The issue of police dispatch once again reared its head during last week’s Oxford Village Council meeting as part of the public comment portion.

Dave Gerber, who serves as chaplain for the village police department, voiced his concerns over council’s 3-2 vote on June 20 to begin the process of transferring police dispatch services to the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office and close the local dispatch center by July 1, 2017 or sooner.

The decision was purely a cost-saving measure. The current local dispatch budget is $338,300, of which $300,000 comes from village taxpayers, whereas a dispatch contract with county would cost $31,115 annually to start. That’s based on the rate county set for April 2017 to March 2018.

Gerber prefaced his comments by making it clear, he’s not a “disinterested observer.”

“It’s no secret how I feel about dispatch,” he told council.

Gerber favors keeping the local center open and in fact, he was one of three people who made a presentation to council on behalf of the police department at a May 5 special meeting, which also featured a presentation from sheriff’s office representatives.

Speaking as a village resident and voter, Gerber told council he’s bothered by what he sees as a lack of accountability regarding its dispatch decision.

His opinion stemmed from the absence of a public hearing on the issue and the fact that two council members who voted in favor of county, Tom Kennis and Erik Dolan, were appointed to their seats, not elected.

Kennis was appointed in November 2014, while Dolan was appointed in April of this year.

Gerber noted the “only person” who voted in favor of the dispatch switch that he considers accountable is village President Sue Bossardet because she was elected.

A public hearing was never held on the dispatch issue because, unlike some council decisions such as approving or amending an ordinance or setting the property tax rate, it was not legally required.

Dolan informed Gerber the dispatch issue was discussed during the numerous special meetings and work-study sessions council held during its 2016-17 budget deliberations and ultimately, it was voted on during a June 20 special meeting. All of these meetings were posted and open to the public.

“While I do respect your opinion and I do respect your tenor, I would suggest prior to speaking about a topic, you educate yourself about it,” he said.

“Thank you for the correction, Mr. Dolan. I appreciate that,” Gerber replied.

Gerber asked Dolan if he had been appointed or elected. After Dolan answered that he was an appointee, Gerber responded, “So, you’re unelected running for election?”

“The last time I checked this is public comment, it’s not a question-answer session, so if you have a comment, I would suggest that you make it, otherwise, I’d ask you to have a seat,” Dolan retorted.

“Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it,” Gerber said.

In closing, Gerber told council he feels “frustrated by (his) inability to speak” on the dispatch issue as a citizen before a decision was made.

“Unaccountable decisions bother me,” he told council. “It seems like this is an unaccountable decision.”

Gerber also apologized if his remarks upset any council members.

“I’m sorry if I offended you,” he said. “That was not my intent.”

Following Gerber’s comments, township Supervisor Bill Dunn, who’s also a village resident, went to the podium and explained making decisions is what government representatives do every day at all levels, from local to federal.

“This stuff happens all the time. It’s your job. And I appreciate the job you’re doing,” Dunn told council.

Bryan Cloutier, a former village councilman and current director of the Oxford Public Library, also spoke.

“I think you all know that the decisions you make are not necessarily going to be the most popular decisions during your tenure on council,” he said.

“With that being said, I also think that you should be making decisions, and I believe you are making decisions, based on factual information that you have and not necessarily based on popularity or the necessity to get re-elected.”

Later in the meeting, during the council comments portion, Gerber’s comments were addressed.

“Normally, I don’t fight with the people (who) come up here and speak because I want public opinion,” Kennis said. “However, (with regard to) the gentleman that came up earlier, I could not be more mad.”

Kennis chastised Gerber for having “no idea” that council had been discussing the dispatch issue for months prior to the decision.

“I have no idea why he came up here,” he said. “This is a decision that was made for the village, on behalf of the village. Our own Oxford Township is not using our dispatch (center). We have checked all of our premises, heard (from) both groups at an open meeting, (a) public meeting.”

“I’m just tired of the politics in this village because we worked our butt off to make this decision,” Kennis noted.

Councilwoman Maureen Helmuth, who voted against switching to county dispatch, said she thought Gerber made “a very interesting comment.”

“I just thought it was a very interesting way to look at it, that of the three votes (for county dispatch), (two) were not elected, they were appointed,” she said.

“And perhaps, between now and when we have another election, we should keep that in the back of our minds when there is an important decision. Maybe put a little more effort (in) to get more public comment.”

Village attorney Bob Davis pointed out “there’s no legal distinction” between elected and appointed members “once they’re on council.”

“I don’t disagree,” Helmuth replied. “Erik’s vote, Tom’s vote, Sue’s vote, Rose’s vote, they’re all the same. But I thought it was an interesting (comment) and I just think it’s something we should all think about.”

Helmuth prefaced her comments by noting she doesn’t believe in new councils overturning previous council decisions just because there’s a change in who favors what.

“I don’t believe when (a) new council comes in that we should revoke what an old council did,” she said. “I might disagree with something that we did, but I’m not necessarily willing to go back just because we have a new member and all of the sudden, we have more votes (to go a different way).”