Hood said Dove explained to him how the vehicle would prove to be an asset.
“What Chief Dove shared with me was also very, very significant,” Hood said. “This is a defensive vehicle, not an offensive vehicle. It is not a tank. It is truly to protect the officers; it is for the safety of those officers. I think one of the best examples that he provided to me that makes sense is if you had a situation where an officer was injured and is out in an area where he or she is exposed, this vehicle would provide a means to be able to potentially go in and retrieve that officer without putting others in harm’s way.”
Based on those discussions, Hood said his apprehensions may subside by next year, especially if the police department comes back with more information and possibly looks into sharing the cost with neighboring municipalities.
“The chief did, in fact, help to change my opinion,” he said. “I am not as opposed as I was. However, I am not going to support the vehicle for the 2014 budget. I want to make it very, very clear that I am not ruling this out for the future. In fact I will tell you, I would really like to see this come back again in the 2015 budget.”
With that, Hood made a motion to amend Ordinance No. 28-2013 and remove the armored vehicle from the budget.
After a somewhat lengthy pause, the motion was seconded by Councilman Rob Kendall.
During the discussion portion, Councilman Don Spencer, who serves as liaison to the police commission, voiced his opinion on why he felt the vehicle was necessary.
Spencer cited information Dove had shared with him about a small town in Colorado that utilizes a similar vehicle because of a transient population that periodically descends upon the town, due to a concert venue.