In these days of economic restraint, there is a search by politicians and municipal administrators to save money through restructuring and downsizing government organizations. The theory is that through downsizing and consolidation of staff, the duplication of services, manpower and facilities can be eliminated thus saving taxpayers' money. This tight fiscal attitude has affected the police and fire department in many municipalities.

There has been a direction towards the consolidation of the Police and Fire Department into one organizational identity called the Public Safety Department. There are other political pressures which direct the attention towards this combined facility. The Massachusetts Senators, Paul Caron and James Jajuga are introducing legislation whereby municipalities which consolidate police and fire departments would receive state funding towards this end. As a consequence of this legislation, some Massachusetts communities are jumping on the band wagon in order to capitalize on this capital funding opportunity.

There are different organizational structures possible with the evolution towards the Public Safety Facility concept.

Public Safety Organizational Structure

There are three types of possible organizational structures:

Type 1 - Combining Separate Police and Fire Departments

This type of organization is a loose association between the police and the fire chief who have there own department and have agreed to share the same site and building with some shared functions.

Type 2 - Partially Integrated Police and Fire Departments

In this organizational arrangement type, there is a single public safety director who assumes the role and responsibility of the police and fire chief. This person would then be in charge of both the police and fire departments. However, the police staff would be trained as the traditional police officer who would provide policing service at either the Patrol, Criminal Investigation or Community Services. The fire department staff under the public safety director would also assume the traditional role and functions of the fire department, responding to fires and injury situations which therefore could include the ambulance service.

Type 3 - Fully Integrated Police and Fire Departments

This type of organization is where the public safety facility is run by the public safety director and below him would be a single public safety department. Here, there are public safety officers who would be trained to provide the dual service for both the police and fire duties. Being qualified in both roles, these persons would assume a larger responsibility and be remunerated proportionally higher than either the same level of police or fire staff. Other police functions such as the investigative /detective services would likely remain as is.

Spatial implications of these organizational structures

The duplication of staff in this integrated organization (type 3) is minimized as the separate police and fire department have been eliminated in favor of a singular organizational structure. There is a corresponding reduction of spatial requirements for this efficient public safety operation with proportionate cost savings. Spaces such as cell areas and fire truck bays would still remain however.

The other option is to retain the status quo (type 1) organizations and have two department heads, ie. the police and fire chief, who would run their own independent organizations as they have done before but have their buildings amalgamated into one facility. In this scenario, there still would be required some duplication of offices and organizations for the police and fire departments. However, there would be some consolidation of the shared spaces, such as:

administration offices

lunch room

meeting room(s)

training room

dispatch center

gymnasium (fitness center)

storage rooms for office/ janitorial supplies

mechanical and electrical rooms

washrooms

Public Safety Spatial Relationships

The following diagram illustrates a typical police and fire departments with distinct spatial needs as well as the common shared functions. The economies gained would include all those functions which could be shared as mentioned previously which, in the past, had been duplicated on separate sites.

Refer to the next diagram which illustrates the police and fire support spaces which are combined on one site.

Shared Space Issues:

The Dispatch Center

Here, the emergency calls for police and fire would be consolidated in this one dispatch center. The question remains if there are two individuals receiving separate police and fire calls or if this is one person who is responsible for this dual function and answers both police and fire calls. Presumably in this consolidated public safety arrangement, one person would answer both calls if the call level can be handled by one person.

A detailed study is required to determine if this dual function which is handled by one person is cost effective and practical in light of the volume of police and fire calls. In any event, if 911 communications is being planned, then any 911 calls coming through to the dispatch center would be either police or fire related. In this instance, a separate call taker would be required if the community were large enough.

The other call taker which is required in the new dispatch center is the Alternate Response person. This person would take all police of fire calls which are of a non emergency nature. It would appear quite reasonable that one person could take both non emergency police and fire calls, thus reducing staff duplication. In this Public Safety Study facility (type 3) the determination of police and fire call priorities and scheduling of staff between police and fire call and duties must be resolved as well.

Human factor

There are a lot of ramifications and managerial considerations prior to embarking on this Public Safety Facility route. First and foremost is the real human challenge as to how to reorganize two separate entities into one organization. There is the likelihood of eliminating some staff members in this consolidated structure. Alternatively, a new position could be created to oversee the police and fire departments. This latter alternative surely would add another level of bureaucracy and would increase municipal operating cost and is therefore not a good alternative unless there is a real growth in population. Consequently if one considers the staff reduction option (type 3), then either the police or the fire chief would assume the lead role of managing the proposed public safety facility. There has been resistance for this very reason because either the police or the fire chief would have to be relegated to the authority of the other person.

Before consolidation of police and fire departments can occur, the psychological acceptance of this idea is mandatory from both the police and fire departments. There are other issues related to union regulations, responsibility definition, training requirements/qualifications and related compensation/salary levels, spatial hierarchy and territorial domain which require resolution. The traditional vertical hierarchy of police staff based on a military organizational structure will have to be redefined and accepted before the Public Safety Facility Concept can work. Some of these existing organizational structures would have to be evolved into a more horizontal organization where a team approach for both police and fire fighting work would be more appropriate.

Cost and Benefit Factor

The other main consideration is the analysis of the cost associated with the transition from the traditional separated police and fire departments into one consolidated organization and facility. The additional costs related to the cross training of staff, the career development programs, the increase in salary of the public safety officers which could range between 10% to 20% higher than the standard salary level must be weighed against the cost savings of potentially reduced staff through this dual role of the public safety officer, the reduction in clerical/support staff (payroll, purchasing, janitorial), and the more compact space requirements, facility and site.

Once this cost analysis is done to see which organizational structure is more economical, then the next step is to prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis to compare the cost related to the benefit of the public safety service envisioned. The question remains, ultimately, whether the specialized roles of police and fire service versus the single combined public safety service performs better for the community. Such issues as response times to police and fire calls, the ability to handle criminal situations or contain serious fire situation will have to be addressed to see which organizational mode is better. Each community will differ between their needs for police and fire service. These needs have to be determined to see if there is a proper fit between this public institution and the community it serves and at what cost.

Conclusion

These issues have to be addressed and resolved by politicians, administrators and the department heads before embarking upon a new Public Safety Facility. Once these matters have been resolved and agreed upon, commencement of the budget, schedule, program requirements, consultant and construction work of the new Public Safety Facility project can follow from a sound foundation.

Refer to the following Public Safety Issues Outline for some factors to consider in planning for this type of facility.

For further information, your department may contact us at the above address/phone, or contact the following communities to find out about the experiences in their Public Safety Facility.

Greenville, Michigan

Kalamazoo, Michigan

Oak Park, Michigan

Sunnyvale, California

Marina, California

Durham, North Carolina (since changed back to separate fire and police departments)