Receive a presentation regarding the Police Department’s take-home vehicle program, and receive a presentation and provide feedback regarding a proposed fleet surcharge for Police vehicles used for secondary employment.
Item 02: Police Take-Home Vehicle Program and Secondary Employment Use
- Thread starter COSM_Admin
- Start date
- Status
JHughson
CoSM Members
I don't understand this statement on page 128:
"To cease the take-home program would cause significant operational impacts, including but not limited to: add more full-time employees to transition fleet vehicles every three years as well as handle increased maintenance costs due to higher mileage;..."
How would there be higher mileage if the cars stayed in the city and not going home every work day?
(I know the cost is higher for multiple-user "fleet" cars rather than the feeling of "ownership" of an assigned car. I get that.)
I understand all the other reasons for the program but the statement above is quite perplexing.
As for secondary employment, doesn't that add to the mileage, over and above the take-home policy?
You provided a certain dollar amount for the cost of the vehicles taken home. What is the cost of using our vehicles for secondary employment?
When did we start allowing our city vehicles to be used for private, outside employment?
Regarding secondary employment, why would we propose half the standard fee (fleet surcharge) for those who live outside the City?
Where are these secondary employment locations? If in the city, this makes no sense to me. If outside the city, it would matter the distances between the secondary employment location and the location from which they travel to the secondary employment location. I like the idea, just confused about how it would be applied.
And why are we charging by the hour instead of mileage?
Because the cars run much of the time?
And why didn't we do this before now?
"To cease the take-home program would cause significant operational impacts, including but not limited to: add more full-time employees to transition fleet vehicles every three years as well as handle increased maintenance costs due to higher mileage;..."
How would there be higher mileage if the cars stayed in the city and not going home every work day?
(I know the cost is higher for multiple-user "fleet" cars rather than the feeling of "ownership" of an assigned car. I get that.)
I understand all the other reasons for the program but the statement above is quite perplexing.
As for secondary employment, doesn't that add to the mileage, over and above the take-home policy?
You provided a certain dollar amount for the cost of the vehicles taken home. What is the cost of using our vehicles for secondary employment?
When did we start allowing our city vehicles to be used for private, outside employment?
Regarding secondary employment, why would we propose half the standard fee (fleet surcharge) for those who live outside the City?
Where are these secondary employment locations? If in the city, this makes no sense to me. If outside the city, it would matter the distances between the secondary employment location and the location from which they travel to the secondary employment location. I like the idea, just confused about how it would be applied.
And why are we charging by the hour instead of mileage?
Because the cars run much of the time?
And why didn't we do this before now?
Response provided by Chief Standridge:
Please see attached.
Please see attached.
- Status