North Valley police chief pitches contract to Moroni council, estimates $150,000 first-year cost

The North Valley police chief presented a plan to the Moroni City Council on March 19 to provide contracted police services, saying the agency would respond to all calls for service in town, enforce city ordinances, support animal control and staff community and school programs. "Our service is gonna provide any call for service that comes into Moroni," the chief said during the work meeting.

The pitch sought to give Moroni a more consistent presence of officers while sharing resources among neighboring towns. The chief said the agency operates a detective division and the county’s only K-9 unit, and that officers would be available at city events and to walk school grounds daily as part of a school-safety emphasis. A resident at the meeting praised that outreach, saying, "the way you interact with kids, it builds that relationship and trust." The chief said those relationships often generate tips that help solve crimes.

Financial and operational details framed the council’s consideration. The chief gave comparative figures — roughly $2.50–$2.60 per resident in nearby towns — and estimated the full cost of a single full-time officer at about $140,000 (including wages, benefits, equipment and a vehicle). He proposed a likely first-year contract near $150,000 if the town sold its existing police vehicle to the agency (he suggested a $30,000 purchase price) and suggested quarterly payments as a practical billing rhythm (about $37,500 per quarter in his example). The chief warned councils not to build budgets on court-revenue projections, calling such revenues variable.

Council members pressed the chief on coverage and accountability. One asked whether contracted officers would still write tickets over time; the chief replied that he could not impose ticket quotas, but that officers are evaluated and merit pay would be tied to performance reviews. He described a system of self-evaluations in December and formal reviews in June to inform merit adjustments. On hours, he described staffing rotations designed to provide coverage across towns and said the agency aims to work toward roughly 1.2–1.5 officers per 1,000 residents over time.

The chief also outlined grant and restricted-fund considerations. He described recent grants — two roughly $80,000 awards in nearby cities, a JAG grant of about $4,500 and state asset-forfeiture funding used for equipment — and emphasized that local beer-tax revenue remains under city control and could be applied to police services at the council’s direction.

On governance and contract mechanics, the chief said he would prepare an interlocal agreement for council consideration and recommended a withdrawal notice period of roughly six months (noting some agreements specify 90 days). He described the existing joint board that governs the multi-city agency and said councils eventually could seek representation on that board if the arrangement continued.

Mayor or council leadership scheduled the proposal for formal consideration at the council’s next meeting on March 19; the chief said the agency would draft the interlocal agreement in advance. No formal contract vote occurred at the work meeting.

The council’s next steps are procedural: review the interlocal agreement on the stated agenda date, ask for any needed clarifications on costs and hours, and decide if they wish to authorize the town to enter the proposed contract or pursue other options, including remaining with the county sheriff’s office or forming a separate municipal department.