continued from page operations of ….
continued from page
operations of the Alamo Police Department. Sheriff Giles, who assumed his duties January 1, was asked to attend the January 6 session to answer questions and to provide insight. He made it clear in the called session that he did not initiate the discussion but was approached by three members of the Council who wanted to explore the unofficial proposal.
The matter became contentious because certain members of the Council, Alamo Police Chief Karen Zanders and her staff, and some members of the public attending the meeting said they were blindsided by the proposal. Zanders has recently been on medical leave and was absent from duties while her second in command, Sgt. Jamie Ricks, has been in charge. During the called meeting, some members of the Council said they had not been previously consulted about changes in law enforcement, and several members of the public voiced their disapproval of the way the matter had been handled.
City Council member Steve Jones began the meeting by informing those in attendance that “several months ago we approached Sheriff Giles about the possibility of doing this (merging the departments). It was tried in the previous administration and the Sheriff at that time would not have anything to do with it.” Jones said that Sheriff Giles told the group of Council members with whom he met that he would entertain the idea. “We talked at our last (Council) meeting about having a question and answer session to gain information. That is why we are here. I just want to make it clear that Sheriff Giles did not come to us. We went to him.”
Mayor Pro Tem Dondrea Geter emphasized that the decisions to explore the potential changes were not made by the entire Council. “I want to make it clear it was not the whole board. I wish we could have been on the same page before (this meeting) but we are not on the same page. I want answers as to why we are (thinking about) doing it.”
Geter walked out prior to the last regularly scheduled Council session on December 16 immediately following a work session in which the future of the Alamo Police Department was reportedly brought up. Geter said he was not invited to any meetings regarding the matter prior to December 16, although he is on the City’s Police Committee, along with Jones, Councilwoman Laura Brownley and Chief Zanders.
“I was told that the reason I was not invited to the Police Committee meetings is because I am rarely available, so it wasn’t possible,” Geter, who works outside the county, said. He said understood when he came to the December 16 meeting that the issue was going to be put on the table and voted on during that regular session. “I wanted you to know why I left (the meeting). You don’t make a major decision like that without everyone knowing the details and the full Council being present.” Geter noted, “I just want to see collaboration and partnership.” He added that it was disrespectful of Chief Zanders to exclude her from the conversation. The regular December 16 session was postponed and rescheduled for December 23, but the matter regarding the Police Department did not come up then.
Councilwoman Patricia Woodward said at the January 6 session, “My take on this is that I don’t want to rush into anything. I want everything to be spelled out. How are we going to protect our current workers? How are we going to protect their retirement? I am all for making changes and saving money, but I do not think we have enough information to make this decision right now. I want us to bring citizens in and get their input, talk to Glenwood citizens (who contracted for coverage with the Wheeler County Sheriff some time ago) and get their input. All I ask is that we do this in the right manner. Acknowledge what we want and communicate.”
Councilwoman Brownley, in response to Geter’s comments, said Geter apparently misunderstood the intent of the Council on December 16. “We were just initiating the conversation. The plan was to investigate whether this could be done or not. We did not know if it could be done.”
Sheriff Giles, who was asked to attend the called meeting to answer questions about a possible merger with the departments, noted that when he initially spoke with Council members, various issues were discussed, including manpower, office space, equipment, and the costs of transferring the City employees to the Sheriff’s Office. He said that a rough estimate of making this change might cost the City about $250,000, but that any figures for making the change are very preliminary. He emphasized that his current Sheriff’s Office budget would not sustain adding the City Department without monetary reinforcement.
“There is a lot to discuss if this happens, from uniforms to salaries to equipment,” the Sheriff said of the proposed change. There will also be a complex process of transferring evidence and records from one department to another, so nothing can be accomplished overnight, he added, noting that all City equipment would become the equipment of the Sheriff’s Office. When asked about transferring retirement funds, he commented that City of Alamo employees are under a GMA (Georgia Municipal Association) plan, which would stop once the Department is dissolved, but as Sheriff’s Office employees, the former City workers would be covered under an ACCU plan. “Those are two separate things,” he said.
Sheriff Giles said that Sheriff’s Office employees might utilize the new Alamo Police Department headquarters, which would be a bonus for both departments since it would give the Sheriff’s Office employees more room for operations and provide more police presence in the City.
Councilman Jones pointed out that the City of Alamo would be asking for 24-7 coverage, unlike the City of Glenwood which was getting “spot checks” under its previous contract with the Sheriff’s Office. Glenwood closed its Police Department several years ago, turning over a patrol car to the Sheriff’s Office and contracting for law enforcement coverage.
Glenwood Mayor G.M. Joiner said maintaining a police force was impossible, given the City’s annual revenue. “We had no other option,” Joiner said, explaining that the Glenwood City Council agreed unanimously to make the merger and a joint meeting between the City, the County Commission, Magistrate/Probate Judge, and Sheriff cemented the arrangement. What Glenwood receives under its current contract differs from what would be needed in Alamo, the County seat, which accommodates the county school, courthouse, government offices and jail — all located within the city limits.
Sheriff Giles pointed out that Wheeler County citizens may not realize that under the former Sheriff’s administration, up until January 1, there was only one Sheriff’s Deputy available, especially at night, to cover the entire county. “As of January 1, there will be two deputies available in Wheeler County all of the time.” The Sheriff said that he is currently two officers away from being fully staffed but has people waiting to be hired. The City of Alamo Police Department has a staff of two full-time officers, one part-time officer, and the Chief.
“We need to have a group conversation. First, Chief Zanders and I need to sit down and talk. This is not just about me. It involves your police staff and your chief,” the Sheriff emphasized. He concluded. “I am here to help, whatever you decide to do. The citizens of Alamo are citizens of Wheeler County, too.”
Chief Zanders, who has been at her job since 2021, commented during the called meeting. “No one has talked with me about this. I am not in agreement, but if this is what you want to do, I am not going to fight it. There are so many steps in closing a police department. You don’t just turn out the lights and close the door. We have evidence and pending cases. All of that has to be mitigated.”
In addition to struggling to obtain and keep officers, the Alamo Police Department has suffered tragedies in the past few years, with two officers passing away — one who was shot and killed during his first shift on the job.
Councilwoman Woodard said of the “why now?” question regarding the discussion, “This has been talked about for years…one of the reasons is the cost.” The Alamo Police Department has a projected budget of $301, 221.25 for the new year. Of that amount, $205,871.25 has been allocated for salaries.
Another reason for the discussion is the turnover in the Police Department. Councilwoman Brownley pointed out, “We have a hard time keeping officers after investing in their hiring and training. We have candidates, we send them to school, and either they don’t pass or they leave and go to work somewhere else. It is hard finding qualified candidates. Our officers are worked to the bone. I feel sorry for them.”
Councilman Jones noted, “We cannot keep working our police full time and then ask them to work a lot of overtime. I don’t know how they work 12-hours shifts, but I appreciate them doing it, and we have paid them for it.
continued from page
But, you want your officers sharp when they are on duty. They have lives away from Alamo. They have families to look after.”
City resident Dr. Marvin Howard voiced his concerns during the called session.” I am really disappointed, and I think we need to display a little courtesy. I see that everybody does not know what is going on. We, as the citizens of Alamo and Wheeler County, should know what is going on. If they (the Council) are going to close the police department, we need to get the citizens of Alamo together and let y’all hear what we have to say. We don’t know the pros or the cons of this. Y’all represent us, you don’t make decisions for yourself. You need to bring us to the table and let us know what is going on.”
He continued, “We have two sets of Council members: half of ya’ll know what is going on and half don’t. Y’all have to get together and quit bickering. And we can’t forget our chief. You don’t want to be the last person to know you are going to lose your job. I think all of you should feel the same way.”
In her response to Dr. Howard, Councilwoman Brownley said, “If we (the Council) can have discussions, bring in (police) officers and committees to have discussions, then bring in citizens and get their input, is that a good path forward?” She emphasized that the decision would be one affecting many people’s lives. “We do take that seriously. We realize our mistakes. We want to rectify that and do the right thing the right way. We all appreciate our chief and officers. I apologize we did not go about this in the proper manner.”
Jones concluded, “I’ll admit that mistakes were made, but it was not intentional to pull the wool over anybody’s eyes. We talked about this in February of last year, so it is not brand new news.” He noted that on the last work schedule, (December) the Sheriff’s Department covered 17 shifts for Alamo. “They (the Sheriff’s Office) are already helping us. This has nothing to do with what has happened to Karen (Zanders) this past month. We just want to make sure Alamo is protected. There is no use in kicking history around. It’s done. We are here to go forward in the right way.”
