Regional dispatch discussed - Sentinel & Enterprise

These studies have been done many times, and money is spent each time only to learn the same thing over and over again.

Lunenburg spent enormous money to build a new public safety money, and throwing out this investment makes no sense, and the level of service provided by regionalization is always inferior

More money will be wasted only to find out what has been learned in the past when money was wasted then as well

Jim,

I agree. One thing that is not mentioned in this aricle is that in many locales the dispatching is throughout a county level. However, larger cities within those counties often retain their own dispatch centers simply due to the call volumes.

Since we have thrown away counties in this state, it will be a band of just a few communities together doing this though.

It reduces duplicity. increases utilization of dispatchers, and truly does save cost - spread out over many communities.

Alas, the mentality in Massachusetts is that each town must retain its own control over everything. So little ever changes - but in the long run a lot of money can be saved.

I can see where consolidating dispatchers could provide a higher level of service and save money, as long as they don't try to cut staff so much that they cannot handle incoming calls.

And as far as a "lobby guy" is concerned there will always be a need for somebody to greet people in the police lobby. Police handle a lot of "walk in traffic" and that will always need to be maintained. You can't put up a sign that says "lobby closed - call your regional dispatcher with concerns".

IF the dispatcher handled BOTH jobs in a particular police station I can understand where the concern is coming from because it's a MUST to have somebody to handle the walk in traffic. If you are also being billed for your share of the regional center it could actually increase your expenses.

I guess the bright side is that we could try it for a year, and if it doesn't work out go back to the way we currently do it. Is that an option on the table?