Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consultant Police Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Central committee narrows consultant request for policing study; members plan to ask council for budget authority
Summary
The City of Central committee discussed and revised a draft scope asking consultants to provide a streamlined cost comparison between contracting with the East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff—s Office and standing up a full municipal police department. The committee directed staff to rework the request so bidders provide apples-to-apples annual budget
The Committee on the Future of Law Enforcement in the City of Central agreed in February 2025 to narrow and standardize a consultant request to get a focused cost comparison of policing options for the city.
Officer John (or "Officer Gauthier" in the meeting notes) drafted a scope document the committee reviewed; members said they wanted every consultant to be given the same data so quotes and analyses would be comparable. "What we want is apples and apples when they come to us and say, hey. We're gonna charge you this much to do this for you," a committee member said while introducing the draft. The committee agreed to ask staff to tighten the scope and then get pricing from consultants so the City Council can decide whether to allocate funds for a study.
Why it matters: Committee members emphasized that a full, from-scratch study starting at square one could be lengthy and costly; instead they favored a streamlined analysis that would take existing CPD and sheriff—s-office personnel and cost proposals as starting points and fill in missing financial details. That approach is intended to produce a quicker, lower-cost estimate of the annual budget needed for a municipal department versus contracting with the sheriff.
Key points from the committee discussion included requests that consultants:
- Use the Central Police Department—s existing personnel proposals and the sheriff—s office estimate as baseline inputs rather than starting a new staffing study from scratch; - Provide an annual operating budget estimate and identify capital or start-up costs separately; - Include benefit packages and retiree/legacy costs where those were omitted from prior submissions; - Offer a short timeline and cost estimate for the work so council can consider a budget amendment to pay for the consultant.
Officer Gauthier said he had met with a recommended consultant and recommended providing consistent instructions to any bidder. Several committee members favored asking consultants to provide a price for the narrower, comparative task (a budget-level cost analysis based on supplied CPD and sheriff inputs) rather than an exhaustive, nine-month origin-to-end staffing study.
Members also discussed procurement mechanics: individuals on the committee may approach consultants informally to ask for rough price estimates, but any formal engagement or funding requires council approval and a budget amendment. "You as a council member would make an agenda item to discuss that," a city official told the committee; the mayor would have to sign any resulting contract.
Direction and next steps: The committee asked Officer Gauthier and staff (including Kyle and city legal/administrative staff) to reword and tighten the scope, provide that single document to prospective consultants, and gather cost estimates. Committee members said they will then bring consultant price proposals and a recommended scope to the City Council for a decision on budget authority and a formal contract.
Ending: Committee members agreed the streamlined approach should yield quicker, more comparable cost estimates for the mayor and council to consider during the budget process; staff will circulate the revised scope and any consultant cost responses to the committee for review before forwarding recommendations to the council.
