Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Emergency Dispatch topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oak Forest staff backs exploring Southland Dispatch after study finds in-house consolidation cost-prohibitive
Summary
City staff and Fire Chief Gary Kasper presented a dispatch study that found building an in-house combined police/fire dispatch center would be far more expensive and require significant additional staffing; the Committee authorized further due diligence with Southland Dispatch but took no contract vote.
Fire Chief Gary Kasper told the Committee of the Whole on May 26 that a February 4, 2026 study of Oak Forest’s dispatch options shows an in-house consolidated police and fire dispatch center would be financially and operationally unsustainable for the city. Kasper said the study highlighted rising emergency medical dispatch (EMD) call durations and the limits of Oak Forest’s current single-dispatcher minimum.
Kasper told the committee Oak Forest handles roughly 4,000 fire/EMS runs annually while the Police Department receives about 30,000–35,000 calls, and that EMD call durations increased from about 4–5 minutes in 2023 to roughly 5–6.5 minutes in 2024–2025. He said those longer interactions make single-seat dispatching risky because a sole operator cannot manage a multiminute EMD call and simultaneously answer incoming 911 calls as required by state law.
The study compared vendor options and costs. Kasper presented Southland Dispatch as the most cost-effective regional option, with an estimated annual cost of $136,000–$142,000. By contrast, the study estimated an in-house, combined dispatch center would require about $1.2 million in startup costs and exceed $800,000 in annual operating expenses; it also concluded consolidation would require about a 55% increase in telecommunicator staffing (an estimated six additional positions).
Kasper said Orland Dispatch — which has provided fire/EMS dispatching for about 14–15 years — remains a proven and reliable option but carries higher operational cost. He described Cook County’s dispatch capability as the most scalable technology and infrastructure option. The study recommended avoiding in-house consolidation because of the financial and operational burdens and identified Southland Dispatch as the primary option for further evaluation.
City Administrator Moses Amidei told the committee staff vetted the study and agreed with its findings. Amidei asked the Council to provide formal policy direction authorizing the Fire Chief to continue due diligence and exploratory discussions with Southland Dispatch; no binding contract decision was made at the meeting. Kasper confirmed the city’s current Orland service agreement expires December 31, 2026, and said Southland and Cook County had offered five-year contract terms similar to Orland’s proposed five-year term.
The presentation also covered potential state regulatory changes. Kasper said proposals under consideration could raise the population threshold at which municipalities may maintain independent dispatch centers, and that municipalities might receive a two-year grace period to identify consolidation partners if thresholds change. He cautioned that to sustain a city-run combined center and to protect against future consolidation mandates, Oak Forest would likely need to partner with one or two similarly sized municipalities — a step that would add legal and administrative complexity.
Staff noted the local ETSB funded 14 dual-band portable radios last year and the department is ordering four dual-band mobile in-vehicle radios; Kasper said additional dual-band equipment purchases will be required regardless of the final dispatch vendor because parts of the department already operate on an 800-MHz (MABAS) system.
No formal vote to select a dispatch vendor occurred. Administration requested policy direction and authorized the Fire Chief to pursue deeper discussions with Southland Dispatch. The Committee then moved into executive session to discuss personnel/negotiation matters and pending litigation; the transcript does not name who moved or seconded that motion. The meeting returned to open session and the recorded motion to adjourn was made by Alderperson Keeler and seconded by Alderperson Kunz; the transcript records the result as "The motion carried 6/1; 1 absent." The attendance list earlier in the record shows six members present and one absent; the transcript contains an internal inconsistency in the vote-tally formatting that is noted here.
What’s next: staff will continue due diligence with Southland Dispatch and will return to the City Council with firm costs and contract terms for a future formal decision.
