are doing makes no sense. As crime is down since 2003, the merger has been successful,
we all emphasize!
Mary Ellen
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lee Smith
Friday, February 06, 2015 11:44 AM
Stephanie Cutter
Frances Rasmussen
agreements
Stephanie
You mentioned earlier this week that you would have some information regarding the merger agreement today,
any update?
Thanks
Lee
Lee Smith
Chatham County M anager
121. Bull Street

P.O. Box 8161
Savannah, GA 311.12
912-652-7869 Office
912-652-7874 Fa.x
Lee Smith
Lee Smith
Monday, December 15, 2014 11:32 AM
Jennifer Burns Qburns@chathamcounty.org)
FW: Merger Agreement
County Draft Merger - City Changes 12-12-14.doc
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
From: Stephanie Cutter [mailto :SCutter@Savannahga.Gov]

Sent: Monday, December 15, t014 9:51AM
To: Lee Smith
Subject: Merger Agreement
Hello Lee
Attached please find the City's respo'nse to the County's proposed merger agreement. The revisions are outlined below.
'
1.
Control of county service levels, beat locations and staffing by the County Manager, and oversight of all
operations in the County by the County Manager,
2. Reduction of the costs which were allocated to the SSD. This is accomplished by
a. transferring the personnel assigned to property crime investigations from the CID cost center to the
patrol cost center .(and making it clear that property crimes investigations are assigned to precincts),
thereby increasing the City's cost, since City pays approximately 80% of patrol costs,
b. transferring cost of E911 (in excess of E911 revenue), the county' s share of which was charged to SSD,
to the M&O fund, which is paid by all citizens in the county, including citizens of other municipalities
(Savannah taxpayers" share is still in excess of 50%), and
c. allowing the county to avoid any ca nine patrol costs, by utilizing Sheriff's dogs, which are funded by
M&O rather than SSD.
Please advise if you have any questions.
Kindly,
Stephanie
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lee Smith
Friday, December 12, 2014 9:44AM
Stephanie Cutter
Renee Hig gins; Frances Rasmussen
police merger ag reement
Hi Stephanie:
It was good to see you earlier this week. We rarely get to talk it seems. Any idea of when the City
may send over the police merger response? The County is holding our workshop next week and
options have been derived from information at hand as to policing the unincorporated area by myself
and County Team leaders. I was hoping for something before next week as I anticipate action by my
Board soon thereafter. It's imperative that we maintain continuous commun ications on these and
other matters including Recorders Court due to the significant impact these services have on the
community.
In the meantime, I have spoken to Chief Lumpkin as to establishing a clear process of communicating
incidences to the County and hope to meet with him soon to arrive at a solution to avoid time lapses
of information. It might be good that the Chief along with you and I meet to discuss, as I do not want
there to be an appearance of my office dealing with City officials without your knowledge. I have
strong feelings about meeting with or having in-depth conversations with another manager's board
members or lead staff without that managers knowledge and that is expected of all managers
regarding my staff and board members. I'm sure we both share in this ethical process as set forth by
the Georgia's Manager's Association and ICMA.
Thanks so much and look forward to hearing from you .
Lee
Lee Smith
Chatham County Manager
121 Bull Street
P.O. Box 816 1
Savannah, GA (31412
912-652-7869 0 flice
912-652-7874 Fax
"The Best Way To Get Something Done Is To Begin!"
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lee Smith
Monday, October 27, 2014 8:38AM
Stephanie Cutter
Frances Rasmussen
Meeting???
Importance:
High
Tracking:
Recipient
Cc:
Read
Stephanie Cutter
Frances Rasmussen
ALScott
Read: 10/ 27/ 2014 9:19 AM
Stephanie
My office talked with Renee in your office last week and she said Wednesday from 1-3pm for reviewing the
police merger agreement would work and we responded and accepted that time but Renee declined the time
and date. So I'm confused . When are we meeting?
Lee
Lee Smith
124 Bull Street
P.O. Box 8161
Savannah, GA :-H 412
9 12-652-7869 O!Iice
9 12-652-7874 F;L\:
11
The Best Way To Get Something Done Is To Begin!"
Lee Smith
Subject:
Lee Smith
Thursday, October 23, 2014 9:48 AM
'Stephanie Cutter'
Frances Rasmussen; Linda Cramer (lbcramer@chathamcounty.org)
RE: Recorder's Court Agreement
Importance:
High
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Stephanie
Staff has worked on this agreement for quite some time so I wou ld like to know what the issues are before removing
from the agenda.
Thanks
Lee
From: Stephanie Cutter [mailto:SCutter@Savannahga.Gov]

Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:50 PM
To: Lee Smith
Subject: Recorder's Court Agreement
Lee
I met with the City's CFO and City Attorney on the proposed Recorder's Court Agreement and a few issues
surfaced. Please delay placement on Friday's agenda to allow further discussion with the County.
Thanks,
St ephanie
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lee Smith
Wednesday, October 22, 2014 1:28 PM
Stephanie Cutter
Frances Rasmussen
police merger agreement response Oct 22, 2014
Re: Response to your October 201h, 2014 Police Merger Agreement

Letter "hand delivered" on October 22, 2014
Stephanie:
I am in receipt of your October 20th, 2014 letter reference the police merger
agreement. As discussed by phone, we agreed to forward our latest draft to the City and then
both you and I sit down with our legal teams to review the revised document. I included in the
revised agreement your idea of giving the county more autonomy in the unincorporated areas of
the county and subsequent precincts while giving the City full authority within the City
precincts while giving myself as County Manager direct contact with the Police Chief as to
staffing levels, precinct locations, etc. You and I mentioned this to Mr. Lumpkin in the final
interview regarding how well we thought we could work together.
As you and I discussed by phone late last week, the changes were made to produce a
structurally more readable and consistent document. You and I agreed at the end of last week
that we would meet and discuss together with the legal teams page by page so we could ALL
have a very clear understanding of the document keeping both content, preference and structure
in mind upon your receipt of the draft. This document also supports the concept of the City
having authority of the Chief including selection and/or replacement. This draft also moves
Marine Patrol back to the City as you and I discussed, maintains CNT as a County function and
finally places Animal Control under the authority of the County as you and I have agreed
verbally. This document clearly outlines the basis of accountability, transparency and fully
supports the City's position as to its needs and authority of police protection within the
city. There have been no substantial changes in the document other than the items mentioned
herein.
County and City staff along with you and I have worked tirelessly to find a workable
draft and I truly believe this document is one that will have a great chance of meeting my
Board's objectives while maintaining the City's objectives of making our community safer for
all citizens. I am formally requesting the meeting that we discussed and tentatively agreed on
involving you and I along with key staff and our legal team representatives to review the
document paragraph by paragraph to avoid further delays.
I assure you this is a "step forward" if you will agree to jointly arrange this meeting
enabling you and I to formally prepare the final document for consideration by our Boards' as
soon as possible. This subject is paramount in maintaining a sound relationship between the
1
city and county and I look forward to our continued positive movement forward. I stand ready
to arrange the meeting as discussed and agreed upon by you and I last week.
As always, I look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Lee SmitJ1
Chatham Com1ty M ;magcr
12,t Bull Street
P.O. Box 81Gl

Sav;umah, GA 3 11 12
912-652-7869 O ffice
912-652-7874 Fax
"The Best Way To Get Something Done Is To Begin!"
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lee Smith
Tuesday, October 21, 2014 8:43 AM
Stephanie Cutter
Frances Rasmussen
agreement
Stephanie
Were you able yesterday after your meeting with your attorney to decide on our meeting date?
I am standing by to schedule you and I along with our legal teams to review the latest agreement.
Thanks
Lee
Lee Smith
Chath;un County M;mager
121 Bull Stree t
P.O. Box 8161
Savmmah, GA :~ 1 412
912-652-7869 Ollicc
912-652-7871. Fa..x
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lee Smith
Monday, October 20, 2014 9:30AM
Stephanie Cutter
Frances Rasmussen
merger
Stephanie
I delivered the newest edition of the merger agreement to your office Friday and wanted to know when we are
meeting this week? We discussed having you and I along with Legal staff to review page by page to help
move the process forward .
Right now Wednesday between 2 pm and 4:30 pm works along with Thursday 8 am to 11 am
Let me know.
Lee Smith
121 Bull Street
P.O. Box 8161
Savannah, Gi\. :31112
912-652-7869 Oflicc
912-652-7871. Fax
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lee Smith
Tuesday, September 23, 2014 10:06 AM
Stephanie Cutter
Frances Rasmussen
urgent items
URGENT Memorandum
To:
From:
Date:
Re:
Stephanie Cutter, Savannah City Manager

Lee Smith, Chatham County Manager
September 23, 2014 23, 2014
Various Urgent Items
1} I left a message with your office late yesterday reference police chief candidates and reference
correspondence from your office arriving after 4pm yesterday with a request to ask you to call me this
morning to discuss.
2} I have blocked Thursday morning, September 25th, 2014 for private interviews with candidates in my
office along with yourself if you can attend.
3} I have yet to receive a response regarding the police merger agreement correspondence from Friday,
September 19th, 2014. Would like to have an update.
4} I need to reiterate my objection to public panel interviewing for the police chief position as stated in
early correspondence.
5} I have not received a return correspondence reference the approximate $1.775M owed to the county
for the building located on Abercorn.
6} On Wednesday, September lOth, 2014, you and I met in your office and subseq uently reduced the
police candidate list to a short list of candidates. We agreed that you would conduct a 20 year
background and let me know of the results so that we could consider next steps. Also, you agreed that
you would correspond in writing of these results and next steps before moving forward in order for
you and I to have agreement. On September 12th, 2014, I read in the local newspaper that the list of
candidates had been released without my knowledge or consent. Following this action, my office was
called by your office telling us that dates had been set for meetings at the civic center with candidates,
again without my prior knowledge or consent. If Chatham County is to be considered a partner in this
issue then you and I must consult regularly and document agreement to provide the stability and
credence needed for this process.
7) I am free to discuss all of these items as soon as you are available.
Lastly, the managem ent of local government can be a difficult task but working together to resolve community
issues is the best policy and I remain ready to do so.
Sincerely,
Lee Smith
124 Bull Street
P.O. Box 8161
1
SaYannah, GA 31412
912-652-7869 OHicc
912-652-7871. Fax
Lee Smith
Subject:
Lee Smith
Friday, September OS, 2014 12:43 PM
Stephanie Cutter
ALScott (ALScott@chathamcounty.org); Edna Jackson; Frances Rasmussen; 'Renee
Higgins'; Jonathan Hart (RJHart@chathamcounty.o rg); 'bstilllwell@savannahga.gov'
Police Chief Search Process & agreement
Importance:
High
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Stephanie:
I hope this email finds you well and hope your time off gave you opportunity to re-energize. I also
remain in prayer for your mother as well as for you and your fam ily.
I wanted to get an update on a couple of issues:
1) I received the resumes and applications of all applicants and the staff recommendations for
finalists for the position of Chief on Friday, August 15, 2014. To date I have not received
notification as to when you and I will review the list in hopes of reaching consensus for a
reduced number of finalists or a final hire. Please let me know when we will be meeting to
accomplish this task.
2) The County Attorney's Office was told by the City Attorney on August 22, 2014 that Chatham
County would receive a "red lined or redraft" of the SCMPD Revised Agreement from the City
of Savannah within a matter of days as submitted in the last Policy Committee meeting. To
date we have not received this document. Please advise when we may expect this document
so that we may continue negotiating this important subject.
Thanks in advance for the updates and look forward to you and I meeting to review these
matters. Have a great weekend! !
Sincerely,
Lee Sn1ith
Chatham County M;magcr
121. Hull Street
P.O. Box 8161
Savannah, GA 311.12
912-652-7869 Oflirc
912-652-7874 Fax
Lee Smith
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lee Smith
Friday, August 01, 2014 12:30 PM
Stephan ie Cutter
ALScott (ALScott@chathamcounty.org); 'EJackson@ Savannahga.Gov'; Frances
Rasmussen; Linda Cramer (lbcramer@chathamcounty.org); M ichael Kaigler
(mkaig ler@chathamcounty.org); Jonathan Hart (RJHart@chathamcounty.org); Jennifer
Burns Oburns@chathamcounty.org)
Draft agreement version # 1 with additions/ deletions denoted
scmpddraftagreement#l .pdf
Importance:
High
Tracking:
Recipient
Cc:
Delivery
Read
Stephanie Cutter
ALScott
(ALScot t@chathamcounty.org)
Delivered: 8/1/2014 12:30 PM
'EJackson@Savan nahga.Gov'
Frances Rasmussen
Delivered: 8/ 1/2014 12:30 PM
Linda Cramer
(lb cramer@chat hamcounty.org)
Delivered: 8/ 1/ 2014 12:30 PM
Michael Kaigler
{mkaigler@chat hamcounty.org )
Delivered: 8/1/2014 12:30 PM
Jonathan Hart
(RJHart@chathamcounty.org)
Delivered: 8/1/2014 12:30 PM
Jennifer Burns
Oburns@chathamcounty.org)
Delivered: 8/ 1/2014 12:30 PM
ALScott
Read: 8/1/ 2014 12:31 PM
Jennifer Burns
Read: 8/1/2014 12:33 PM
Lind a Cramer
Read: 8/1/2014 1:17 PM
Jonathan Hart
Read: 8/7/2014 11:19 AM
Stephanie:
Please find attached the SCM PO draft agreement version #1 with additions/deletions/changes denoted in the
document as discussed and submitted in the Policy Committee meeting earlier this week.
Thanks
Lee Smith
Chath am County Manager
124 Bull Str eet
P.O. Box 816 1
Savannah, GA 3 1412
9 12-652-7869 Office
912-652-7871. F:LX
,STATE OF GEORGIA .
C~OUN TY
J ult_~!
I Formatted: No Spadng, Left, fndent: left: 0", First line: 0",

Tab stops: Not at t + 0.5" + 0' + 0.5'' + !" + 1.5'' +
+ 2.5" ... 3" + 3.5" ... 4" + 4.5' + 5" + 5.5" + fi"
OF CHATHAM
I6.5"
2014
l Formatted: Font: (Oerau~) <Aurier
r.----l~~tted : Font: Aria!
_,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT. is
made
and entered
into
this _ __
day of
- - - - -- - 201.1~. by an~ between CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA. a
l Formatted: Fon:;:.t::..:..Al::.:la::..l- - - -
----'
political subdivision of the State of Georgia (hereinafter referred to as "County") and the
MAYOR AND ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF SAVANNAH, a municipal corporation
chartered under the laws of the State of Georgia (hereinafter referred to as "City")
WITNESSETH :
WHEREAS, the Constitution of the State of Georgia of 1983 in Article 9, Section
3, paragraph 1, provides that municipalities. counties, and political subdivisions of this
state may enter into agreements with one another for the provision of services by
I Formatted: Font: Aria!

intergovernmental agreements for a period not to exceed fifty (50) years; and
I Formatted: Font: Arial
--1
l
Formatted: Font: Arial
~ Formatted: Font: Atial
WHEREAS, the Georgia Constitution Article 9, ~. Secnon 2 .. r.;>araqraQtW. 3 (~)()) ,1
f Formatted: Font: Arial ---------...1
provides that any county, municipality, or any combination thereof may provide police
services; and
WHEREAS . the County and City are mutually concerned about reducing crime ,
improving pollee responsiveness and visibility, facilitating more effective criminal
investigations, improving drug enforcement and improving the overall criminal justice
system w1thin Gl:latham-County and Qillt..S~na!'l J!l th~ mol?t co~t ~ffecti_'!~ mann~~; an~- -WHEREAS , the County and City -Be~if41 enter~ into an int~~gox~rnmenta l
agreement on the 161h day of October. 2003 for the P.l:Jrpose of providing joint_police_
services in the unincorporated area of the County and in the City, as well as countv-w1de
-~
---------------------
~-
---
( Formatted: Font: Arlal
! Formatted: Superscript
j Formatt~:Foot:~
A r~
ia~
l ---------~
1or An1mal Control. Manne Patrol. Chatham-Savannal1 Cgunter Narcotics Team and

Mal:ffie. Patrol. ami Chatham-8ava'1nah Counter NarcotiCS +eaffi.:-through a police
department to be known as "Savannah-Chatham Metropolitan Police Department" and

referred to as "MPD"; and
~ERE AS . the
County and City desire to rev1se the Intergovernmental agreement
Formatted: Font: Bold
!O .-eflect a rev1sed MPD jurisdiction, orgamzallonal structure. and cost allocation process.
( Formotted: Font: Anal
WHEREAS, the County and City agree that the MPD jurisdiction is defined as the
geographic area of the City, and th_~ ~nincorporat~d COl}[lty, as_it ~xists on the date of _
___
_--=_ =1
execution of this Agreement and as it may be amended ,as wel l as county wide
Narcotics Team ("OlT").- This area of jurisdiction will be hereinafter referred to as the
.sxpanded MPD jurisdiction .
WHEREAS , the County and City intend that there will be no deterioration of police
services wtthln~_\he expa~d MPD jurisdic~ion _ and that_t_h ~ _ prc;wision _ ofj_o[l}t servi<;:~s .
under this Agreement will signtficantly enhance the quality of police services provided in
the a*panaed- MPD jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS , !he County ana City intone that there will be no net
lo ss--ifl.-~r
WHEREAS, the County and City intend that the County and City shall each be
responsible only for the proportionate share of the costs of the MPD for services
performed in the CountyLs jurisdiction and Ctty;j> jurisdiction, ~esp~ ct1vely; c:md_
( Formatted: Font: Aria!
l fonnatted: Font: Aria!

WHEREAS . the County and C1ty tntend to measure and monttor the quality and
( Fonnatted: Font: Anal

( Formatted: Font: Anal
lffiQ_aCt
or
MPD services [?rt)VIdOd Ill the Countys IUrtSd!Cl!On and the City's IUnSd!Ctlon,
respectively; ar.d
WHEREAS , the Board of Commissioners of Chatham County reviewed this
' Formatted: Font: Bold
---------
Agreement
and
authorized
the
Chairman
to
sign
this
document
at
the
- -------,
_ __ _ __.September~). 20.1i.Q3. meeting of the B()ard of Commissioners: and

[ Fonnatted: Font: Arial
~~~-------
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah reviewed thts
Agreement and authorized the City Manager to sign this document at the
_ _ _ _ _ __.j2;J,OL]1_:!4,~:.01fc~to~b*eH=-.r-+16 ~ meet[ng
of.the Mayor and Aldermen .
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements

herein made, the County and City do hereby mutually agree as follows:
I.
Jurisdictional Authority
A.
Legal Identity and Services. The MPD will not be a separate legal entity,
but will be an instrument of the City government. The MPD will provide the full range of
police services in the unincorporated area of the County and in the jurisdictional area of
the City. Additionally. tl=le MPD will provide sounty wiae police seP11ces in the fields of
Animal Control, Marine Patrol, ana Chatham aavannah Counter Narcotics Team
(C~JT).
The MPD will also provide tl=lesame-mutual aid police services to other municipalities in
the County .....~ere-prov ide(j sy-V~_q_ County as of t~.e 9ate of thi~ M~eement ,.
B.
Agreements in Existence.
The MPD will continue to provide services
pursuant to all mutual aid agreements and formal police service agreements between the
County, City and other governmental entities in existence at the time of execution of this
Agreement.
The MPD will continue to provide services pursuant to all grant project
( i=;;";,atted: Foot: Aria! - - - - - - - - - -
existence at the time of execution of Lh.!...JhstiQt:e'<'iettSS Agreement lA 2003.

C.
! Form~:Arial
---- -----
_j
County-W ide Jurisdiction of Officers of MPD and Enforcement of City
Ordinances. All Police Officers and new recruits of the MPD will be sworn in by the City
and County as MPD Police Officers and then assigned to the MPD. MPD officers will
have authoritv to enforce County and City Ordinances. The County Clerk of Commission
and Sheriff have the authority to swear in Police Officers for the County-wide Jurisdiction.
_All Sava nnah Police Offioers and new recrUitS of MPD w~e sworn in tJy the
Co~nty
as Co~nty Police Officers anEI then assigneE! to MPD. These afficers will ha11e
~lharn
Co~nty
Cmmty Polise Department on the Elate of e~<ec~tio~s-AffiemeAh--AII
Police Officef'&a!'lEI new fficruits-of..MPD will be-oweFA-il+by-lho City as City-PoliGo
Qffieers ana then assignee to MPD
MPD officers wtll have
a~ thority
to enforce County
and C1ty ordinanses.
II.
Organizational Structure
Go;ernonce and Doo~ cv Sel!!illJ~
' Formatted: font: (Default) Anal

' formatted: Underline
' ~~~atted_: F~n!_Pefa~~) Anal
: Formatted: Tab stops: Not at I" 0.5" + 0" OS' +
r + t s + 2" + 2s + r + J.s + ~ + 4.5" + ~
s s + 6" + &.5"
A Policy Committee :s herein established to prov1de governance over

intergovernmental issues and affairs between the County and City regarding the MPD
and to ensure implementation of this agreement. The Policy Comm1ttee will consist of
the Mayor of the City. the Chairman of the CommiSSIOn. the City Manager and the County
Manager. The Policy Committee shall meet at least quarterly.
Policy direction from the Commission shall be provided through the County
forma~~ Fo~ (Oefauit)_A~
. formatted: Normal, Indent l eft: 0 '
Manager to, the Commander of the MPD. with wr1tten notice to members of the Policy
{ Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial
Committee. Policy direction from the Council shall be provided through the City Manager
to the Commander of the MPD. with written notice to members of the Policy Committee.
greeted officials shall exclusively communicate to the County Manager and City
( Formatted: Font:
---
:Derautt) Aria!
---~--
--- -------J
Manager any service requests. and the Commander shall prov1de prompt action and
response considering available departmental resources.
,It is intended that the operations and administration of the MPD be fully in
' Formatted: Indent: fitst line: 0"

( formatte'!: ~n:.:.:
I ::.:.:<D:..:e:.::fu:.:.:lt:.:..lAc..:.n:.:.:al_
_ _ _ _ _ __
conformance and compliance with the charters and ordinances of the County and City.
Nothing in this amendment shall supersede such charters and ordinances.
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 5'
t Formatted : Fon t: Anal

( Formatted: Font: ( Default) A11al
I Formatted: Fon t: Aria!

l ~rmatted: Font: (Oe~ult)AN~a_
l _________
6
ll~May9r- e41->~-,-4t.\&- GAai~+;;afl

tl:le Cot~n~y -Malla!Jer-
T.k!e lvi-PQ
ojj
the- GB>HmiS>;I6fHM !;f~y-M;w.,tgef-c3PB
governanf:"'--anl4 81~ffii RISH"atiV'"7 peliGies are
I~R<:JeG--!G--IR-SUI'G--0j:lP.ARP.~Itii<e~~9AS!V-9RCS&;-aA~[0ffiP.f ..S9~613 N~
~1-essieAaJ...LAnP.~emefl{-
PG!iGy-Eiireolion fro~mi&sieA--sl:lall-t~e-fMev-iGetl--too:wgh lhe Co"'At-y

MaA~ F-te-IRe-GI:Iief...-e~e-MPQ.,witJ:l. GeAStJitation-wit-f:\--~Re--Cit-y-MaAagef-c--P-GiiGy
GifeGIJGA-frem the Cily Co~hall---be ~roviaee tf:lrough the City-Mafl<le~

Gef\SI:Iltatien witl:l the County MaAafJe"'
Service re~s-.ffem elected officials shaii-Ge--oomm~,~AiGate-G--t~RG
Gily--MaflageF-for--i1 r-omF> t--actiOA-aAG--f-e5f*>nse---ey- H1e-Ghief...-a FIG---t:Re-MP9--oosidoAAg

available department resCWffie&:
+l=l~ti9AS-aAEI---aeminislralion
of the MPD shall--be-fi:Hiy..iA-GoAffirmanoe aA6
oompliaAG&-WitfHI:Ie-1:larlefs-aRd~l'Eiinances-Gf-GRalflarn-CotJA-Iy-an1..--tRe.-..Gi l:y-G~
Saw~Ana~Gtfling
B.
-
in this J\~menl shall Sldj3eFGed~FS-aAd ordinances.
Commanding Officer.
-
' Forma tted: lnO.nt: f irst line: 0.5'
The Commanding Officer of the MPD will be at the level of County or City
Police Commander and will be known as the Police Commander of the MPD
("Commander'')
1)
Selection, Salary and Employment Status of Commander,
The
formatted : Foot: A!lill, li<'derline
f Formatted: Foot: Anal

County Manager and City Manager will JOintly consult and each provide written consent
----- -
to the other as to the selection an(fr-2t!WBI=1sati~ &'14-removal of the Commander to

include concurrence as to the selection process. The selection process could include
formation of a selection advisory panel. if agreed to by both parties. to provide non-binding
advice.
The selection process shall mclude negotiation as 10 the salary of the
Commander deoendent upon experience and other relevant factors .
The County
Manager and City Manager will jointly consult and consent as to the salary or other
compensation of the Commander to be funded through the appropriate MPD Cost Center,
and the County Manager and City Manager shalh~av formally agree and concur as to any
other funding sources. The Commander will occupy a Citv position or a County position.
Any selection or remova l of the Commander without joint consultation and written consent
of both the City Manager and County Manager shall be viewed as a material violation of
th1s Agreement. and the Agreement's Termination provisions shall be activated.
2)
Performance Evaluation of MPD Commander,
For purposes of
Formatted: Font: Anal, Underline

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - J
r;;;;;;ttecl: Font: Arial
evaluating the Commander's job performance. the City Manager and County Manager
shall develop an approved work plan with performance criteria and shall evaluate the
Commander's performance at least quarterly through a written evaluation process .
Compensation adjustments for the Commander will be related to the performance
evaluations.
3)
Access to Commander, The C1ty Manager and County Manager Will
Form atted: Font: Artal, :.Jnderhne
t Formatted: Font: Ari~

establish administrative procedures to afford them direct access to the Commander and
to delegate police service tasks to the Commander. The Commander will attend
Department Head and other meetings scheduled by the County Manager and the City
Manager. and may send a representative as necessary. The Commander wrll make
presentations to Council and Commission upon request.
4)
Defin1tion of Commander's Responsibilities. The City Manager and
Formatted: Font: Arlal,
Und;;;;
erl
~
n
.;.;
e_ _ _ _ _ _ __
( Formatted: Font: Arial
County Manager will establish and provide clear direction to the Commander as to h1s or
her administrative and managerial responsibilities and related processes. Target service
levels for each jurisdiCtion are defined as that level of oohce service delivery necessary
for governance. and the C1tt Manago:r and County Manager w1ll 1dent1fV -w'*'A target
s_~r,, ce
leve!s for th e1r re_pectlve
1u n~jctions
the -will- also- -ee aellneated ev- -the
Commander's recommended implementation plan to ach1eve target service levels. and

will recommend adoption, rejection. or amendment of the pse
tarq e~
seFV.ce levels Dian
to the Policy Committee. The Commander will follow the terms of this Agreement in the
I Formatted: font: Arial
~ Formatted: Font: Arial
( Formatted: fonl: Aria I
I Formatted: Font: AriaI
(~F~
or~m~a~
tt~
ed~:~
fo~n~t=~
Ar~
;a~
l ____________________j
conduct of police service tasks. The Commander will assume direct responsibilfty for the
Cost Centers outlined in th1s Agreement.
5)
Serv1ce Measures. The Commander will maintain records and
accounts that demonstrate services provtded rn the City and in the unincorporated
9
Form atted: Font: J\rial, Un<lerfioe
l ;;;,..,;;t~d : R;;:;;~
--------
County. The Commander will provrde a wntten report on Serv1ce Measures to the C1ty
Manager and County Manager at least an nually. Service measures will include but will
not be limited to statistics for each jurisdiction related to response time. calls for service.
cnme statistics (Part I and Part Ill. open cases. closed cases. personnel assignments.
workforce recruitment and retention. the staffing of beats. and provision of mutual aid.
~mqlaPding
Officer or the MPD wril be at tho level of Cou~Gity-~
and will be known as the Chief of the MPD ("CJ:\ief:'}c----OH-the date specified by the
l~ntatien
Schedule (see--&ee!ieA- X}-tll e-Gity-ef. -Savannah- .Police Chref shal-l
oecome the initral Ch rof of the MPD.

1.
Seleclion, Salary and Emplot'ment Status ef Chief.
Manager and the-Gity-Manager will jorntly-6e~s1:flt-and confer

pFOcess--of-4fle-CAief...t>~e-MPD .
The
i~eGen
County
er remoy:al
A seleGtlen-ad-visery-~Aeh3ppeinteG-&y-tfle...Ci~El
~nagOI'S-With memb~s
in conformance-wrth the rc(j1:1if8ments of the
City and Count:y Charters . will provide aev1ce on

af{er--the-mGl:lmGef:l.cy- ef-tRe-iAHiai-Chief.
the sefectron of ne>,., Chiefs for--tfle--MPG
The salar-y-e~href-will--be-negetiate<H:Jy
lfle-.GiW-Maflao~euffiy--Man~d funded as-f*)viEied--in-lflis-Agr-eement.
The
C!=lief-wiiJ....ecw~-a-Git-y--f;)esftien--aR6-will-functiGf:l-as-a-G+ty-Btlfeai:I-Glllef-in- acoo rd an co
wilf1~G~rte~olisie!r.-fules--aAe-regulatiOAS-efthe-Gity-o -1he-Ghief-will-ha-ve -cm-a~ual
~rferffiafl-Ge-evall:hWo~e-Git-y-Manager anEI-Cel:mty-Manager-aM-a~~
(:)Jan with performa~~
10
Oper:alional
AGGOI:In~lity-ef-MPD
Ch1ef.
The City MaAaeF--OflG
have dire<*aGses&4e-tl:w Chief of Polise. ana to ae~se-sefllfoo-tasks to the Chief

ef...the MPD. The Ct11ef ,viii attena
Tfle Chtef and staff will assist in
C.
D~afl.ffient
Head and other
the-l)~~r
the annl!al
rneetifl~
~lltlet
as f3FOYiEieEI
Patrol Bureau. The patrol services of the MPD will be provided through a
precinct system. The overall quality of police services provided by the MPD will be equal
as to residents 1n the unrncorporated area and the City's junsdictional boundaries.
1)
Number of Precincts. As of the date of this Amendment it is tntended
_____)
; Formatted: Font: Arial, Underline
that the MPD operate at least six precincts. Unless significant annexations of
unincorporated area territory occur, the MPD will operate at least two precincts in the
County's umncorporated area to primarily service the unincorporated territory of the
County to the west and east of the City respectively . Chatham County may utilize the
former headquarters of the Chatham County Police Department on Chatham Parkway as
the west precinct.
The MPD will operate at least four precincts in its municipal
boundaries to pnmanly provide services w1thtn the City's 1Unsd1chonal boundaries. The
County shall fund the construction of precinct facilities located in the unincorporated area.
and the City shall lund the construction of precinct facilities located within its municipal
11
i Form..tted: Font. Arial
boundarie~;.
21
Determination of Boundanes and Staff1nq . The Commander will

i Formatted: f ool: Arial, Underline
recommend the boundaries and staffing of each orecinct to the City Manager and County
Manager based on factors including but not limited to geography, population. calls for
service. lime of day when service calls are received. crime rates within precinct
boundaries, acceptable response times and equity in the distribution of police services
and resources . The Commander will also make a recommendation to the City Manager
and County Manager as to the number and level of beats emanating from each precinct
and how available resources can be deployed to meet the target service level of each
jurisdiction. For purposes of this agreement. a beat
IS
defined to be a specific
geographical area within a precinct boundary for which specific patrol officers are
assigned consistent patrol responsibility. Such recommendations shall be reviewed by
the County Manager and City Manager who will recommend to the Policy Committee that
such allocation be accepted. rejected or amended by the Policy Committee.
Each precinct will be staffed with the goal of providing efficient and effective police
services to citizens in the unincorporated area of the County and jurisdictional area of the
City utiliz1na provided resources . The Commander shall maintain and provide data that
demonstrates serv1ces rendered to each turisdiclion. and shall compare provided services
to target service levels as a part of the 5ef'Al-aflf'llo.la._performance evaluation process.
12
The Commander shall have the authority to adjust staffing assignments on a

tactical basis to respond to a short term. unforeseen law enforcement incidents. The
Commander will need to obtain approval from both the City Manager and County
Manager as to realignment of resources that tmpact each jurisdiction's target service
levels for greater than 3 three l3i. day pertod.
It ts the intent of all parttes that

Lformatted: Font: Arlal
redeployment outside of the approved precient and beat assignments should happen
tnfreguently and not as a part of routine crime suppression or response. Final decistons
.:Js to more oermanent resource realignments wtll oe dectded br
~~--sePAGes-
th~ pg~c,tJ;:.J."'lr.t tt~e .
orovtded by -\he.- G4') P~rtmenl-~-Gounly Police
-----------,
!_Formatted: f'ont: Anal
__
-J
reso~rses
D.
on a taslisal easis to rosj:lens to short term law enforsement matters and
Criminal Investigation Bureau. The criminal investigation function of the
MPD will be centralized and configured in a specialized manner under the general
functions of Violent Crimes and Property Crimes.
The SWAT Team, Bomb Squad, Dive
Team and Hostage Negotiation Team will be overseen by the Criminal lnvesligaOOfls
Buroa~:~
l Formatted: font: Aria!
or a :1ew1y creates the Speci <:~!_Opera~!ons Burf!au. -- .
Traditional County Police Ac1Jv1ties.
The Crty and County .e.gree !hal the
operations ol the Chatllam-Savannah Counter Narcotics Team !CNTl, Animal Control,

Marine Pa1rol and Emergencv Medrcal Services (EMS) Wlll be removed Irom the MPD s
junsdict10n withrn SIX months of execullon of this agreement and be returned to the Coumy
Manager's operattonal runsdrct1on The County iylanager and Crty Manager
Will
develop
a separate plan detarllng the transition of staff from City to County employment. and the
plan wrll be sub mitted to the Pol1cy Committee.
EJz.
Chatham Savannah Co~nt@r ll>larooliss-+oom ("CI'IT"l. The MPO Chief will
assume responsibility for IRe admrnrslratioo-aOO~ ht of C ~JT whish-will be a ~a rate
current memeershrj:l of law enforcement stakeholders will continue rls- mul!i-j~nsdistional

aG\flsory eversJ9~0 CI>JT dru~ercement l)regrarn ~N+ wi ~ntinuq to enferse
15
1Formatted: Undenlne
laws regaraing
aru)-63l~Gki~fl.;-f}GSsessi~eu&&;-ana
serlfies.-fe~ -If}~
arug relateG--ielef\t
to perform
r-imeA~N+-w-ill--fnittate-ana
senauct namoties investigations in all of Chatham County.
C!>IT w1li be loeatea
ff\
ava1lable office space i~l~t-fleae~rters euilaing

in~steRee-e~-U-le-4ate-Gf...e-XG\,ffieA-i'Jf-tRls--Agr-eemeAb---ln - 0feler--te-take-aGvafltage-ef
Aew
seoper-a~~ooraination
of:)f)effiiAities-Greatea tly the mergei'-;-WitAin one yeaf
of the effeohe sate of this Agreement the MPD Gt:lief will pref)are-a plan for the
impreVBmenKlf.Gfug-eAfoFGOmeffi-fGHeView--l:ly-!fle-Gi-\y-GeuAGil- anEf..Gel:l~ffiissiOA;
wiiA-IAe-geal-IAat-a~rove4-pfogfam-feHlrug
enfersemeffi-Will be imp lementeG-witflin
t-wo years of the date of tl=iis ,o,greemenl.

Community Polic1nq ...._-_- _The t'JlPD wiU _Op!=!rate in accordance with the
community policing philosophy w hen so directed by the Policy Committee and will provide
crime prevention services and community outreach policing. Such community policing
shall be taken into account by the Commander when establishing the target service levels
and shall not be a reason for the deployment of officers outside assigned beats unless
provided for in writing by the County Manager or C1ty Manager with notice to the Policy
Comm1ttee.
G.
Office of Professional Standards. . It is the desire of both parties to agree
that the Office ot Professional Standards and Internal Affairs Will operate us1ng the best
practices to include a bifurcation of the unit into two divisions. to wit. the Office of
16
Professional Standards and Internal Affairs . The Commander shall endeavor to introduce
to the extent practical and advisable the best practices as outlined by the Policy
Committee. If any complaint. grievance or investigation of any MPD officer is initiated by
any other law enforcement agency or by the County Manager or City Manager and
referred to the Internal Affairs division. the Commander shall ensure that written
notification is provided to the initiating agency and the Policy Committee that an outcome
was achieved. +he services f)ef'fermea ey the County and-C*Y-!ntemal ,<\flairs Units at-tfle
StaAdarels wiY, the e~ceplierK>f the SOPiiGe&i*lrfOrmeel ey COOfl(.y-ffiteu:lahl\tfuirs for the
HGeAsing of alcoholic b~e-establishments in the
uniAOO~AiGA--will
Commu n l ca tions!nfermal!Ofi-- MaAaetneA~M
l Formatted: Font: Anal
Gi~mpl:lter-aM-telet>flarle networks shall eo cha~o-lfle-MPG-buelget and lunGed
( Formatted: Font: Anal
H.
E9 I 1 Public
Safety
[ Formatted: Font: Anal
17
- - - --_ _
-1
___ j
as J3Feidod in ~action V.C . A combined E-911 public safety communications center

(Public Safety Answering Point or "PSAP") currently .wilt-provide. all ~ervices- -6eing .
9-y--tfle..-lmplernentation Schedule (see i;ection X) . The PS/\PJ.L .will
ee located at the
I Formatted: Font; Arlal

the effecttve
eate -et H"lis. AgFeemenl.
II IS the Intent of both part1es. co tmQtement the
recommendations and provtstons enuml:lrated in the docL;ment city of Savannah

Operational Plan for Consolidahon of Police and Fire Dispatch dated October 17 2011
prepared by Wtndborne & Costas. Inc The C.fu Manager and Counl't Manager will
prepare an Implementation plan w11t1 a two vear timeline for full
operational
implementation which will be sub1ect to the approval of both the Comrniss1on and Council.
To the extent such an Implementation plan ulttmatety alters the reoortmg and managerial
structure between the emergency communicallons/E911 Center funcuons and the
Commaf!der. U1e MPD Agreement will be corresoondmqly amended to alter the tv!PD
junsdiction, related Cost Centers and use of E9 11 revenue sources. ,1.11-GI-'1i3Aes-t04Ae
,..._....+fle-on941rne-ifl+ttal cost of renovations and modificattons 10 th e City J30iice
18
! Formatted: Font: Arl~l

! Formatted: Font: Anal
----- - -
9aHacks, technologiGakAanes-aA~I:lAlGffiien~r:soonel--aAa
equipment 1&-#le-Gity police barracks- sil-afl-..9e-paie-trem-oomeifleti-Ret-assets of the E
911 Funds of the Co~:~n:y and City eKisting as of :h&-effective date of this Agreement. All
equipment acEjuired after m<ecution of tl:l is Agreement sha ll be compatible with or have
~he
aiJility to somm~:~n icate-with-both City and County facilities as req~:~ired by the C1ty or
Co ~:~ nty
Manager.
Ill.
Employees
A.
Transition to MPD. Tre County Manaef-GR8 City Manaei'-Will--establish
a conversion sshe8ule to standardize, to tl:le greatest
exten~S&ible,---Gity----jGIJ
classifications with those of the-County for salary, benefits, duties-and responsibilities, - It

~~al-:4&4he-reatest-e~ssi9le-;-l-le-ef!WI&ye~i~y-el'-Golffity--Pelise
Department as of tho effective date of this Agreement will suffer a
red~:~ction
af-beAefit&-AII-Gt:latt:lam--GowAl-y-Peli~ei*!AAleAh3fiG.-Sav.annah
in rank. salafy
Police ~Ftment
personnel will eo assigned a pesilion Nilhin the MPD.

B-,--MPD Employees after Tmnsition .
agreement. all
on-tJ:l~oymeAt
switch
o>~er
Effective as of the date of this
date specifieG---oy the lmplemeffiation
S6hedtlle-fsee-Sestion X) , County employees ass1gned to the MPD employees are sMU

oeOFRe-City employees. and except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. shall be
subject to the personnel policies. procedures, rules and regulations. pay and benefits of
19
the City.
~EiiteJ..-t<l
such employees.
In eases wheF0--6\Jch balanses eJ!GeeQ.....tAe
Alkosts-felatoo-te-any employee wefker.:.s com~nsalien _claims. or claims. of~
le-t~fl'h-and
shall net be shargec:k>r---fooded-t-Af~e-~et-,........+Re-Gwflty
sl:ta~!R---a-k~o~kencemffi~ensable-ifljl:lfies-ef
ElatE!--Sf}OGifi9-Gy-tt:le-lmplementatieA-SGReelule-(-see-&letioA-X-}c--
D.-
-DefMed--Gemeensalieni457-)PiansiSupelementa4ns~:~r-anses, - - l=t:le--Gi~y
7. 0
~yee~~embers of the MPD, who actually participated
il+-S<-Jch plans as of the effeot1110 date of thiS Agreement.
Any MPO n:<ember desiring te
in+tlate----flew- f.h3ftie$a!ien -aftef--.tre -effectie date of -#tis--Agreement 1n a -OOfeFr-00
the thon currently authorized City programs.

eE:----~R~e1!jtif!FO:tJmlli1C!n~t.---l~VJ.4RG---members wflo --we-re---Gelli:lty---mftloyecs on tre
ernplo>;mem-swHGh-eef--Gate s~e--ay the lmptementa-tioA-Senedule (sec Scotion X)-;

shall Irrevocably elect no later than Deceml:ter~Q3.ooe of the-following ret1rement
plan options.
Elect to remain
a participant 1n the Chatham County Pens1or Plan (the
!!Geunty PensiGn Plan;'). Em~oyees making this election shall co~

[ For matted: Font: Artal
be participants 1n :he County Penston Plan . The pay of employees who

rnal4e-lfH&-elcstion
i>Ral~
be subject
~wf#1f1oidtng
for empleyee--j10AsieA
GOffiflbtJtions as specified by the County Pcnston Plan. Tho C1ty shall pay
to tho County the amount of such wtthholdlns en a

TJ:\e--empiQyeK~-fetlrement
month~
benef.ts for sucl1 employees shall
be tncluded 1n the MPD budget and rom1tted to ;he-Geunty on a- monthly
21
I, Formatted: Font: Arial
ast~l-val~:~atien-ef ll'le-GauAt-y- PellSIGA--Plan--aAG--all06ated--te-ll'!e--MPG--tlA
~-emwevees-vesteG--in-ll:le----Goumy--PensieA-PlaA--ma-y-eleGt-te---'!vest:--tf!eir
OOAtf:i~s in
t11e County Pension Plan aRfi---9eGome a new partioipaffl-ifl
!Ae-Gitv--PeA-Sien Plan_
Empfeyee5-Sele6tfng this option shall e~
l*!ftiG~!=Hs---ifl----lfle----Gfty--PeRSien-- Plan.
tl-ti&-elwti(:)I'I--Ghall
ae
subject to
Th~ees-who make
wi#HielffiR--fef.--aA~
sof!tflGI;l{jan--as-Sf.leaflefl-.!}y-lfle--GitY---Pellslen--Plafh
PensiaFI---Plafl~oessar; .
as all--vested assets will remain in the
GMFged to the M~~The--BfFipleye$-AG~
IGI'----tAe City Pons~A-fGI'--effiployees---elaGii~~A---1:1all--be

iflGIJJded-iA-the- MP-&-aud1--anG--f-unde1--as-previdee-in-lhis-AFeernent.-
22
r---- - - - - - - - - - -
( f ormatted: Font: Arial
_ _ _ __ _ )
County (and only c;uch employees) shall have the option to elect not to
r>art1cipate 1n the Count-y-PensJOI-1-~e a new parncieant in the
City PenSISn Plan. Employee~s 8f3l18n shall ens their potential
paffiuij:lation in the Cet~nty-P~Asioo-Pian , and shall beoome new part1cif3ants
ifKhe-~ nsJ on Plan.-
crodit for any
E-fflflloyees-makJng this oiOGtion shall net reG9Ne
county.-serviee -tim~er
the Gil)' Pension Plaf1 (unless the
~lt>'~an -up-fmnt pa)'ment to the City Pension Plan ~

~-beAe#t-value-ef suoh serv1ce as determJAed
ey :he Gil:y's
pens1on
aG!tlary). Tho pay-of emf3loyens who make :his eloctJon shall be subject to
wil~A-fOf-aP.-e!Tlployee-pensien contributiOn as specifiee -by the City
Pens ron
P~aR-o
The emplayers norA'lal annual cost for the City Pens1on Plan fur
employees-electi~ e~on shall be if:ltflKleG-ifHhe -MPD budget-ana
fundeEI as provided in this Agreement.

Before a fol'mer-Cel:lnty emf3leyee-wHI-Se-el~i&kH~City employee on
{fie Bffipl~~r
dale as previded byihis-A~n~ he/she must make-an
elect;on from the abm'e options by the date-specifieEi-aaeve. The selection of an ~Sf\
shall be accomf*i&ReG-ty-signin~R-166tion form 1n wh~
sl=lall--aeMlowl~e aAG--afee ~hat-fle-Oenef#-un9er the County~AS!OO-Pian can
GOA'IFRefl6e--tlffiil-afto~s-an-aGt~>Je--R:leffi9e~PfHs-f)efmaflent+y
23
lrrl'iAated.- ~-aeknowledge
and agree that such former County employee--&RaU
GGfHiA<JOf}Gfl:iGipa!!OA ifi-GAG-ee-subjeGt-te-+Ae-fl::l le&aAG-f'e\:llatiens..e~Ae-Ge\:lflty-mediGal

~Hs-joFQR=t,
NoiFiiR~....f:larqiR~~R~-IFia-Gi~FI&--Ce~<~nl;t ffem medi~iR!\l its
l'l~~Ay.eW:leF-eA=~f:)l&yeeoeeA~n. in U<~e futtlf&-Any-f~ee+fiaa~ioR
of 1119 Gily-P9AG~R-6Aa~40-M~mf)l&ya~~.ooii'9RIS in I~
~AG~AEI-any ftll~OOifieati~l:l A~i@~~~l-a~~
~a.yees-wfle..ef~a~li~nts-ii:Hfle~~ieA-P--ian-,
All new hires fe r the MPD shall-De-~art!GipaAts lA the Cit)' Pensior. Plan as provided
9y the-rules and reyulatief\5-eHhat-f)lan,
J2...F.
Equal Opportunity and Diversity.
The administratt~n and staff of the MPD
( Formatted: Font: Ar1al
will be committed to diversity in the MPD work force and strive to achieve appropriate
minoffiy
representati~oA
goals m recruitment. hinng and
promo~_on , __S_u_9fect
to the
I Formatted: Font: Arlal
~al---G~{30I'tt!FHty--anG- wof'k.fBI:Ge-4-v~ty--geals --or..-{-f:le. Gi~Y=- fGFm er-Goomy-~kGe

b>ef'ar:tffieAI-Bm~leyees- will-~ru;t9r-ed-Gn an ef~t;Jaf(;{')mpetitlv~asi6-WltlHeFR1er-.G!~
PBIcB-0ef3artmAAt-empl ~ -fOf ~ansf~!)eet~sstgnments
and preffitHKJns
Nt> employee- w111- reseiY(~- -i}fly-.-=IGWJ Alae-oH'Ii saeYaAtae-9-afiP.!J--~i&-G F--her-- feR:nef
eepaFment n#tliatlGFr-
Uniforms. Vehicles and Weapons.
24
The uniform of MPD will ~be
("Fo;;,-;tted, Fcnt: Ada!
rrepresentative of a professional metropolitan police organization with visual recognition

of the rich department history of the County and City Police Departments.
D.
Formatted: Underline
I formatted: Font: Arlal

officers ef tho MPD will continue to carry the weapon issued to them until such time as
D~ent-will-
retain take
conEii lion~lace
home--veh~e&-uAder
the same procedures ana
with the Chatham Count.y-Peli~artmonl on4Ae4ale-of e1wcutien
of this Agreement. After the effective 9ato of this Agreement, all-swefA-J'OFsonnel from
ass1gnee vehisles. AAt the first Policy Committee meeting after ~the effective date of
this Agreement. the County Manager and Citv Manager will recommend a GGfl'\mitffie-11-y. .
Maflager-W+lk1e-..e!ef} a-take-home vehicle
~tt;d~Fc;:;,;;-
policy for sworn personnel to be implemented
on an incremental basis.
E.
Medical, Penson and OPES Benefits. Nothing herein shaUprevent either
lillLG.ilY....o.LllJ.e
County from modjfvjng jts.J'l,WlsiPJJ..!;!laD or aoY....Qther emPlp.Y&e ben.efll
pl an jn the futvLO. Any fuMemod jOcgllgn oU he=Cjty Pension Pl.an..s.b.allRRolv to MPQ
lb.e C.Qu,Olv..&.nsjon Pta.o..sba.ll aQply Lo MPP emRJ2x.e.e.s...w.ho_are participants

~
in
lb..e
Pensioo.1.i:!O... The City s11a[l allocate cost;; to tile MPD for Medical. Pension and
.,)fEB benefits on the same bas1s 'ls allocated to other City departments and bureaus
25
1 Formatted: Underline
--=_-=______
.......J
Former County pollee officers and staff had elected to rema1n
on the Count.i
Pens1on Plan anc! Medical Plan during the mitial staff transition to C1ty employment 1n
200:3 through 2005. These employees shall continue to be oart1G1pants in the Countv
Pension Plan and Medical plan. Prov1s1ons of the County Pension Plan shall apply to all
parJcipants in the County Pens1on Plan. Prov1sions of the County's Medical olan shall
M.Qiy to all partiCipants 1n the Medical Plan . Tl1e pay of employees who elected County
b~nefit
plans shall be subject to withholding tor employee medical prem1ums and pens1on
con1nbut1ons as specified in the County olans. The C1tv shall pay to the County the
amount of such wilhholdinqs on a monthly basis. The employer cost for retirement
beneftls. OPES and medical benefits for such employees shall be included 1n the MPD
budget and remitted to the County on a monthlv basis. The amount oi employer cost for
tl1e Pension Plan shall be based on the annual actuanal valuation of the County's Penston
Plan and allocated to !he MPD on the same basis as allocated to other Countv
departments. The amount of employer cost for the County medical plan shall be based
on cost estimates for the medical plan and other related benefits and allocated to the
MPD on t11e same basis as allocated to other County departments . The amount or
filmoloyer cost for OPES (other post-employment benef1tsl shall be based on the bienntal
actuanal va1uat1on of the County's OPES plan and
bas1s as allocall,'l.d to otbe.r County deQ.~.rtrnen\s.
26
allo~e~J_
to the tviPD on the same
r-b- ---~ -
oolllifl~ntil
The traintng f'lFograrns and seheeules of the County Poliee
the MPD TraiAi~~lates a traiAiAg J3rograrn tor tl:le-MPD, inGiuding
=ain1ng in firearms and crowd eontroL
IV.
Legal Representation and Settlement of Claims
County Provided Representation . The County Attorney will represent the
i Formatted: Font: A:al, Underlin;
Form atted: Font: Anal
County. M PD. the City (if requested), and MPD officers or employees who are sued for
----------
incidents arising out of the ownership of county-owned vehicles. The County Attorney will
also represent the same listed part~es in all actions arising out of any incident involving
staff assigned to Animal Control. Marine Patrol and the Counter Narcotics Team. The
County Attorney will also represent the same parties listed when an incident ts-not
otherwise covered by this agreement occurs within the unincorporated area of the County.
County is responsible for payment of all clatms made in this paragraph. The payment of
such settlements or judgment shall not be charged back directly or indirectly to the MPD
---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1Formatted: Font: Anal
- - -------
Budget as part of any Cost Center.
B.
City Provtded Representation. The City Attorney will represent the MPD. the
1 Formatted: Font: Anal, Underline

_ _ _ __
! ~.!:_matted : Font:~ri_al_ _ _ __
County (if requested). the City and MPD officers or employees who are sued for incidents
arising out of the ownership of a city-owned vehicle. The City Attorney will represent MPD.
thP. City
r~no
County in all employment law matters and claims as all MPD employees are
27
City employees. The City Attorney will also represent the same listed ~arties when an
incrdent not otherwise covered by this agreement occurs within the corporate limits of the
City. City is responsible for the payment of all claims covered by this paragraph. The
payment of such settl~ments or judgment shall not be charged back directly or indirectly
I Formatted: Font: AJ'al
to the MPD Budget as part of any Cost Center.
C.
' Formatted: Font: A oal, Underline
~ed : Fonc: Adal
Q-.-
Subrogation., rhe parties waive any rights to subroqalion against the other.
for all matters as to each oth er and MPD.

31:le--Ge~Rty-AttGmey-w+JI-f.epreseAf-.I.Ae-MP.Q ,
uniRGGFJ*)l'atee area of the County.
the City (if so requestoE~t,-tRG
The ~resent the MPD, the-Gity-,
lAe-CeYRt-y (if so FO(:juested), and MPD oflicers/employees wl:\e-are-51:1~
28
Formlltted: Font Aria I, UnderHne
la-af:HnGident whici-HlGSYrred 'llitl::un-#Je corporate limHs of4Ae..Gity-
+Ae-Gost of defending or settling any ol~iA!:}-3fl'I-JIlgement arising from

aA-tnoklent..for:-wf:lio~atiaA-Gt-OOGI;Iffenoo-eaA-na~e-<leleFmineG-sf:laiHle-sflal:ee
bei!Aeen the City ana County in proper00n-~9f*llatien of the City and tho populatien
ef...thEHffiiAGG>pGrated area of the Ceunty.
+Re-fur~~neing, the County 1\ttorney shall ref*esent and Elefene
Sfled..for any incidents in1of.Wng Animal Control. Marino Patrol . or tho CNT. As oolffit.ywide
~notions.
the County shall be re~e for paying any judgement (or settl~
claimj-invewin!}AnimalGeAtf.al~ar~Ae-Palfol,or-tl1e-CN+,
~a~ny rights of subrogatioA-aarnst the other for~jeQ
rnatters-oovereG-un<Jer4his-agr.eell'lenh
V.
Funding
A.
General Principles . It is the express rnlent of thrs Agreement that eJo
i.Fo;;;:;;t;d:~.1 -
pro1rde for
fiscal~~!fle
County.
~ach
jurisdiction is intended
to contribute its fair share of funding for the MPD, tbereby providing fiscal equity between
29
- - -- - -- - - ,
_j
the two jurisdictions,
Eachjuris_diction is intended to receive
service~
in
accord;~mce with
the funding that it provides. The residents and businesses of unincorporated Chatham
County shall provide MPD funding sufficient to fully and fairly fund the cost of police
services for the unincorporated territory. Likew1se. the residents and businesses of the
City shall provide funding sufficient to fully and fairly fund the cost of police services within
the City's jurisdiCtion .. To the extent tha t TracliUonal County Pollee Services remain part. .
rFo~~~tted:!ont:p,;( _____
---===--:;
of the MPD !Unsdiction, the residents and businesses of the County as a whole shall
provicle iunding sufftctent to fully and farrlv fund the cost of those services. ,The BoartJ.of . . .. ! Formatted: Font: Aria'--'_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Commissionel'S and the Gity-Council expressly agree to take all required steps to achieve
and maintain fiscal equity upon the implementation of this Agreement and for the duration
of this Agreement.
ll-is-aelffiowledged that -as
ot the etfeotlye date of tl"llS Agreeme~4ee-sWiGes
1/1-Bacli-of-{flej\:lf!Sdlsl!ons are not equal and that the ta)( rates ffif~erflees 1n each
o~
aM-J.;he in~(;lnt 9.f. th1s Agreement is to increase the availability and
effectiveness of police services.

f'aiG~olice
F~r;a_
tt_
ed_: -Fo-nl:Arial
---
However. -staFf~ levels d1ffer stgniflca ffily-anti--~
serv1ces differ signiHBaA~'JH3Bt>.veen the junsdictloAs-- Police resources
shall not be transferred from one jurisdiction to the detriment of the other jurisdiction.
TI..ax.~s
and funds provided by onE! jurisdiction shall not be used to subsidize the other
jurisdiction .
30
_)
The demand for police services within the City compared to the demand for police
service within unincorporated territory are not equal. Therefore. il is acknowledged ffiat
after tmplementatton of thts Areement. that the_~_P() funding per capitCI (or p~r dollar of
taxable assessed value) within the City compared lo the unincorporated area may not be
equal.
This difference in per capita funding (or per dollar of taxable assessed value) by
each jurisdiction reflects differences in factors such as. but not limited to: (a) police call
volume; (b) crime statistics; (c) geographic response time; and, (d) police officers per
population ratio.
~koowlwged that because-of budget decisions made
by the Commission or
the City Council with~geted in the MPD budget for patrol services
for their respective jurisdictions, the nuFAber of patrol officers fJOr cap1ta may be differe~
aM th~in service ~evels or respoFlse limes for oalls-fe~C service may be different,
fer the City oompared te the -lffiiflOOfjX)Fated County.
It is the express intent of thts Agreement to place more officers en the street
through the merged MPD than is currently achieYee by the two police departments
separately-, 'This- wiU-9e--aBOOffiJ3Iish as nermal attrition of e*cess command positions
command posttion will be remvosted 1n
B.
pa~rol
MPD Budget.
31
officer posttions
A biennial operating budget for the MPO ("MPD Budgen shall be prepared by the
City Manager in conformity wtth the requirements of the City Charter and City Code for
each anm.;C!IaAPl:la-1 period commencing each January 1. The biennial budget will present
the esttmated operating costs for twenty-four months of operations. During budget
development and prior to making a final budget recommendation, the City Manager shall
confer with the County Manager and County Staff designated by the County Manager as
to the MPD Budget Proposal and shall provide a budget calendar outlining key dates in
the budget process. The City Manager. in consultation with the County Manager. shall
modify the proposed MPD budget to conform to changes requested by the Commission
and City Council.
The budgeted share of MPD funding to be provided by the City and County shall
be computed based upon the Cost Allocation Procedure provided in Section V.C. The
Cttv Manager shall provide the MPD final proposed budget and funding requirements by
source to the County Manager and Ctty Counctl in November each year.
The MPD Budget is an operating budget and therefore should not include Capital
Assets. Equipment and Supplies as identified in Section VIII herein. The City Manager
may determtne that significant capital assets are needed for the operation of the MPO
and that related appropriations of funds may tall outside of the City's operating budget
process. The City Manager shall bring significant capital asset purchases that require
contribution from the County to the County Manager's attention for the purpose of
32
l~
Fo~rm
~
att~e~d~:F~on~t~:A~na~i____-_- _- _- ___- _-__- _-__
- - __j
obtainmg budgetary approval from the Commission. The County's budgetary approval
shall be required before the City contracts for or commits funds for the capital purchase.
The budget for the MPD shall be considered and adopted by City Council as part
of the City's overall operating budget tn conformance with the City Charter. It is recognized
that the first year of the biennial budget would be adopted by Council as its annual budget.
The second year of the biennial budget is intended by be used for operational planning,
cost control. and guidance to the County in the adoption of its fiscal year budaet in the
ensuing June. The adopted MPD budget shall be administered by the City using its
customarv budget control and monitoring procedures. All MPD procurement funded by
the MPD operating budget shall be administered by the Ctty tn compliance with the City's
procurement rules and regulations.
It ts recognized and identified in Section V. A. that the demand for services in the
Ctty's turisdictional boundaries and in the unincorporated County are different.
Consequently either entity may desire to implement MPD services that do not benefit or
interest the other entity. Should the City des1re additional or expanded services that
involve funding from the County. the City Manager shall provide detailed infonnation to
the County Manager on any recommended budget proposal for additional services.
programs. operational costs or equipment items. to include increases in authorized
positions that will result in increases to the County's allocated costs. The County
Manager will seek budgetary approval from the Commission for these items as though
33
the MPD were a County department. Such budgetary approval by the Commission will be
required before any allocation of these costs or provision of these services bv the City to
the County. If the CommiSSion withholds their approval, the related activities will be
accounted for in a separate cost center on the C1tv's ledgers and pa1d for solely by the
City. A reciprocal oroces:> w111 be uuhzed m instances where the County des1res additional
or
e.~paraed
I Fonnatted: Font: Anal
serv ces for t'le umncorporatect area
The County Manager may designate a county employee. appointed and paid for
by the County. whose responsibility is to work in a coordinated effort to ensure that the
County Manager has full and complete disclosure of all financial and operational matters
related to the MPD's use of County resources. The intent and purpose of this paragraph
1s to ensure that the County Manager receives all information necessary to ensure
verification of financial and service measure information provided. The cost of such
employee shall not be Included in the MPO budget.
C.
Allocation of Costs between City and County.
All costs budgeted and
r~rmatted: Indent: First line:
0.5"
: Formatted: Font: Aria I, Underline
charged to the MPO operating budget shall be allocated for funding between the City and
the County in accordance with a cost Allocation Procedure" The Cost Allocation
Procedure shall be developed utilizing the General Principles identified in Section V. A.
as an evidence-based funding approach and affirmed by the Commission and County by
November 30. 2014 and therein incorporated into this Agreement as Exhibit I. Failure to
reach an agreement within the lime period specified will be viewed as a material VIOlation
34
{ Formatted: Font: Anal
of this Agreement. and the Agreement's Termination proviSions shall be act1vated.
D.
Aviation Charges. The MPD Budget shall include appropriations to

( forma tted: Font: Anal - - - - - - -
reimburse the County for costs incurred for the utilization of mosquito control aviation by
the MPD. Such charges will be expensed to the MPD Cost Center utilizing the aviation
services. The amount of such charges shall be allocated among the County and City for
funding as provided form Section V. C
An annual operating budget for the MJ:2G-sflall be prepared for each twelve month
the twelve month period commencing January 1 , 2005. As an Instrumentality of the City.
~flget-fm-too--lvlPD
shall
ee~d-by
the City-MaAager in contQFfl'llty-wA-th
tl=le City Manager shall consult with the County Manager and County staff de~ignatee-by
the-GBtlnty Manager.
~y
Manager shall appiY-ffie.Gesl-AIIocatienPfficedure provided 1n ~ectiOR
of-MPD funding to be provided by the C!ty,-~ty (on a county-wide basis), the

County S~D (for he un!ROOFJ')Ofaietl-ieffitor-yt,~--County revenues . and City E 911
revenues for th-eR-SHifl--yea~l"he MP.fl oroposed budget and budgeted funding
~ffients
by sourBe shall be prov1ded to the Cotmty-Board of Comm1s.sioners-aOO to
35
the Crty Council rn fl>lo\ember of each year.

~y--Ma~ r .
in consultation with the County ~lanager. shall moeify the
PFel'!esed-MPQ..budget-le-oonfefffiWiti:Hhe-bi:IEiget- chaflge~ested
by the CommissrGfl
aM-Glty-Couf\Gik
The bueet for the MPD shall be consrdoree ane adopted by City CoURcil as part
( Formatted : Font: Arial _ _ __
MPD
budge~l
___
_j
be aeminrsteree by the Crty using its custofRai'y-bvd90t-rontrol and
shall be admiAlOteffiG--by the City i~iaAGe with the City:.s prec~o~rement rules-aM
f For matted: Font: Arial

( For matted: Font: Arial
+he CH-y-sAall f*eiJH:ie..a-moothly-finan~rng the line rtem budgets and

year to data exeenses for the MPD cost centers.
The Cot~nty Manager may designate a county employee as an MPD Internal
Auditor. appointeG-anEI paid for by the
Co~:~nl-y ,
whGse-fOspoRsimlity is to work in a
Manager has full and complete disclosure of all financial matters relalrve to the MPD's
use of budgetary funrls on behalf of the
Co~:~nty
The intent and
purpose~
paragraph rs --to-~<e that the ColffiW-Ma~r ' ecerves -aH -f~ -infOfi'AatiGA
neoessary to ensure
~ erifroaHon
of frnancial rnformahon used oy the E!oare of
36
Gemm+ss1oners of Chatham Col::lnt; il'l determiAIA the lmdget.
The MPO lnterqal
G-f.!!esalion of Costs eet,woel'l City and Col::lntv.. . A~eted al'ld sha~
I formatted: Indent: Left:.o.s-- ( Formatted: Font: Arial, Underline

:A
_ri_al_ __
( Formatted: Font;;..
GoUA!y-{-eA-<Hlounty-wide-llasis-).tt:le-County-SSG-(fer- the-~:JAiAGe~or-ateG-territer:y.~
e Q11
County revenues. and City !!! 911 revenues in accordance with a .".Cost
~ formatted: Font: Arial

\ Formatted: Font: Aria!
Al l ocation~ce4aFef.;:---+l:le-~roseffiJfes-descriaeG-ir-I-E-xl:liait
A-sflall-ae-tfle-iflitial
Gost--Allocation Procedure. TAe prooedures described in~l-A-sRall--ae--iA
I Formatted: Font: Anal

f Formatted: Font: Anal
effct-for-four-yeafS-BeginninJ-oFHhe-etteotive.aate-o~his-A&~r.eemOfl~ss-ttlan
two years prior-to the expiratien of a Gosi-AileGatien-Procodure, tR~efeto

sHall agree on a new cost-allecation proceoore to replace the Cost AllocatieA
J;,Q.
Gol:lRWi;S=Funding Obligation.
The City Manager shall compute each
Form atted: Font: Ariat _ _ _ _ _ _.

formatted: Font: Arlal
entity's budgeted funding obligation based on the MPD Budget and Cost Allocatlon
Procedure as outlined in Sections V. B. and V. C. The City shall render a monthly invoice
to the County for an amount equal to one-twelfth of the annual estimate of \he_amo_unt of
the MPD budget to be funded by the County. The County shall pay for the unincorporated
share of pohce serv1ces from revenues of the County Special Service District. Any
37
invo1ces should be paid withir. four weeks of receipt.

The City Manager shall estimate the amount of E-911 fees collected by the Citv
and County. and such revenue shall be used as a funding source for E-911 Police
Dispatch services. If budgeted expenditures exceed budgeted revenues. the City
Manager will calculate the County's Funding Obligation for E-911 services by applying
the Cost Allocation Procedure to Ihe remaining expenditures. The City Manager will then
render a monthly invoice to the County for the County Funding Obligation in an amount
equal to one-twelfth of the remaining estimated costs. Any invoices should be paid within
four weeks of receipt. Should budgeted revenues exceed budgeted expenditures, no
invoice will be issued to the County.
After completion of each budget year. actual MPD expenditures shall be
determined by the City Manager. The City Manager shall provide the County w1th a
statement no later than June 30th following the end of the budget year that shows !he
actual costs of the MPD and the amount to be funded by the County for unincoroorated
area services and for E-911 services using the Cost Allocation Procedure If the County's
actual share for the year is greater than the monthly payments made during the year. the
difference shall be paid by the County to the City by August 31st following the end of the
budget year. If the County's actual share for the year 1s less than the monthly payments
made during the year. the difference shall be paid by the City to the County not later than
August 31st follow1ng the end of the budget year.
38
l Formatted: Font. Anal
_~
Anv payments due under this amended agreement not paid when due shall accrue
interest at a rate equal to the yield of the Georgia Fund 1 commending on the due date.
Pnor to Desember 31 each -year the Cty-MaRagef--Sl:lilll-compute the lGtakhafe-of-the

aE!ef*eG--MPG-W~~teS-00~~-AesaliGn Procedure , to
~afe-aR-e&timate
9f tl:le-~~e-f!FO'MeG-Gy-ea61:1-jUfl5flicOOA-fG~=
the eRSUIAQ year.

+l:\e-Geunty shall pay an amount-eaGI=l-mooth-fOOforo tho last business day of the month)
to the City equal to one twolfth-Gf-.tAe-annlffil estimate of tho amount of tl=le MPD budget
to-be funded by the Go~-ounty-wide-basi&.-----+Ae--Gounty shall pay such amel:ffil
from revenues it has raised -~wide basis.
The--Gounty shall pay an amount cash month (before the last busJAess day of the m~
to-#lo City equal to one lwelflh of the annual estimate of tho amount of the MPD budget
tO be .fi:J-R!ed--9y--tl;e--Geunt~<
aaD -ffif-the
UnlnGorporated Share-of police SeFVIGC.
The
Gounty shall pay suoh amount fmm re'lenues 11 has raises solely from the unincorporated
temtery or
aSD_
Tho Go~Jnty shall pay an amount each morth (sefore tho last bus1ness da-y--ef-4He...mGRtl=\-)
10--the-Gity- ~e-ameuni- 1t ha&--fei-ve4--fBf--.B-!-1 fees for :he GG\ffily-aAG-i!ny-omef

GWes-within the County.
As pro1do11n the Cost AlloGat!On-ProGetltJre.-ouch E B11 foes
39
!fie City Manager. The City-Manager shall pre>.<iGe-tl=le-Geunty with a statement showing
the actual costs of the MPD and th e amount to be fuAdeG-O) the County (on a count-ywide-basi&);-aRG-Ihe-ameuRt-to-00-A:IneeG-I:ly-the-GeuAty-SSQ.ffor--t~niAGGf~oratee-territOfy.}
( F;;;m~~:F,;;;t/;ri~l - - - - - - - - - - - 1. Formatted: Font: Aria!
COI*~<&the- ~-&j-Jujy.J-+sl-fol low lng
the end of the buogel ye<1r.
If th~
Aud1t of MPO Police

Expenses. Access to Records and Report1ng.
A:A+f ctf'fu-Al':<7es.-- ~M~fi-Rf'<>ett1f; dn<:J
Reaor-t&. --As an instrumentality of the City, the MPD accounts shall be audited annually
by an independent firm of accountants as part of the annual City audit made in
conformance with audit requirements for municipal governments set forth in State law and
l~e
Crty Cnarter
The County Manager and City Manager. or persons desrqnated by them . shall
40
lF;;;,~tt,;d:- F;t:"Ariaf - - -
- --
- -
--J
have full and unfettered access to all MPD financial records or other data including
operational metrics such as call for service history , use of MPD Confiscated funds . or
other data relevant to alf matters covered here1n.
The City Manager shall provide the County Manager with a monthly financial report
showing line item budgets, current month. and year-to-date expenses for each MPD cost
center. The City's payroll system will be configured to provide accurate information about
the assignment of staff to specific cost centers and precincts. The City will allocate staff
salaries to the specifiC cost center and precinct where the employee is primarily assigned.
The City shall provide
a monthly staffing report for each cost center identifying assigned
employees and vacant positions.
/\s an Instrumentality of the City, the MPD accounts shall be aud:ted annually by an
if1depeRGeRt firm of accountants as part of the
an~ at~Git-ma~~aflGe
with audit requirements for munic1pal go'ernments set forth in state law and tho C1ty
~
The County Manager and C1ty Manager (or persons designated by them) shall have open
a1;cess to all MPO finanmal records or olher data relat iA-t~H:ll~mal-tef.s..-ooereG--by-tffis
Agreement
The City shall provide a Alonthly finanGial report showing the line item budgets and year
to date OMpnses-fe~
-1.
County Speciai-Pelice TaM Districts. The County rnay establish a special police
providing po~ces-in the unincorporated area of the Co~I:IFSI:fa~o
-----
determined a&-f}fG'Ii~~A-V . C . of this Agreement-,
[ Formatted: Font: Arial
--- - - - - l
( Formatted: Font: AriaI

{ Formatted : Font: Anal
The County rnay establish
SPTD couRty-wide-tG-pay--feHJ:te-rost-e~~rlaiA
I Formatted: Font: Anal
--
- J
J
iF\-Sooti~HI=lis-AgFeemefl{-,
Any---fl:llur:e-<>ounty-wde - f}oliGe--SefViGOS- fO{luiMg-aGE!illonal- fuAE!iA;-maneateG-er

implemented by the County Commissi~ll be funeed by additionaHunEis provided by
by the
Col:lflt-y-Cem~deEI-Gy-adGttional-fui'IGs-proYiaed-&y-4he
County
and raised from the SSQ.,
6---Uso of E-911 Revenues. E-911 R8venues and nNet assets of the C~~
42
l!orma tted: Font:,;:;;;-- -
- -- -_ _ _..J
available as of the effective date of this Agreement shall be used to fund communications
related ~ tr-anMieA-costs
11-,G.-
tQr the E911 ..:::enters
ooeratron;-~s ee~naed m SeBtion .
New revenues of the County and City Emergency Telephone System Funds
received after the effective date of this Agreement shall be used to fund the annual
operating costs of the Communications Cost Center as provided in the Cost Allocation
Procedure.
The County shall desrgnate the MPD as its public safety answering point and. to
the-_exten! f.l permitted by law. shall authorize the City to collect E-911 fees on behalf of
the County.
G
Baseline Stdflino Data. A list of authorized posrtrons oy Cost Center for the
' Fonnatted :U~ne
MPO as of January 1. 20 I-I is 'ncorporatecl rnto til lS Agreement as Exhrbrt II, ;s provided
as baseline staffing d<Ha and an rndicatiun of the level of resources and effort existmg as
: Formatted: Foot: Arial
of the date of this Agreement
~teAMR Gf
tne parties that the lO\'ei of effort and resources fur I'JOiico fuActr(ms be
maiRtaiood--at. a-level iA each jurisdietieA that rs Ao-less than the teveHf.>.-offeGt as ef the
efteGti,e date ef41=1is--Agfeem~s-seGtieR-J3f'G\fiees-00o~"'g9ol data on staffing
and-f~g
levels or I'JOiice functions for both JUnsdrctrons rn the mast recent full year
pnor to ifl'lj)lementalieA-of this .A.groomeffi- Thm entn -provie!'!s an rn drcatie~e ~ ev-el
43
of e#Brt af\G-resetlfoos existing prior to the effec;tive date of this Agreemeffi,.
+i=le-fellewffig tables prov1de the staffing for police fu~ons as set forth in the 2002
( Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pl
---
Part time
ftJnotion
- - - - - - - - -- --
1Formatted: Font: Mal, 12 pt
M&O Budoet:
: CounteF-f.J.arcetic6 Team
( Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt

Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
~ar~ne-Palic;e-Pal.ml
:-ARimar-GGFitrer
Formatted : Font: Aria!, 12 pt
.~sueeet-;
Coi:Jnl
[ Formatted: Font: Arlal, 12 pt
Police:
- omse:G~If:le..GAiet
-~J.:QIWsieA
'-Gf.iil:lii:lal-=-lf:weStieaOOnf;
I Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt
Formatted: Font: Arlal, 12 pt
4
.t
I Formatted: Font: Arl~l. 12 pt
Formatted: Font: Mal, 12 pt
:m
Se"Fvices Dli.iisiGA
lnterna~

I For matted: Font: Arial, 12 pt

( Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt
~-Gmffik>f-42-iAGiu~~'ffk>es under c;oRtfaGI-fffim-eii~P.F-iuriseiGUf>A5.,
~ounl-e~-eseRts two oolfce chao~.
~ Formatted : Font: Arial, 12 pt

\
Fonnatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
l Fonnatted : Font: Arial, 12 pt

[ Fonnatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
Formatted: Font: Mal, 12 pt
[ Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt
j Formatted: Font: Arial
f Form~ont: Anal
44
J
l
(~F~~::,:
rm:,::a:.:;tt:;:e::;
d:;.:F,;;::o n:.::.t:..::-A;:;rf:::
ai,:..:1:.::2.::.
Pt:...__ _-_ _-_-_-_-_ - _ _;
f__~
Fo~r:_::
m~
att
~e~d::_:~
Fo::_:nt:.:_::;::
Ar~
la:!..
l, _:_:12=-.!P:.:.t_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _I
[Formatted: Font: Arfal, 12 pt
GeAerai-~Affi
~Ge-Gflief
~lffil
Ci"imiAai lnveslioafioos
~ooorl SP.rviGA!';
-~memir~tiAR-MaAaeAA=~ertl
: Savannai:Hmeaci~roeram
- - - - - - - -- - -- - - -
! Formatted: Font: Arfal, 12 pt
~
~Sl
~
-1-.t
+$;
~
.14
I Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
23
2
f formatted: Font: Arfal, 12 pt
'1-2
Jlt,JGJi<'~afei---GofRmHRi<'..atieRF;'"
' PaliGA Communications
~ire i.li"c:>alr.R
I Formatted: Font: Anal, 12 pt
;u).,~*..
i Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
( Formatted: Font: Anal, 12 pt

[ Formatted: Font: Ar1al, 12 pt
.t
44
~AG
:----AGGFeSS~ino Task F-effie
f Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
rFormatted: Font: Arfal, 12 p;

i Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt

f ormatted: Font: Arfal, 12 pt
{ Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
!!:!...Gfl~ffiSeAHJGI:leel-Gffi~
; '
Count
of
422--iAciude!';
14
SPQ
offiGen::
detailef'.l
to
tho
[ Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt

The--fGIIewifl-tables--oet--furtA-the-l:ll:l19eteG-el$0nditures ter poliaiB~slieAs-as

seUf>r-tt:l-m -tl=le- 2GG2--2QG3-adf>pted-e~;~ageUer4Ae-CeH:Inty-a~G3-aeepted-buaget
Formatted: Font: Arfal, 12 pt

l formatted: Font: Arfal
45
Fortnatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
_ _ __ _ _ _ I
~
,-Get!Ale~.G~
-Mafif:le-Pelise-Patfel
:-AAima~GeAtffil
~
c ololri(d2olie.:.
~~et
Patrol Division
~fiminai-IAvestiaalieru;
seFVic-Eis-Div-iSial'i
..'-lf:ltei'Fiai-A#aiF5
.. . .
..... .
CCPD Gross Total
8,143.820
-bess-+fansfet
- - ffGm..Effiel'e
l=ele-Sv-s-~n1
&.
CCPD
~let
Total
1-1-aP7-&-W
6.906,d00
~aAeSvste~
Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt
:----+Fa.nsfer te SSD Funa

Oiher emeraEmGV Gommunicaifens
:- -bess-E-9.1-1-rB'fflnue

Formotted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
LFormatted: Font: Arfal, 12 pt
I Formatt;;d;~;;i; 12 pt
Caunty total
$10.6Q7,740.
( Formatted: Font: Artal, 12 pt
f Formatted: Foot: Arhil

I Formatted: Font: Atlal
46
=1
!Formatted: Font: Anal, 12 pt
( Formatted: Font: Anal,
iiP't"" -- ---- - -J
_2_qoa Budget ...
j F;;;;;;tted. Foot' Aria-l -1-2pt

-
--- ------
c-PeliGe-GJ:lief
Formatted: Font Aria!, 12 pt
:----:Patroi .
Formatted: font: Aria!, 12 pt
.GeAeral FunG;
~mlnal-lnVstiaatlons
~aaori Services
lntorffiatlen Mai:iaeemeAt
: Crime S~eeef&
Si}Ja n~a ct Proorarn
:~~if:l:ieuiseffient trciffi~foF-SP9-e#iGeFS
Formatted: Foot: Aria!, 12 pt
POO!iG-Safet CoR1rn unications FuM;

Police Communications
Formatted: Font: Arial. 12 pt
Formatted: Fool: Anal. 12 pt

~~eatA
: Lci~s e'91 i revei~UO {flek*-wiroless resorvol
Formatted: Font: Anal, 12 pt

f Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt
.GraAt-F-I:Ind
.~aressiYe '?f:iv.ino Task Force
SPD Totals
Formatted: Font: Artal, 12 pt
Formatted: Font: Artal, l2 pt

Formatted: Font: Anal, 12 pt
'
( Formatted: Font: Anal, 12 pl

{ Formatted: Font. Arlal
II is aeknowledged that the total cost of the MPD will
eetween tho
d~eAI&:-n}- costs
e~Eceed
the surn of the two
[,~F~o~
rm~a~tt~
ed~:~F~on~t~A~ria~l_ _ _ __ ______ _j
that will be recognized as !')art of the MPD that are
currently borne ay non f)Oiice related functions witl=lin the Counl'l accounts (such as but
[Fo"r matted: Font: Aria!
( Formatted: Font: Arll
YChicle use chargee). and Iii) costs related to
47
e~pand i ng
the take horne car privilege te
----------l
C1ly police patrol officers.
1Ae-6urre~lie 13~:~dg ets ,
plus estimates for the ada1tional--and reallocated cos!s -aAG
applying the Cost '\llocat10n
Pmced~:~re
as aoscritled in Exhitlt A
H. Ore time Initial Transition an1 Start ~o~p Gesfs,....-The one time initial start up
transition costs to 1mplement th1s Agreement l:lave.tJeen estimated by the City and County
Pelice Departffionts . Tho estimato!H:!Atl-the ftlnsditioA-re5f}eftsiblo for funding are set
forth below:
I Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt
Estimated Cost
~ Formatted: Font: Aria!, 12 pt
.Items to ~e fun~od by Co_unty:
Formotted: Font: Arial, 12 pt

[ Formatted: font: Anal, 12 pt
Provision of Build lAOS fer Precincts a and e
I Formotted: Font: Atial, 12 pt
MPf>-iJnifer.ffiS-f~~unt:e#lcers
Reffia~tv~ehlcles
1-leaEkiuarter reniwatlon oosts

)teffiS to ae l"tlnded l)y City:
( Formatted: Font Arial, 12 pt

Formatted: Font Arial, 12 pt
lflilial-flurchase-oost-GI'-v-eAiGies-neeEied>-+toe-- - -
,004,4 7{}
...
provide for "take

. .home''
...... vehicles
. . -
Formatted: font: Arial, 12 pt
[ Formatted: Font. Arial, 12 pt
MPG-Yrlifef~~
Re~o of exislino Citv vehicles
Formatted: font: Arlal, 12 pt

Formotted: Font: Arlal, 12 pt
)tem-w-be-41nded bv E 911 available net assets:
R-eloeatkm of..PIJGiiG-Sa.fet~nsweFinG-P-elnt
48
l...:.F.:;or:.;;m;;;a.::.tt:::ed::.::.;.Fon::.:.:.:.:t:.:.;./lJ;;;ia;;:l.:l;;.l:;:Pt-------~.J
l~F~or~m~a~tt~ed~:_F~cn~t:~M~a~l-----------------~'
]
Tho 2003 200!! SPLOST 13ian

Co~o~nly
!Or Police
1 ncl~o~des
a $2,200,000 allowance a>Jailallle to tho
Faciliti~
VI.
Funding from Grants, Condemnations, or Other Sources
A.
Grants.
All parties agree +Ae-CHy-l.f:lret~gi=HAe-!QMPQ...wil_l ~ggress ively_.
seek funding through grants and other sources to reduce the costs of providing police
services. A separate Cost Center within the MPD accounts shall be used to account for
expenses funded by such grants.
B.
Condemnations and Forfeitures. All.f\-!'!C!~ .derived fr()m_condel!lna~ions ~n~l... -
forfeitures initiated by the M PO shall be deposited in the MPD condemnation account and
shall be available for expenditure by the MPD in accordance with all applicable laws.
ordinances. rules and regulations.
All funds derived from condemnations and forfeitures initia ted by CNT shall be
deposited in the County Confiscated Funds
expen6itt.r-e by .fiAPG
~u la !ion s .
~A-asseffiaflGe-witl:l
Revenue-AGGe~o~nt
-all
and shall be available for
aJ3~e- la~n ances,--+;;les -- an9
aml the "County City 1\gfOOfflents for Drug Enforcement Activities" dates
Maf~994
as amended.
Expenditures funded by the MPD condemnation account shall be charged to an

Confiscated Asset Expense Cost Center.
49
C~atted:"F;t~Arla1 - --- -
C.
Court and Parkmg Revenues. Cases or parkHJ9..1i.o.Lat;ons prqught t<;> 2

( Formatted: Font: Artal
court &the r~ ~order' s Court of Chatham--COIJAh:-by the MPD (other than the
~rmattea: font: Arial
CNT) for violations reasonably believed to have been committed within the City:.;.s .
f F.;,.,;;atted: -Font:A~al- -
-- - --
[ Formatted: Font: Arlal
corporate limits (as determined by the MPD Chief) shall be deemed J:..City Cases_~~ Any .,
selffi revenue resulting from City Cases which is eligible to be paid to a police jurisdiction
shall be paid to the City. Such se\ffi-revenue shall not be part of the MPD budget and
- ( Formatted: Font: Atial
I Formatt~: font: Artal

[_Fonnatted: Font: Arial
shall not be subject to the cost allocation methodology provided in Section V.C.
All other cases or parking
v ;o la t ;o ~ brought
by _th~ MPD
~n
anv court other
ll:lan-Recorder's Cow:t-(including the CNT) shall be deemed to be :~.<;:<;>_unty Ca~es}~ Any .

69-Uft.--revenue resulting from County Cases wh;cr
IS
elimole to be pa;d to a po11ce

~ Formatted: Font: Arial
I Formatted: Font: M al
Formatted: Font: Artal
cost allocation methodology provided in Section V.C.

The Commander MPD Chief shall establish standard operating procedures (in
cooperation with the County courts) for the MPD to properly identify all violations as either
a City Case or a County Case as defined above.
VII.
Jail Costs
Any Inmate delivered to the Chatham County Detent;on Center by the MPD for
crimes reasonably believed to have been committed within the City 's jurisdictional limits
50
-l
j
)
~F~o~
rm~a~tt~ed~:~Fo~n~t:~Aria
~l-------------------~
\ Formatted: Font: Arlal
Such w~;~ft-revenue shall not be part of the MPD budget and shall not be subject to the
shall be deemed a "Savannah Prisoner' Any mmate delivered to the Chatham County
Detention Center by the MPD for crimes reasonably believed to have been committed
within the County's unincorporated area shall be deemed county Prisoner. The MPD
Commander shall establish and mamta1n standard operating procedures (in cooperation
with the SherifO to properly ident1fy each person delivered to the Detention Center as
either a Savannah Prisoner or a County Prisoner. Any costs for jail services shall not be
a part of the MPD budget or the Jurisdiction of th1s amended agreement. Any revenues
related to jail service reimbursement shall not be part of the MPD budget.
+his section is inleRGeG--t&provitle gu1dance for the adm+AtStfalion
~the
Inmate
ServiCOS Service Agreement between the-Gily ane the-Geblffiy~

Chatham County Detention Center by
ti=le--MPG---(~-lflafl-4he-CN+~FifRe&
Feasan~eliev~~e-been---Gemmitted-witAifl-tRe-- Gl-'f...S-GerpeFal-e-limits---fas
{r;,;;;-a~~t;,;-
- - - -- - - -
\ Formatted: Font: A11al

{ Formatted: Font: Anal
Formatted: Font: Anal
fef-.Gity Pru;oners shall be paid By-tAo-City to the County in accorEiance wlh the current
IAffiate.--.Ser-viGe&--SBrviBe--f"-ee-Agreemont. Such jail cost shall not be part of the MPD
v.c
All other 1nmates Eletivered to the Chatham County Detention Center by the MPD
51
Formatted: Font: Mal
I Formatted: font: Mal
__ )
VIII.
Capital Assets, Equipment and Supplies
Gomplete inventGf}'-ef-at~tal assets anG-e~pmont of the Go~:.~nty-Pel~h
within six
mon~e-efk:lstiv&eak:K>f-this-Agr.eemont.
A GGpy-ef the County Gapital
asset--3f!G-e~t:JipmeRt- iflvent9F)'--st:lal~-prf>vraeG-tcHAe-Git'f.
l ! h -Use of Existing Capital Assets. Equipment and Supplies.

1)
Ownershtp of Capttal Assets . Equipment and Supolies. Capital
[ "fo-;;;;;tl;d~l --- -
----,
Formatted: Font: Anal, Uncler1ine
assets and equipment will be generally owned by the entity that directly purchased the
item. and any salvage value will be paid to the property owner upon the asset's disposal.
In the ordinary course or operations. the MPD will purchase capital assets. equipment
and supplies through the MPD cost centers. The City will have admimstrative custody and
ownership of these assets except in the event of Termination of this agreement. In that
event. ownershtp of assets purchased with operating funds will be shared by both parlies
based on the funding source as of the purchase date. The funding source shalf be
52
[ Formatted: Font:.:..:
llm
:.::-:;...
1 - - -- - - -
I
.....)
determined based on each enttty's contnbuttng cost share as defined tn the Cost
Allocation Procedure in Exhibit
r.
Such assets will include computers. radios and other
equipment purchased through the Cttv's internal service funds with contnbuttons from the
MPD cost centers. excluding vehtcles
2)
Vehicles ..
' Formatted: Font: Arfal, Undemne
(al
Replacement Vehtcles . The County shall replace a mtntmum of
( Formatted: Font: Aliill

( Formatted: Font: Arl<!l
fifteen (15) police sedan vehicles per year. All costs to mark and outrit the vehicles will be
paid by the County external to the MPD Budget. Vehicles purchased by the County shall
be listed in the County's inventorv. shall be County propertv. shall be maintained by the
County Fleet Maintenance Department. and shall be self-insured by the County.
The City will replace a mimmum of thirty (30) vehicles per year. All costs to mark
and outfit the vehicles wtll be paid by the City external to the MPD Budget.
Vehicles
purchased by the City shall be listed tn the Ctty's inventory. shall be Crty property shall
be maintained by the City Fleet Maintenance Department, and shall be insured (or selfinsured) by the City.
The MPD Commander shall be consulted on bid specificatrons for all vehicles
purchased for use by the MPD. All vehicles purchased will be of the same color and bear
the mark1nqs of the MPD.
(b)
Veh1cle Use Charges . The MPD Budget may tnclude appropriations
53
I Formatted: Font.~ _ _ _ _ _
for veh1cle depreciation titled Vehicle Use Charges. Vehicle use charges shall be paid to
the jurisdiction which owns the veh1cle and shall be used as a method to accumulate
funds for the systematic replacement of vehicles due to age or use. Such replacement
charge amounts shall be calculated in a Similar and methodical fashion for each
jurisdiction and w1ll be charged to the MPD Cost Center to whiCh the vehicle is primarily
assigned .
let
Fleet Mallltenance and Fuel Charges. The MPD Budget shall also
include appropriations to pay each jurisd iction for the cost of vehicle maintenance
performed by their respective vehicle maintenance departments and fuel charges. Such
charges shall be made to the MPD Cost Center to which the vehicle is primarily assigned.
The methodology used to determ1ne vehicle maintenance charges shalf be on a basis
consistent to all other cost centers throughout the rurisdiction. and shall be allocated
amono the County and City for funding as prov1ded for in Section V. C.
__f.ll-elQst~pilal asset~if)meffi.aA~ies . insluem~t6
IG--bl:lilGifl~~er~~fef'm~iGie~eGial~
law--eRfBfcmrn~ent.
armameAts,--effieFency equif*Tient--JM sup[:!lies,...a!W
eAe~ef<*iAg-supf'}lies in use by-aAHnGer the owflef&l:li~n-:ol-ef lhe Cownty
and C1ty as of the e#estive date of this

~~~=!ergo
ll.groeme~l
be m<*le--a>.<allaG!e--tG-MPG
(except as etHefwise- -erG'o4~ -thls--Af9'llent for vehicles -afl!
Gamf*itef...e(lui~me'*)-IG-!AA-MPG-ter-refli-~Hlepfeci~on-~inatien-eate-Gl'
54
at the ens of the terffi of this .A.grneffient, all capttal assets, equtpffient whiCh remain in
eHecnve date of this Agreement

C.
Ownership. Maintenanca,LRopair. D isposCJ~an ci-Replacoment of.
Gafti!a!
.A.ssets. Equipment and SuQQ!!gs.

1.
- --Gwfler-ship of Caottal Assets and Equipment.
Capita-l-assets ana
equipment puFhase1--b)' the County will remain the property of the County.
Capital
a06et&cnG-e{1Uipment pi:Jrchased oy the City will remain the property of tl=le C1ty.
2.
Vehicles.
a. ReplaceFRont Vehtcles
sedan
veh!GI~.yea r.
The
The
C o unt~
shall replace a FRin;mum of le!l (10) police
~ke!*aGe--a-miffimum-Gf
two- (2) vel=H106-fef
Manne Patrol and two (2) vehicles forAntFRal Control every other t ear.
T~
rel*aGe-a-minimum-or rive (a) police seda~icles per yeaf-fur C~lT . Vehicles purchaseG
( Formatted: Font: Ariai
FRaintained by the Chatham County Fleet-Maif:ltenam;e- Department, and shall oe insured

~lf-msured)
lly the County
t"Re c;;y-wilkep l~inim~o~m of thirty (dO) vel=licies-pef-yOaf- Vehicles purchased

~e City
shall-t>e-listeG-iA the City:.s invont~l:lall be City propert,y;-shaU-be-maifltainetl
[ Formatted: FOI\t: Ariai

( Formatted:
ay ll'ie Gity-Vehicle Maintenance Departrnen t, ana shall be tnsurea (or-self

55
tnsured) by the
Fon.~t._,_:Aria:..:.::.l_ _ _ __ _ __ __)
All---m,:Jrked- pc;Jt<ol vehicles pbrchased after tho date of the execution of th1s
Agr-eemeffi-will-9e-ef-!l-1e-same- seteF-anEI-l:le-af'-tl:1e-marlns-of-tl1e-MP~ef
sllall be consulted on b1d specification fer all vet=ucles purcl:1asee fer use by the MPO.
b. Vehicle Expense Fund1ng. The MPO budget may include approprialions-fef
vehicle
rop~semonH;Mfes.-fer-eaGA-vooicle-assiHe~hich
shall be paie
~fisOOien-~w-ns--t-Re-vef:\i6l~~eemerl~s-sAaU-b
accumul:1toe and reserYed by the receiYing jurisdiction to
systemati~.fufl1--l::lew
vehicles to replace MPO vehicles that reach the end of the1r usoM liYes.
~cemeAH;Aarges--sRa~rged
~ly
to the
~st
Such
Center :o whicM!te YOhisle-is
assignee.
The MPO l:>udgel shall alsG-if:lslude-appffipriatiOAS to pay each Jurisdiction for tt:le
cost or -veAiGie---mafl:ltenance perfermed by their respective vehicle maintenafl0
departments. St~cil charges shall-Ge-ma~lhe MPO Cost Center to whicn the tehicle
is pnmarily ass1ned . The-ametlflt of such cf:larges shall be determined on a basis
OOFlSI6tent w1th .ffie---fl'\etooElology usee- fe>- the-6BteFminat1on of.--YOFiicie mainteAaRGe
cflafes to all
o~I=!Foughout
tho junsdiction .
Veh1sle-felated costs shall be allocated among the

provided by Section V.C .
56
ju~
Current Count\
Contfasts-an~ervice
Agreements.
Any service
agreement currently in effect at the lime of this agreement shall remain in full force and
effect unless and until !he City Manager and County Manager consult and consent in
writing as to the termination of such an aqreement.+Ae-Gel:lnty towing service sentract as
well-as -serviGe-aweernefll.s-for-tAe-maiAteAance-of-Gaf)ital-assetsle~u'~At-oWReG-by
tl=le County '""hich were in effect on u~e e~clie date o4his-Agr.eemeAt-sAall-remaifHA
effect until-tfleiF-&tateG-l=l6rma~iFalian,..--+A&Gei;IA~al~de4o-tho City a COJW-Of
eac..J:l..stiGI+oontFaGHIAG-sef\li{;e-areemen~e-GGstcef- suctK>entFacl&sRall-9e-Gfiarged
to tl:le benefilling Cost Cen~on the expiralioFHlf...s~Facts. !he City ManageF

~er-sAall-~nd
cost effecti1e meaA!Hor
pr-alidng-e~fv.aleAt-sefvices-feHJ:Ie-MPG-aMJ- inceri3erate-IRe-Glsts-tf.lefeef-in~e-MPQ
twdgot-;
Costs for Cap1tal Assets. Eguiprnent and Supplies.
Tho cost of ne\-8Pital
assets . equijO)rnenl ana supplies for tl=lo ~eneral use of the MPD and the cost of the
maif:ltenanc,-fOpaiFS-aml-feplacerneflt-tt:ler-eef-sflall-be-funded4flrougf:Hfle-a{}~
!Wdget-o r the most a~~r-iale--Gost-Centef;--anEI-sooR--Ge&l--sJ:\all-be-aUooa~e

iurisfficlioREHFM3GGefdaAGe-wilh the metl=l~FeVideG-ffi.SectiQA-lhG.,
~~JR!~ily-will
eacl:l be responsiele-fof-tl:le-o.naing-maif:lteRaRGe-cost&-ier-all
Ga(lital-asset&-aoo-equipmeRt-iFI-use-by-an~nder-tne-ewnersl:lif'l Or-ceRtroi-G4fle-GGI;IAiy
aAd-Cily. respeetiely, as of the-effective date of IRIS Agreorn~A-oost-shaU-00
57
charged back to the benefitting MPD Cost Center.

Ne-amount for depreciation (or reni)Ol=l-taf3ital--assets-awAeG--by ei ther party-aRG-maae
charges fo;:...vehicles and comp uter
_____ !!J..:
e~nt
as provided f1erGin
Procedures for Main tenance/Repair. Disposal and Replacement of
Fotmatted: Font: Arial

Formatted: Font: Arlal
Capita l Assets. Equipment and
S u pplies .~
All parties
Tho . City
shall follow
reasonable and customary procedures for schedules of maintenance/repair, disposal and

replacement of capital assets, equipment and supplies for the MPD. lrrespecitve of
ownership. all vehicle shall be maintained. reparred. replaced and disposed on the same
standardized schedule.
IX.
Dispute Resolution
Any unresolved question shall be placed in writing through notice. and the County
Manager and City Manager shall meet withm ten (10) days of the wntten notice in a good
fa1th effort to resolve the dispute. Any unresolved dispute shall be considered contested...
Any contested" items shall be forwarded to the Policy Committee for discussion at the
next quarterly meeting. Any items remam1nq as 'contested" after review by the Policy
Committee shall be subject to the dispute resoJut1on procedures of binding arbitratfon.
Nothing m this paragraph regarding any pendmq contested" 1ssue shall prevent either
party from serving notice of termination as outlined in Section XI herein.
58
_j
,A.ny wnresoiJea EJwest1on shaiJ...Ge..placea in writiAft1!yG!fflfrtloll6&.-afla tho GouffiV

MaAaeF--aAEI-tfle-Gity--MaAagef-SflaU-meet-witl:lin-W--4ays-af-the-w-Htte~-RGtiee-in--a
OOEI=faith e~rt to resolve !Ae--Gispute.
AAV unresolvea ai!Sf?l:lte-sl:la#--l:le-GGns~
fi*Jnteste4.:!,--Any-ff3antesteG!!;items-sA<iii-Be-feSalveG-&y-IJ:le-Eitsp\ile-reSGk:lti>fl-1E)GedUI'e '
Formatted: Font: Atial

-~-
Formatted: Font: Mal
fer disputes enseminEJ service delivery strategy agreements
as-sol forth at O.C.G.A 36
I Formatted: Font: Ana l

f Formatted: Font: Arial
70 25.1.
X.
and tf:le
C eunW:CommissiOR-~a~e
sl:lall--agree in an
dates fer
c~let-i~
fuiHmplementa-tien-by....J.anua"Y:h--290-5,
,XI.
Termination of Agreement
Formatted: Font: Arial

For'!'_atted: Font: Arial, Bold
A.
Term1nation, This Agreement may be terminated by the County or City
with eighteen (18) months written notice. Should the 18 months written notice of
59
-1
until June 39,-2023. Aft.eto
lmfH~I&-tAat-spesifie s
f~For_m_a_
tt_
ed_:-Fo
"'"n"'"
t:-Aria.;.l________
The term of Agreement is five (5) years expiring on December 31 . 2019.
Ge~mcil
-----~
'
Formatted: Font: Anal, Under1ioe
r~'!""tted: t=ont= A~- _ - -
_______
termination be provided by either the City or County, the termmation period may be
extended up to six {6) months by mutual agreement of both parties in order to provide the
County with adequate time to staff a police department and/or for the MPD to conduct an
orderly reduction in force.
B.
Status of Employees upon Termination of Agreement, Upon written nottce
, Fonnatted:
Fan~: Arial, Underline
[ Fonnatted: font:
~~a_
l ___
---
of termination. the City and County in conjunction with the MPD Commander will begin
--'
working jointly to determine JOb placement for each emoioyee of the MPD who will be
affected by the reduction in force. Each MPD employee will be given the opportunity to
be employed by either the County or City in substantially the same position . to the greatest
extent possible.
XII.
Need for Agreement after Expiration Date,
' Formatted: Font: Mal, Bold

# '--
............ - - . . . . . - - -
- - -
.. -
I !~':!"_!'t_t~~_:__~~~d.: ~n_d~r~rne
A.._..Continuation of Services. The City Manager and County Manager may
mutually agree to continue the joint provision of police services subsequent to the
Formatted: Font; Anal, Bold
(~: R:nt: Ar1al

1
Formatted: Font: Anal, Ur.derllne
[_ormatted: Font:
expiration of this Agreement. By or before September 1. 2018 the City Manager and
County Manager will provtde the Commission and Council with an agreement titled the
Second Amendment to Police Intergovernmental Agreement with an agreement term
commencing on January 1, 2020. Commission and Council will have a four month period
n which to approve by a mutual consensus. one with the other. the Second Amendment
to Police Intergovernmental Agreement. Failure to affirm the agreement within fhe time
60
''rat
--=-= _ )
_______ -- __ J
period specified will be viewed as a material violation of this Agreement, and the
Agreement's Termination provisions shalf be activated.

R"'Onths wn!teA-ootiGe-feF-a-'lielatleA- of lhts- Agreement.
ef torminatiol'l--is--pr.e,_..dod by either the City
slateG-feasGfl-tly-{Ae-Geunty -oF- City with 24
or-Ce~,~niy .
If the 18 R"lonthc written nottce

the torR"linati~l'iod R"la'f oo
FMR~+tten -AetiGe-
6tatus of ER"lployees uoon--+ermlnation o_f /\QFOOffieAt. Upon wrt:teA-Aetiee
of terR"lination of IRIS Agreement. tho City and
Co t~nt~'
will be affected by th e reduction tn force.
Each MPD employee will be giveR-tAo
~ity
1n conjunction 'Nitfl tAo MPD Chtef
to be employed by the Countt or City4A-W95tcffilialiy41:1~
the saR"le benefits, to the greatest extent j)OS<rtSI&.
XIJ.I.
A.
Miscellaneous
~ -Amendments .
This Agreement may be amended by the mutual
agreement of the parties hereto
Such amendment shall be in writing and shall be
attached to and incorporated into this Agreement.
61
1-h,~att~d: Font: Aria~ -
----- - - - - - I
( Formatted:~~~~-
-------
--J
_
I Formatted: Font: A-,-!1,-_-- - - - - - ____ - !
B.
Counterparts. ~h.i~
ag~eement
may be ~!gned 1n several counterparts, each .
- - - - ---- - - -- - -- - ---- - -
1 Formatted: Font: Arial
one of which shall be an original and all of which when taken together will constitute one
agreement between the panties.
c.
Validity and Enforceabilit'i. If any provi~ iof1 .9f t~is _ag~~emel}t is_hel(j _i_nvalid
I Formatted: f ont
Arla
-'-1_ _ __
_ __
or unenforceable, the valid1ty and enforceability of the remaining provis1ons of the

agreement shall not be affected thereby, unless the provision held invalid is a material
element of this agreement.
0 .-
Waivers. . No delay or failure to exercise a
~ight
under this
agreemen~ shall
1mpair such right or shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, and any such rights may
be exercised from time to time as often as deemed expedient. Any waiver shall be in
writing and signed by the party granting such waiver.
E. -
Headings. ~he hea9ings of the. secti(JOS of th1s agreement h~ve been
~~
-~
~mn
~a~
tt~
~,~~~
nt~:A~;=
I_ _____ _____ --~
inserted for convenience of reference only and shall in no way restrict or otherwise modify
any of the terms or provisions hereof.
F.-
Parties hereto are sole beneficiaries. This_Agreement !~. made for \h_e sol~
benefit of the City of Savannah and Chatham County and is not intended to be construed
as conferring benefits on any other party.
G.-
Entire Agreement. This Agreement consli!utes the entire and
complet~
agreement and commitments of the parties with respect to the comb ining of the C1ty and
62
( Formatted:~~-- - -
____
~- _]
County police departments, all prior or contemporaneous understandings arrangements

and/or commitments whether oral or written having been merged herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County and City have caused this Agreement to be
duly approved by their proper officers and so attest with their corporate seals affixed
hereto set forth in duplicate originals.
Formatted: Font: Anal, No underline
.
-----~
[ Formatted: Font: Anal
[ Formatted:
,.CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA
F..;~it)C~~~ Au;---~
Formatted: No Spaong, Lett, Indent: Lett: 0", Tab stops:

Not at 0' + 0.5" + !" + 1.5" + 2" + 2.5" + 3" + 3.5" t
4'" + 4.5'' + S'' + 5.5'' + 6"
Formatted: Font: (Defaul t) Arlal, 14 pt, Not Bold, Font color:
Auto
BY: __________________
Forma~~d: ~on~: ~~e!_au~~ Arla.1:_!4 _1, F~t.~l?!' Auto
Afbert J Scott - QR...BJI--B-F!NR:Chairman,

_______ _ _ _____..)3oard of Commissioners
For"?atted: Font: ~Default) Aria I, Font colo~~te>_ _

Forn1at!'~.:. r:_<m~ l!J."!~t) Anal, F?"t co!cr:= Auto
Formatted: Font: (Default) Artal

- . -- - - Fo~atted:_~n~:
(Default) Ari~ ~t color: A~to
Formatted: Font: (Oefaul~ Arlill, Font coi_:Jr: A_u_~

Formatted: Font: (Oefalllt)
63
Ari~l.
Font color Altto
i Formatted: Font: [Oefault)_Arlal, f ont color: Auto
ATTEST:._________________
----------~J:,lntce BocookSytlll-.-c-f-iUmaP
_ __ __ _ __ Clerk of Commission
Fo~m~tt<;_d:
Font: (Default) Anal
' Formatt~: ~~t: (~fa l!!.tl Ari~_Fon~~or: Auto

' F'!!~!~ed: Font: (De~0!!:'~ : ~~ _
__ __JSEAL]
' F~tn1a~~ Font: ( De~ult) Aria I, Font color: Auto

!?nnatted:
Fon,!= (De~~~~ co~: ~to
F~ma~ : Fon~~~~~-Auto
Fonnatted: Font:
fOR THE MAYOR AND ALDERMEN

,OF THE CITY OF SAVANNAH
[Def~)
Arial, 14 e_t,_Font aJi!>f:_~!o _ _
Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, 14 pt Not Bold, Font ector

. Auto
: Formatted: Font: (Default) Anal, 14 pt, Not Bold, font color:
Auto
Formatted: Font: ~~!2. M al, l~t~~-
. Formatted: Fo~~: {De!a'!'tl_A~I! Fon~c~r:.._A ~~o __
BY:
-Stephante Cutter Mi~.
City Manager
Formatt~
f?nt. (~e~au~ ~font ~~~~o
' ~o-~~~':'!' ~ont : (D~u~ ~1, f':nt~o~or: Au!o
'\f,TTEST:. ___________
1 ~~-ma~: Fon t: (~u~t] ~~
Clerk of City Council
I Formatted: Font: ~~) Anal, Fon~lor: Auto _

Formatted: Font: (!JefaUit) Arial, Font color: Auto
I~r!".!_tl~ ~n.!:__~ l
64
Do!1na Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Helen Stone <helen_stone3@hotmail.com>

Wednesday, February 25, 2015 10:12 AM
Donna Myers
FW: Police Agreement
From: helen_stone3@hotmail.com
Subject: Fwd : Police Agreement
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 12:30:49 -0500
To : leesmith@chathamcounty.org
Lee,
Please review and respond immediately. I will follow up with Mary Ellen.
Thanks,
Helen
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Mary Sprague <MSprague@Savannahga .Gov>
Date: February 12, 2015 at 11:17:00 AM EST
To: "helen stone3@hotmail.com" <helen stone3@hotmail.com>
Subject: Police Agreement
Helen,
After our chat last night I asked Brooks for some clarifications that I wanted to relate to you.
1. The city is very unhappy about the county's unwillingness to pay over a million dollars in back
payments under the current merger agreement. How can the city trust the county if they won't pay what
they currently owe? This is a huge sticking point. The county has conceded that they owe it. They expect
the city to just write it off. That is neither "fair nor just".
2. The city would like a mediator to provide clarity of agreement. Brooks says that when they meet they
seem to come to agreement in most areas. However, when the county actually puts the agreements on
paper, it looks very different from what the city thought they had all agreed to. A mediator would be
responsible for actually putting everything in writing so there is no disagreement as to what was said.
3. Currently, the city residents pay more for beats and hence more officers per capita. I rarely receive
complaints for slow response times. When I do it is usually a screw up in the system, i.e. a new officer
who did not know where he was suppose to be, or a mix up in addresses. If your residents are
complaining about slow response t imes then maybe you should be asking them "Would you be willing to
increase your taxes for more beats?" When I first ran for office a big issue was recycl ing. When I went
door to door and people brought it up, I asked them "Would you be willing to pay a dollar a month more
for recycling?" They overwhelmingly said "yes". Maybe you shou ld be asking your county constituents the
same question instead of raiding the city residents for more money for county police coverage!
4. According to Brooks "Calls for Service" has never been adequately clarified. 911 received over 900,00
calls for service every year. Of that amount 1/3 would not be really classified as 911 calls. Of the other
2/ 3rds a great many are for EMS and Fire. If the allocation was based on actual crimes, how would that
work? Wal-mart on Montgomery Xroads has the highest shoplifting rate in the county. Would all the
1
:hoplifting be put toward the county or would it depend on the address of the shoplifter? What if the
shoplifter is homeless or not a county resident at all? What if the shoplifter is found innocent? Has a
crime really been committed at all? Trying to resolve all these issues would take a huge team of people
just to do an allocation. It would be a huge waste of taxpayer money.
5. Prior to the merger a great many police special units were being paid by the city alone. This made
sense when there were few people living in the unincorporated areas. However, as the unincorporated
areas grew in population the city rightly felt that all the residents of the county should pay for these
services that benefited everyone. The cost of public safety has increased to the county both because the
population has increased and because they are now sharing in the costs of county wide services. Should
the merger dissolve all these services will have to be duplicated. The city will not have any cost sharing
agreements or be willing to provide services on an "as needed" basis. This means that all services such
as the Bomb Squad and Marine Patrol will have to be duplicated. Brooks does not think that the County
has truly looked into the huge cost it will take to set up a completely separate system and to pay for it. If
I were you, I would demand a complete accounting of the true cost of a separate system before I voted
on anything . I think your administration is counting on share agreements that are not likely to happen
given the current climate. Has the county factored in creating their own Crime Lab or Evidence facility
for instance?
6. To say that the current system is not "fair and just" to county residents is ridiculous. The residents of
Ardsley Park do not commit any more crimes than the residents of Isle of Hope. You are asking them to
pay even more for public safety than they already do just because they live closer to crime ridden
neighborhoods. However, they haven't committed any crimes!!!! Why is one neighborhood charged more
than another if everyone is innocent?
7. The city is prepared to immediately contest in court a demerger without a referendum. We have
already been offered free legal services by some of the best attorneys in Savannah so it will not cost the
taxpayers anything. How will it look politically if the county commission fights this? Are not all the
residents of Chatham County allowed a vote in how public safety is paid for? Even if you win a court
battle you will lose in the court of public opinion. If we prevail, then ALL the residents will vote.
8. I have not publicly in any way gone to war with you. I understand that while 60% of your constituents
are in the city, that you also have a huge base of support in the county. I understand what a difficult
position you are in. However, while police response time may be poor in the county, crime is down BY
HALF in the county since the merger. It has been GOOD for public safety in the county and the city If
you do vote to demerge, I will have to change my current silent position to defend the rights of the
people that live in the city.
In closing, please make up your own mind what is the right thing to do for YOUR constituents. You do
not represent Pat Farrell's district or any other member of the County Commission.
Mary Ellen
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, February 20, 2015 11 :30 AM
Donna Myers
FW : Police Merger Agreement
020915 Police Merger Agreement.pdf
From: MS!I>rpgue@Savannahga.Gov
To: helen_stone3@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 14:54:11 +0000
FYI
Mary Ellen
From: Renee Higgins
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 4:55 PM
To: xCity_Council; (aldermanjohnsonl@aol.com); (aldermanthomas@aol.com); Tom Bordeaux (tbordeaux@prodigy.net);
CaroiBell (chbell210@aol.com); Brooks Stillwell; Jennifer Herman; Stephanie Cutter
Cc: Lida Coleman
The following message is from the City Manager, Stephanie Cutter.

Please review the attached memo re: Police Merger Agreement.
Regards,
Stephanie S. Cutter
~'t!'t>JavanJUili
CITY MANAGER ' S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor & Aldermen
FROM:
Stephanie S. Cutter, City
Manage~
SUBJECT: Police Merger Agreement

DATE:
February 9, 2015
Please find attached a copy of the letter sent today to Chairman AI

Scott and County Manager Lee Smith in response to the County's
latest proposed Police Merger Agreement received on January 21,
2015. The letter provides an overview of the City's concerns with the
proposed agreement and recommends mediation to resolve
differences.
Please let me know If you have any questions.
sse
P.O. BOX
I'IIONE
9T2. 651.6415
TOn
1027,
SAVANNAH, GA 31402
912.65L670l
CoAX
912.238.0872
SAVANNAHGA.GOV
Edna Branch Jackson

Mayor
February 9, 2015
Mr. AI Scott
Savannah, GA 31401
Mr. Lee Smith
Savannah, GA 31401
BY HAND
January 11, 2015, and approved by the County Commission on January 16, 2015. We do not believe that
it would be in t he interest of Savannah taxpayers to accept this proposal without further changes.
Essentially, the County's proposed agreement, if implemented, would substantially increase the share of
unincorporated area. City taxpayers a re already paying over 70% of the costs of the merged
while unincorporated areas residents are paying $190 per capita. We a re not willing to substantially
boundaries, staffing levels and other matters which only affect the unincorporated area. We have
agreed that all routine property crime investigations will be handled at the precinct level, and that we
will shift the cost of t he officers handling property crimes to the budget of the patrol division, for which
City taxpayers already pay 78% ofthe cost.
We have not agreed to the County's proposal to separate all responsibility for patrolling to separate City
and County pre cincts. This would lead to confusing boundary lines, and inefficient patrol routes,
weave in and out of the City limits. We believe that implementation of the County's proposal would
increase the number of precincts, and the resulting overhead for all taxpayers, and. that this is
unnecessary and inefficient.
We continue to believ~ that a merged dep;;~rtment is in the interest of all of our residents, as well as our
ejackson@savannahga.gov P.O. Box 1027 Savaimah, Georgia 31402 (912) 651-6444 Fax (912) 651-6805
Mr. Scott
Mr. Smith
Page2
February 9, 2015
We are prepared to enter into non-binding mediation, using an independent professional mediator
this mediation. We recommend that the members of the Policy Committee represent their respective
governments in this mediation. We hope that the County will enter the mediation in the best interest of
our community.
cc:
Donna Myers
From :
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Donna Myers
FW : Police Merger Agreement
From: MSprague@Savannahga.Gov
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 01:12:40 +0000
Helen,
I wanted to make sure your received this. Remember if you do demerge you will not only have to pay for an increased
number of beats to improve response times but all the administrative costs for a separate police system. I can't figure out
how that ends up being cheaper for county taxpayers.
Mary Ellen
From: Sharonte Turner
To: alscott@chathamcounty.org
Cc: Gail Gordon; Lee Smith; Stephanie Cutter; Carol Bell; Tom Bordeaux; Johnson, Van R. (aldermanjohnson1@aol.com);
Mary Osborne; John Hall; Mary Sprague; Estella Shabazz; T homas, Tony (aldermanthomas@aol.com); Edna Jackson
Good Aftemoon Chainnan Scott,

Mayor Jackson asked that I fmward the attached letter to you. The original is being hand delivered to your
office.
Thank you,
Sharonte Turner
City of Savannah
PO Box 1027 (31402)
Phone: 912-651-6444 Fax: 912-651 -6805
--------------------------------------------------------------- ---
Edna Branch Jackson

Mayor
February 12, 2015
Mr. AI Scott
Savannah, GA 31401
BY HAND
In response to your letter of February 11, the City Manager and I are authorized to negotiate the terms of the
Police Merger Agreement, subject to Council's final approval. The City Council reviewed your recommendations
and did not agree.
For the reasons stated in my letter of February 9, we will not recommend approval of the County's latest offer,
without additional changes. We will not agree that City taxpayers should substantially increase their share of
police department costs. As you know, the City's taxpayers already pay over 70% of these costs.
We feel strongly that rather than sending drafts back and forth, it would be in the public interest for us to sit down
and discuss the proposals wh ich you have made, and those which we have made, in an effort to reach a
compromise. This process has gone on far too long, and needs to be resolved one way or the other.
We believe that a mediator would facilitate this discussion, but mediation will be successful only if both parties
have an ihterest in reaching a fair settlement. We feel that, to date, all of the concessions have been made by the
City, and that it is time to discuss frankly whether the County Commissioners wish to make an agreement.
If the Commissioners reany believe that creating a separate department wou ld be good for our comm unity, it is
time to cal l a referendum and let the people of Chatham County decide this issue once and for all.
Again, we feel that one department is stronger than two, and that duplicating services would be more expensive,
and would move the County in the wrong direction. We do not believe that the County needs two SWAT teams,
two major accident investigation units, two criminal investigation divisions, two internal affairs departments, two
canine units, or even two chiefs.
We hope that the County will accept our proposal to come to the bargaining table.
Very truly yours,
Edna Branch Jackson

Mayor
C:
County Manager
City Manager
Aldermen, City of Savannah
ejackson@savannahga.gov P.O. Box 1027 Savannah, Georgia 31402 (912) 651-6444 Fax (912) 651-6805
From: Helen Stone [mailto:helen stone3@hotmail.com ]

To: Lee Smith
Subject: FW: Police Agreement

Lee,
Please review and comment as soon as possible. I would like to factually respond to Mary Ellen .
Thank you,
Helen
From : MSprague@Savannahga.Gov
To: helen stone3@ hotmai l.com
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:17:00 +0000
Helen,
1. The city is very unhappy about the county's unwillingness to pay over a million dollars in back payments under the
current merger agreement. How can the city trust the county if they won't pay what they currently owe? This is a huge
sticking point. The county has conceded that they owe it. They expect the city to just write it off. That is neither "fair nor
just". I do not believe the Board of Commissioners or County staff have conceded to the City's position on the
disputed prior year billings. Language was added in the last contract draft to set aside previous claims because
there is no benefit served by entering into a new agreement when there is a threat of litigation under the old
agreement.
2. The city would like a mediator to provide clarity of agreement. Brooks says that when they meet they seem to come to
agreement in most areas. However, when the county actually puts the agreements on paper, it looks very different from
what the city thought they had all agreed to. A mediator would be responsible for actually putting everything in writing so
there is no disagreement as to what was said. The two main areas still in dispute are the funding formula and the
separation ofprecincts/beats into City-only and County-only. This is a service contract_ and the County wants
to ensure that services are being provided to its citiz ens. The County has expressed its concern that officers
are not visible in the unincorporated area and are diverted into the City for calls. So the County has asked for
its own precincts and beats in the unincorporated area to ensure that its residents are being served. The City
has not agreed to this proposal. As this is really a simple yes or no question, it is questionable that a mediator
could provide any resolution. On the funding formula, the City has not changed its desired funding formula
throughout the negotiations and has kept the funding formula from the 2005 agreement. The County is
obviously unhappy with the current funding formula and has presented 2 alternative funding formulas so far
based on service levels provided (dispatched E911 calls and direct cost ofprecincts. The City has not changed
its position or presented any alternative.
3. Currently, the city residents pay more for beats and hence more officers per capita. I rarely receive complaints for slow
response times. When I do it is usually a screw up in the system, i.e. a new officer who did not know where he was
suppose to be, or a mix up in addresses. If your residents are complaining about slow response times then maybe you
should be asking them "Would you be willing to increase your taxes for more beats?" When I first ran for office a big
issue was recycling. When I went door to door and people brought it up, I asked them "Would you be willing to pay a
dollar a month more for recycling?" They overwhelmingly said "yes" . Maybe you should be asking your county
constituents the same question instead of raiding the city residents for more money for county police coverage! There
should be a direct correlation between improved services and increased taxes. The City has not offered to
improve services to the unincorporated area under any of its proposals. The County's proposal seeks
to improve services by having the precincts and beats be exclusive to the unincorporated area.
4. According to Brooks "Calls for Service" has never been adequately clarified. 911 received over 900,00 calls for service
every year. Of that amount 1/3 would not be really classified as 911 calls. Of the other 2/3rds a great many are for EMS
and Fire. If the allocation was based on actual crimes, how would that work? Wal-mart on Montgomery Xroads has the
highest shoplifting rate in the county. Would all the shoplifting be put toward the county or would it depend on the
3
address of the shoplifter? What if the shoplifter is homeless or not a county resident at all? What if the shoplifter is found
innocent? Has a crime really been committed at all? Trying to resolve all these issues would take a huge team of people
just to do an allocation. It would be a huge waste of taxpayer money. Dispatched calls for service, based on location
of occurrence, is the measure proposed by the County. This information is available from the police records.
County staff were able to sift through the records to determine the 2013 percentages. This activity can be
contracted to a J d party if neither the City or County feel they can
5. Prior to the merger a great many police special units were being paid by the city alone. This made sense when there
were few people living in the unincorporated areas. However, as the unincorporated areas grew in population the city
rightly felt that all the residents of the county should pay for these services that benefited everyone. The cost of public
safety has increased to the county both because the population has increased and because they are now sharing in the
costs of county wide services. Should the merger dissolve all these services will have to be duplicated. The city will not
have any cost sharing agreements or be willing to provide services on an "as needed" basis. This means that all services
such as the Bomb Squad and Marine Patrol will have to be duplicated. Brooks does not think that the County has truly
looked into the huge cost it will take to set up a completely separate system and to pay for it. If I were you, I would
demand a complete accounting of the true cost of a separate system before I voted on anything. I think your
administration is counting on share agreements that are not likely to happen given the current climate. Has the county
factored in creating their own Crime Lab or Evidence facility for instance? These factors have been considered in the
County's alternatives.
6. To say that the current system is not "fair and just" to county residents is ridiculous. The residents of Ardsley Park do
not commit any more crimes than the residents of Isle of Hope. You are asking them to pay even more for public safety
than they already do just because they live closer to crime ridden neighborhoods. However, they haven't committed any
crimes!!!! Why is one neighborhood charged more than another if everyone is innocent? This is a service contract,
and the County wants to ensure that services are being provided to its citizens. The County has expressed its
concern that officers are not visible in the unincorporated area and are diverted into the City for calls. So the
County has asked for its own precincts and beats in the unincorporated area to ensure that its residents are
being served. Likewise the City can provide services as requested by its citizens through its own precincts.
7. The city is prepared to immediately contest in court a demerger without a referendum . We have already been offered
free legal services by some of the best attorneys in Savannah so it will not cost the taxpayers anything. How will it look
politically if the county commission fights this? Are not all the residents of Chatham County allowed a vote in how public
safety is paid for? Even if you win a court battle you will lose in the court of public opinion. If we prevail, then ALL the
residents will vote. The County has always provided police services in the unincorporated area and will continue
to provide these services to its residents.

8. I have not publicly in any way gone to war with you. I understand that while 60% of your constituents are in the city,
that you also have a huge base of support in the county. I understand what a difficult position you are in. However, while
police response time may be poor in the county, crime is down BY HALF in the county since the merger. It has been
GOOD for public safety in the county and the city If you do vote to demerge, I will have to change my current silent
position to defend the rights of the people that live in the city.
In closing, please make up your own mind what is the right thing to do for YOUR constituents. You do not represent Pat
Farrell's district or any other member of the County Commission.
Mary Ellen
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Friday, February 20 , 2015 11 :31 AM

Donna Myers
FW : Police Agreement
From: leesmittl@chathamcounty.org
To: Helen_Stone3@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 10:13:11-0500
Helen
Below you will find some answers to Mary Ellen's issues.
Lee
From: Linda Cramer
To: Lee Smith
Subject: RE: Police Agreement
My comments are shown below.

From: Lee Smith
Sent: Thursday, February 12., 2.015 3:48 PM

To: Linda Cramer
Subject: FW : Police Agreement
Linda, please read ... can you and I get together and respond
Lee
From: Helen Stone [ma ilto:helen stone3@hotmail.com]
To: Lee Smith
Lee,
Please review an d comment as soon as possible. I would like to factually respond to Mary Ellen.
Thank you,
Helen
From : MSprague@Savannahga.Gov
To: he len stone3@ hotmai l.com
1

Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:17:00 +0000
Helen,
1. The city is very unhappy about the county's unwillingness to pay over a million dollars in back payments under the
current merger agreement. How can the city trust the county if they won't pay what they currently owe? This is a huge
sticking point. The county has conceded that they owe it. They expect the city to just write it off. That is neither "fair nor
just". I do not believe the Board of Commissioners or County staff have conceded to the City's position on the
disputed prior year billings. Language was added in the last contract draft to set aside previous claims because
there is no benefit served by entering into a new agreement when there is a threat of litigation under the old
agreement.
2. The city would like a mediator to provide clarity of agreement. Brooks says that when they meet they seem to come to
agreement in most areas. However, when the county actually puts the agreements on paper, it looks very different from
what the city thought they had all agreed to. A mediator would be responsible for actually putting everything in writing so
there is no disagreement as to what was said. The two main areas still in dispute are the funding formula and the
separation ofprecincts/beats into City-only and County-only. This is a service contrac~:r and the County wants
to ensure that services are being prov1ded to its citiz ens. The County has expressed its concern that officers
are not visible in the unincorporated area and are diverted into the City for calls. So the County has asked for
its own precincts and beats in the unincorporated area to ensure that its residents are being served. The City
has not agreed to this proposal. As this is really a simple yes or no question, it is questionable that a mediator
could provide any resolution. On the funding formula, the City has not changed its desired funding formula
throughout the negotiations and has kept the funding formula from the 2005 agreement. The County is
obviously unhappy with the current funding formula and has presented 2 alternative funding formulas so far
based on service levels provided (dispatched 911 calls and direct cost of precincts. The City has not changed
its position or presented any alternative.
3. Currently, the city residents pay more for beats and hence more officers per capita. I rarely receive complaints for slow
response times. When I do it is usually a screw up in the system, i.e. a new officer who did not know where he was
suppose to be, or a mix up in addresses. If your residents are complaining about slow response times then maybe you
should be asking them "Would you be willing to increase your taxes for more beats?" When I first ran for office a big
issue was recycling. When I went door to door and people brought it up, I asked them "Would you be willing to pay a
dollar a month more for recycling?" They overwhelmingly said "yes". Maybe you should be asking your county
constituents the same question instead of raiding the city residents for more money for county police coverage! n1ere
should be a direct correlation between improved services and increased taxes. The City has not offered to
improve services to the unincorporated area under any of its proposals. The County's proposal seeks
to improve services by having the precincts and beats be exclusive to the unincorporated area.
4. According to Brooks "Calls for Service" has never been adequately clarified. 911 received over 900,00 calls for service
every year. Of that amount 1/3 would not be really classified as 911 calls. Of the other 2/3rds a great many are for EMS
and Fire. If the allocation was based on actual crimes, how would that work? Wal-mart on Montgomery Xroads has the
highest shoplifting rate in the county. Would all the shoplifting be put toward the county or would it depend on the
address of the shoplifter? What if the shoplifter is homeless or not a county resident at all? What if the shoplifter is found
innocent? Has a crime really been committed at all? Trying to resolve all these issues would take a huge team of people
just to do an allocation. It would be a huge waste of taxpayer money. Dispatched calls for service, based on location
of occurrence, is the measure proposed by the County. This information is available from the p olice records.
County staff were able to sift through the records to determine the 2013 percentages. This activity can be
contracted to a J d party if neither the City or County feel they can
5. Prior to the merger a great many police special units were being paid by the city alone. This made sense when there
were few people living in the unincorporated areas. However, as the unincorporated areas grew in population the city
rightly felt that all the residents of the county should pay for these services that benefited everyone. The cost of public
safety has increased to the county both because the population has increased and because they are now sharing in the
costs of county wide services. Should the merger dissolve all these services will have to be duplicated. The city will not
have any cost sharing agreements or be willing to provide services on an "as needed" basis. This means that all services
such as the Bomb Squad and Marine Patrol will have to be duplicated. Brooks does not think that the County has truly
looked into the huge cost it will take to set up a completely separate system and to pay for it. If I were you, I would
demand a complete accounting of the true cost of a separate system before I voted on anything. I think your
administration is counting on share agreements that are not likely to happen given the current climate. Has the county
2
factored in creating their own Crime Lab or Evidence facility for instance? These factors have been considered in the
County's alternatives.
6. To say that the current system is not "fair and just" to county residents is ridiculous. The residents of Ardsley Park do
not commit any more crimes than the residents of Isle of Hope. You are asking them to pay even more for public safety
than they already do just because they live closer to crime ridden neighborhoods. However, they haven't committed any
crimes !!!! Why is one neighborhood charged more than another if everyone is innocent? This is a service contrac~
and the County wants to ensure that services are being provided to its citizens. The County has expressed its
concern that officers are not visible in the unincorporated area and are diverted into the City for calls. So the
County has asked for its own precincts and beats in the unincorporated area to ensure that its residents are
being served. Likewise the City can provide services as requested by its citizens through its own precincts.
7. The city is prepared to immediately contest in court a demerger without a referendum. We have already been offered
free legal services by some of the best attorneys in Savannah so it will not cost the taxpayers anything. How will it look
politically if the county commission fights this? Are not all the residents of Chatham County allowed a vote in how public
safety is paid for? Even if you win a court battle you will lose in the court of public opinion. If we prevail, then ALL the
residents will vote. The County has always provided police services in the unincorporated area and will continue
to provide these services to its residents.

8. I have not publicly in any way gone to war with you. I understand that while 60% of your constituents are in the city,
that you also have a huge base of support in the county. I understand what a difficult position you are in. However, while
police response time may be poor in the county, crime is down BY HALF in the county since the merger. It has been
GOOD for public safety in the county and the city If you do vote to demerge, I will have to change my current silent
position to defend the rights of the people that live in the city.
In closing, please make up your own mind what is the right thing to do for YOUR constituents. You do not represent Pat
Farrell's district or any other member of the County Commission .
Mary Ellen
Donna Myers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Helen Stone <helen_ stone3@hotmail.com>

Donna Myers
FW: Police Agreement
From: MSprague@Savannahga.Gov
Subject: RE: Police Agreement
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 19:27:17 +0000
Helen,
Some further questions & comments based on the responses:
1. In regards to the money owed I quote page 43 of the current merger agreement "The 2012 allocation percentages
(and years following 2012) shall be based on the then most recent available U.S. Census data." I don't understand how
the County can honestly and fairly contest this. You can surely understand how upsetting and frustrating this is to the
city staff. How can the County be trusted to enter into any agreement if they won't follow a simple allocation plan? This
should not have to be litigated or even be part of the negotiations. It should simply be paid.
2. The County is concerned about officers being diverted into the city from unincorporated areas. This is a legitimate
concern. Has the County asked SCMPD for this information? How often does this occur? How big a problem is this? Is this
really a problem of diverted officers or a problem of too few beats in the unincorporated area? Unless we know the
answers to these questions than we aren't even necessarily answering the right question. For instance, if the people on
Whitmarsh Island complain that their response time is poor but no officers have been diverted to the city from
Whitmarsh Island, than this is a problem of insufficient officers assigned to Whitmarsh. It has nothing to do with the
city. Have we really drilled down to where the response times are poor? Have we drilled down to the reasons why? Does
the County have conclusive proof that response times are poor because county officers are diverted to the city? All I've
heard is anecdotal answers. Are overall response times really any different between the County and the City? The County
needs to present a better case.
Secondly, the County is unhappy with the current funding formula. So is the city. After all, city residents are paying more
per capita than county residents because we have more beats per capita and because the County insists on using the
2000 census numbers. Why should residents of Mayfair 1 pay more than Mayfair 2 when they live right across the street
from each other? Residents of Mayfair 1 pay 12 mills for city services. Mayfair 2 residents pay 2.75. This is fair????? I
have read everything sent by the County and I agree with Brooks, where is the detailed explanation for "calls for
service?" My question was not answered!!! Where else in America is such a funding formula used? This seems like an
extremely lame attempt to try to squeeze more money from the city taxpayers to pay for county wide administrative
services. How can you expect the city to sign on to a funding formula that is so "fuzzy"?
3. see #2
4. Are "Calls for Service" all calls for service? Does that include all the calls that come into 911 that are not true
emergencies? The police in Ardsley Park encourage residents to call if they hear shots fired. Last night dozens of calls
were made because people thought they heard shots fired in Daffin Park. In reality there was a drunken group of Mardi
Gras celebrators who set off firecrackers. Is this charged as a "call for service" or dozens of calls for service? Would this
be charged to the city if no crime or even evidence of a crime has occurred? (the police found no shell casings, only
reports from bystanders). Is it really a good idea to discourage city residents from using 911 because it will increase their
taxes? (You can be assured we will come up with an alternate system for most calls if this funding methodology is
approved.) Is this really in the best interest of community policing? We need a far better explanation of how 911 calls
would be allocated and why this is a "fair and just" method to law abiding citizens within the city. How can the city
budget long term based on a funding formula that seems subjective and could fluctuate wildly? This will certainly have
and impact on our ability to financially plan for the future.
5. Good. The County needs to take into account the cost of buildings as well as staff.
6. see #2
7. However, if the County has a separate police system the problems of the past will again prevail: confusion over
1
j urisdictions; higher cost for everyone because administrative costs will be greater for everyone both city and county; lack
of sharing of criminal information between j urisdictions; quite likely a return to higher crime rates for both city and
county.
We live in an urban environment. People in the unincorporated benefit greatly from the benefits of living contiguous to
Savannah: jobs, health care, higher educational opportunities, more shopping and restaurant opportunities, sports
venues, civic arenas, cultural events ... Unfortunately, all cities come with problems : unemployment, homelessness,
poverty, mental and social ills .... Those people in the unincorporated areas benefit greatly from their proximity to
Savannah. To say that they have no corresponding obligation to pay for police services that benefit all is truly unjust.
The unincorporated residents are not being asked by the city to pay for the Savannah's patrol officers . They are only
being asked to contribute per capita to those services that benefit everyone: Special Operations, SARIC, Professional
Standards and Training .... How is that not just?
Mary Ellen
From: Helen Stone [helen_stone3@hotmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 10:59 AM
To: Mary Sprague
Mary Ellen,
The county's response to your comments are posted below.
Thank you,
Helen
From: leesmith@chathamcounty.org
To: Helen_ Stone3@hotmail. com
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 201 5 10:13:11 -0500
Hel en
Below you will find some answers to Mary Ellen's issues.
Lee
From: Linda Cramer

To: Lee Smith
Subject: RE: Police Agre ement

My co mm ents are shown be low.
From: Lee Smith

To: Linda Cramer
Subject: FW : Police Agreement
Linda. please read ... can you and I get together and respond
Lee

County, City Emails Regarding Merger

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

County, City Emails Regarding Merger

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Donna Myers

From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

Edna Branch Jackson

Edna Branch Jackson

Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

You're more than welcome.

From: Sharonte Turner [mailto:STurner@Savannahqa .Gov]

From: Gail Gordon [mailto:gfgordon@chathamcountv.org]

From: Sharonte Turner [mailto:STurner@Savannahga.Gov]

From: Sharonte Turner

From: Gail Gordon [mailto:qfqordon@chathamcounty .org]

From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

Edna Branch Ja~kson

Dear Chairman Scott and Mr. Smith:

Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

Edna Branch Ja~,:kson

Dear Chairman Scott and Mr. Smith:

Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

(912) 652-7878 - Qffia

Edna Branch Ja~kson

Dear Chairman Scott and Mr. Smith:

Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

From: Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

Edna Branch Ja~kson

Dear Chairman Scott and

Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

Edna Branch Ja~kson

Dear Chairman Scott and Mr. Smith:

Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

(9 12) 652-7878- Qffice

From : Gail Gordon

From: Gail Gordon

From : Gail Gordon

From: Sharonte Turner [mailt o:STurner@Savannahga.Gov]

Edna Branch Ja~kson

Dear Chairman Scott and Mr. Smith:

Stephanie Cutter, City Manager

From : Gail Gordon

From: Sharonte Turner [mailto:STurner@Savannahga.Gov]

Edna Branch Jackson

Edna Branch Jackson

Tony Center <TonyCenter@comcast.net>

Mary Ellen, Tom ,

2012 Crimes by City within Chatham County

TOTAL PART I CRIME

TOTAL PART I CRIME

Historical Cost Data- 10 Years