City spending, analytics & setting priorities

John Detweiler has submitted a letter to the editor regarding the City of Corvallis' desire to reopen Fire Station #5. The letter reads:

As I have said many times, there will never be enough money to fund everything. Therefore, we need to set priorities and make choices. Moreover, we need to support those choices with appropriate analytical work.

The City Council is considering reopening fire station five. Yet, the Corvallis Fire Department Response Time Simulation Study, dated April 25, 2012, tells us that we gained an average ten seconds in EMS response time and lost eleven seconds in average fire initial response time when we closed station five - a trivial amount of time. Are we conveniently ignoring this study now?

The Police Department is still trying to justify more officers by saying comparable cities have so many sworn officers per population, therefore Corvallis should have the same number. The underlying assumption being that the demand for service in the comparable cities is equal to that in Corvallis. Nothing is being said about the demand for service in Corvallis that Matrix Consulting Group quantified in 2008. Considering the growth in demand for service because of the OSU expansion, that quantification needs to be updated. Moreover, we need to establish the current relationship between the response time and the number of officers we deploy as I did in 2009 with the Matrix data - see my web site: www.peak.org/~detweij.

Any reduction in, or failure to increase, services will have adverse effects on public safety. But, since we can't afford everything, risk needs to be balanced against costs. That is what good governing is all about.

John H. Detweiler

Read More......

Re: Corvallis Levy

Research and letter by John H. Detweiler (submitted to the Corvallis Gazette-Times 3/13/2011) - The levy that will appear on the May ballot funds the lower priority items but not the highest priority items. If the levy passes, we will fund: the Osborn Aquatic Center - the service with the lowest priority, the Senior Center - part of the Parks and Recreation Department which has a priority just above the Aquatic Center, some social services, and marginal cuts in library services - which have a priority just above Park and Recreation.

On page III-13 of the Financial Plans, given to the Budget Commission, shows that the ending budget fund balance is a negative $3.1M. On the reduction possibilities-matrix, also given to the Budget Commission, there are three groups of services -- A-Levy services, B-Remaining Order of Magnitude Packages, and C-Alternate Order of Magnitude Packages -- listed in the order, by group, which they would be cut.

The property tax fund amounts for group A, group B, and group C are $1.8M, $1.0M, and $1.6M respectively. The first two groups (A&B) will be cut for total of $2.8M and $0.3M cut from the third group (C).

If the levy passes, the cuts contained in group A will be restored but the cuts contained in groups B and C will not be restored. Groups B and C include cuts to the fire and police departments - the services with the highest priority.

My analysis of priorities is based on the 2010 Citizens Attitude Study and the survey conducted by Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall and can be found at www.peak.org/~detweij.

John H. Detweiler
Corvallis
www.peak.org/~detweij Read More......