Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Rochester Hills council approves Oakland County policing contract after tense debate over 17% rate hike

Rochester Hills City Council · December 16, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Facing an abrupt 17% rate increase from the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office for 2025 (followed by two 9% increases), Rochester Hills officials unanimously approved participation in a three‑year law‑enforcement services agreement but authorized the mayor to continue talks to phase in payments and seek alternatives to protect local policing levels.

Rochester Hills City Council voted unanimously Dec. 16 to participate in a three‑year law‑enforcement services agreement with the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office covering fiscal years 2025–2027, after a heated discussion over unexpectedly large rate increases that city officials say arrived after the city's budget and millage were set.

Joe Snyder, the city’s chief financial officer, told the council the contract includes a 17% rate increase for 2025 and two additional 9% increases in 2026 and 2027. He warned the jumps would “use up any and all police fund balance above the 25% fund balance target by the end of next year,” adding later that “this is an absolute monkey wrench thrown into our city's very well tuned financial system.”

Council members expressed frustration with Oakland County’s timing and called for immediate work to mitigate the impact. Councilwoman Neubauer said the county move had left cities with an untenable choice: absorb sharply higher costs or cut law‑enforcement services. “The Oakland County Board of Commissioners has defunded our Oakland County Sheriff’s Department, not only for our community, but for several other communities,” she said.

Mayor Barnett urged continued negotiations with county leadership. He said talks with the county chair had opened a path for a possible phasing arrangement: “There is an ability for us to divide that initial 17% by three even amounts,” he told the council, describing a potential compromise he planned to pursue in follow‑up meetings.

Council’s resolution authorizes the mayor and city clerk to execute the contract and explicitly empowers the mayor to continue negotiations with Oakland County to seek phased payments or other transitional arrangements. Snyder said the city is preparing a set of options for council consideration in the coming months, including potential impacts to the 2026 budget and whether additional local revenue or changes to service levels will be required.

Officials emphasized that the city intends to maintain the current number of contracted deputies for now (65 deputies plus two administrative staff, totaling 67 positions), while exploring alternatives and pressing county officials for detail on the cost drivers. Snyder said the county cited deputy wage increases and contracted costs among the drivers but that the city had not received a full indirect‑cost breakdown at the meeting’s close.

The council also urged residents to contact county commissioners to convey concerns about timing and the scale of the increases. Mayor Barnett and Snyder said they would report back with results of ongoing discussions; the city will not reduce contracted staffing as an immediate measure but said long‑term solutions may require difficult budget choices.

The council’s action keeps local policing contracts in place while formally asking the mayor to continue negotiations with Oakland County — a pragmatic step intended to preserve services during a period of fiscal uncertainty.