Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Columbus council hears report recommending civilian crisis‑response unit, phased pilot and stronger coordination
Loading...
Summary
Mission Critical Partners presented a 200‑page review of Columbus’s alternative crisis programs and recommended creating a civilian response unit, a braided coordinating body, improved dispatch typology, and a phased pilot (estimated about $2.5 million); researchers and residents urged timely implementation and stronger community voice.
Council President Hardin on Monday convened a joint hearing of the Rules, Public Safety, and Health & Human Services and Equity committees to review Mission Critical Partners’ assessment of Columbus’s alternative crisis‑response programs and to consider next steps toward a civilian, unarmed response option.
"First, it is time to establish a non armed, non uniform crisis response option," Council President Hardin said while introducing the report and its recommendations. The consultants’ 200‑page report lays out a 12‑part strategic framework and a menu of administrative models, and calls for a phased approach that includes a temporary braided coordinating body, a civilian response unit (CRU) pilot, and improvements to dispatch and data sharing.
The consultants, Jenna Streeter and Bonnie Mahaney of Mission Critical Partners, said Columbus already has multiple strong programs — the Right Response Unit (RRU), Mobile Crisis Response (MCR), React and Spark — but they operate more as a collection than an integrated system. "The meta problem here is that Columbus has a collection of really strong alternative response programs, but not an integrated system," the presenters said, citing fragmented authority, limited cross‑program MOUs, and gaps in triage and dispatch that reduce the share of eligible calls routed to alternative responders.
Streeter and Mahaney recommended establishing a braided coordinating body to unify communication and set systemwide standards without managing day‑to‑day operations, and described three staffing models for a CRU: direct hire (city employees), outsourcing (contract partners), or a blended approach. They said the final scope will determine costs and staff needs and urged a phased pilot to reduce risk and build public trust.
Council members pressed presenters on dispatch integration with 988 and 911, safety protocols for unarmed responders, and pilot size. The consultants said a concept of operations outlining hours, staffing, triage and safety protocols will be delivered in a January timeframe for council and administrative review.
Researchers who testified at the hearing supported the recommendations. Dr. Leah Bevis, professor of applied economics at Ohio State, summarized a multi‑year evaluation of CIT training and MCR commissioned with police data under a data‑sharing agreement. "MCR has the strongest impact on the highest severity cases," Bevis said, adding that MCR reduces arrests and jailing for the most severe 20% of cases and lowers repeat calls for low‑severity incidents.
Bevis recommended a pilot large enough to be evaluable: with five MCR teams today, MCR serves roughly 9% of eligible mental‑health calls; a credible evaluation of a new civilian team will require a pilot of similar scale and a plan for scaling up over time. The consultants and Bevis both emphasized that data access for evaluation is essential if parts of the system are contracted to third parties.
Community speakers echoed calls for faster implementation and broader community involvement. Deborah Seltzer, a lifelong Columbus resident, urged the council to fund supports that enable affected residents to participate meaningfully on advisory panels and said delays prolong harm in vulnerable communities.
The administration signaled willingness to work with council and community partners. Deputy Director Mike Holloran and Assistant Health Commissioner Anita Clark thanked the consultants and said the city welcomes the roadmap and will use the concept of operations to inform budget and operational decisions.
The consultants also cited a city‑level fiscal note: Mission Critical Partners noted Columbus invested roughly $8,500,000 last year in alternative crisis response programs, and they benchmarked other cities that began with multi‑million dollar starts. Council members asked about a pilot estimate that appears in the report; presenters confirmed a pilot framework in an appendix and discussed a preliminary pilot cost figure in the $2–2.5 million range subject to scope and staffing decisions.
No formal motions or votes were taken at the hearing. Mission Critical Partners said they will submit a concept of operations in January; council members signaled plans to review the concept during upcoming budget deliberations and to play an oversight role as staff and community partners refine staffing, dispatch and evaluation approaches.
The council received written testimony from the Firefighters Local 67, the Columbus Safety Collective and a retired social worker; Dr. Bevis and other in‑room witnesses urged public reporting of outcomes and open data for evaluation. The hearing closed with council leadership encouraging ongoing interdepartmental conversations and public engagement as the city moves toward piloting and, eventually, broader implementation.
