Meridian — City planning staff presented the “service accessibility” (also called service impact) tool, a geospatial scoring system used in department reports to show existing conditions for utilities, public safety, transit and other services.

Planner Brian McClure and deputy chiefs from fire and police explained the technical approach: the tool combines approximately 18 separate GIS models, uses both centroid and boundary‑edge calculations and is updated nightly from city databases. McClure emphasized the tool “reflects existing conditions, not what is being proposed,” and said the map colors were meant to flag where staff should “stop and consider context,” not to deny applications.

Council members said that in recent project reviews the tool’s red flags created confusion: some undeveloped parcels scored red for police or fire because there were no historical incidents or because road network connectivity had not yet been built. “I don’t like the colors,” one councilor said, adding that red was commonly interpreted as “bad” by members of the public and commissioners.

Staff acknowledged those communication gaps and suggested several fixes: (1) add clear explanatory notes in staff reports where data are missing or where red means “no data” rather than a negative judgment; (2) provide director‑level context in the narrative for major service flags; (3) improve onboarding for new council members; and (4) make department directors available in follow‑up meetings to explain their specific metrics. Fire and police staff offered that the tool uses different measures for different services — fire relies on modeled response time components while police metrics are based on reporting‑district crime statistics — and that these distinctions need to be called out in the report.

Council asked staff to return with revised report formats (or remove the chart from the front of the staff report) and to prepare explanatory materials and training for incoming council members, while continuing to make the tool available to applicants at pre‑application meetings. Staff said the tool is automated but that some maintenance and clearer narrative will help reduce misinterpretation by elected officials and the public.