Kokomo — Kokomo Mayor Greg Goodnight was brief Wednesday when asked to assess the county’s progress on a proposed emergency dispatch consolidation.

“Slow. That would be my word for it,” Goodnight said.

It has been almost a month since the Kokomo Common Council approved a plan to hand city dispatch operations over to the Howard County Sheriff Department.

County officials, however, have yet to act on the proposal, which was broadly outlined in July by the Citizen’s Committee for Consolidation.

County officials are expected to vote Tuesday on the proposal, which calls for reducing the combined amount spent annually by the city and county by $700,000.

How those cost savings might be achieved, however, has been the source of increasing speculation.

No one connected with city or county government — or the consolidation committee — will say how many dispatchers might lose their jobs during the merger.

Neither will anyone suggest that no one need lose their jobs. The consensus seems to be that some job cuts will be necessary to achieve $700,000 in savings.

An interlocal agreement, which is expected to spell out in detail how the existing employees will be treated in the merger, is still being drafted.

Goodnight, however, contends that the decisions on how the new dispatch will be structured should lie with the county.

“I think the city council acted swiftly, and I’m just waiting. [County officials] have said they’re on board. It’s pretty simple,” Goodnight said.

Tuesday, however, county officials suggested they might send three different budget proposals to Goodnight for the new dispatch.

Goodnight said the agreement was simple: the county will take over dispatch and run it with a $1.4 million budget.

“I’m not sure why they would send over three different budgets,” Goodnight said.

“They put together a consolidation committee — it’s their committee. And that committee put together a $1.4 million budget, run by the sheriff. So they should put together a $1.4 million budget and the sheriff should run it.”

By Wednesday afternoon, county officials had decided they would create just one proposed budget, but declined to give a dollar amount.

The consolidation committee recommended the county be given first shot at running the consolidated dispatch, but also recommended handing the operation to the city if the county couldn’t, or wouldn’t run the operation for $1.4 million.

Goodnight declined to speculate on whether the county would decline to run the dispatch after initially accepting the consolidation committee’s recommendations.

“I think they made a commitment they could do this,” he said. “They accepted that budget, and I’m sure that’s what they’ll come up with.”

Goodnight also said he hoped the county will retain the city’s dispatchers, who may or may not be retained as county employees.

“I sent a letter a month ago to the sheriff and the three commissioners, asking them to consider our employees,” Goodnight said. “If there are some they don’t hire or use, we’ll obviously consider them for any other positions we have.”

Goodnight initially objected to the cost split proposed by the consolidation committee, which recommended the city should pay 70 percent of the cost and the county 30 percent, with all E911 revenues going to fund operations. The county receives about $630,000 annually from fees paid on local phone bills.

But Goodnight dropped those objections and urged the city council to pass a resolution supporting the consolidation. On Aug. 9, the council passed the resolution, which calls on the mayor to prepare an interlocal agreement spelling out the details of the merger.

County officials Wednesday said details of the draft interlocal agreement will be made public next week.

County officials contend before the consolidation takes place, there has to be an interlocal agreement.

“As far as the county is concerned, we need an interlocal agreement,” Commissioner Bill Thompson said. “If the commissioners approve it, we will forward it to the city.

“We believe the proper procedure for consolidating dispatch is an interlocal agreement,” he said. “That is what the county will pursue.”

For his part, Goodnight won’t say whether he thinks it’s necessary to sign an interlocal agreement.

At the Aug. 9 council meeting, he suggested the agreement wasn’t necessary, saying the city hadn’t signed an interlocal agreement when it disbanded the old City Court and allowed the circuit and superior courts to handle those cases.

“It probably depends on what [county officials] add to it or subtract from it,” Goodnight said.