Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lisbon chief warns Patrol‑First tradeoffs as council weighs cutting officer position
Summary
Police Chief McGee urged the council to weigh long‑term risks of shifting from community policing to a Patrol‑First model after one patrol position was frozen and school resource officer revenue was lost; councilors pressed for alternatives including reclassification and hiring freezes.
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chief McGee presented the department’s FY27 staffing model and defended Lisbon’s community‑policing approach, saying it combines patrol coverage, specialized detectives and school resource officers (SROs) to prevent repeat incidents and build trust. “Our patrol shifts are staffed with a minimum of 2 police officers on duty 24/7,” he told the board. The chief explained he adopted a hybrid SRO schedule after a patrol vacancy and the loss of SRO reimbursement from the school system.
McGee warned that shifting to a Patrol‑First, reactive deployment could reduce specialized follow‑up and long‑term prevention. “Shifting away from Lisbon’s community policing model to a strictly patrol‑first call response approach could have significant consequences for our community,” he said, arguing detectives and SROs help reduce repeat calls and support victims. He also spelled out cuts already made in the FY27 draft: roughly $115,950 tied to a removed patrol officer and about $92,000 for cruiser reductions, with additional offsets from a grant‑funded narcotics position.
Councilors probed alternatives. One councilor said, “I just can’t wrap my head around this,” comparing Lisbon’s force to neighboring towns and questioning whether the current mix is affordable. Several members suggested reclassifying an upcoming detective vacancy to patrol or instituting a hiring freeze so attrition could reduce headcount without layoffs. Chief McGee cautioned that further personnel cuts would amount to layoffs and promised to review line items with management for non‑personnel savings. The council did not take a formal vote to change staffing but signaled interest in exploring attrition/hiring‑freeze tools and directed staff to return with options.
