The Short Version
The City of Troy released its February EMS report three weeks late. Once again, it came in the form of an “Executive Summary.”
Not raw data.
Not call-level records.
Not timestamps.
Just a summary.
And when you actually look at the numbers, and the memo explaining them, a bigger issue becomes clear:
👉 This isn’t full transparency. It’s controlled reporting.
📊 The Numbers: Not Close to the Standard
The contract requirement is clear:
➡️ 90% of emergency calls must have a unit on scene within 6 minutes
Now here’s what the City’s own reports show:
- January: 279 of 395 calls → 70.6%
- February: 311 of 372 calls → 83.6%
Combined (Jan + Feb):
- 590 of 767 calls under 6 minutes 👉 76.9%
Let that sink in:
76.9% vs. 90% required
That’s not a rounding error.
That’s not “almost there.”
👉 That’s more than 13 percentage points below the standard.
🧾 What the City Released (and What It Didn’t)
What we received:
- Averages (e.g., 4:18 response time)
- Buckets (≤6 minutes, >6 minutes, etc.)
- Percentages
What we did not receive:
- Individual call records
- Dispatch-to-arrival timestamps
- Geographic distribution of calls
- Outliers and extreme delays
- Any way to independently verify the data
🔍 What Section 2.4 Actually Says
The City’s own agreement requires:
Monthly reports including response times, dispatch processing times, interagency referrals, and any other compliance data requested by the City
This matters.
Because it means:
👉 The contract does not limit reporting to summaries
👉 The City has the authority to request detailed, underlying data
👉 Compliance is supposed to be demonstrable, not just stated
⚠️ The Memo: Where the Problem Becomes Clear
The memo from the City Manager’s office tries to explain the reporting.
At first glance, it looks thorough.
But look closer.
🚩 1. It Reframes Reporting Around a “Template”
The memo states:
“A template was created…”
That sounds harmless — but it’s actually critical.
Because a template:
- Standardizes what is shown
- Also standardizes what is not shown
👉 It defines the boundaries of transparency.
🚩 2. It Substitutes Averages for Verifiable Data
The memo emphasizes:
- Average response times
- Categorized buckets
- Aggregated metrics
But averages can hide:
- Delays
- Clusters of missed calls
- Geographic gaps
- Systemic issues
👉 You can meet an “average” while still failing people in real situations.
🚩 3. It Presents Compliance Without Showing Proof
The contract requires:
➡️ 90% compliance under 6 minutes
The report gives:
👉 A percentage (83.6%)
But it does not give:
- The underlying dataset
- The ability to verify the calculation
- The context behind the number
🚩 4. It Avoids Independent Verification
Without raw data, you cannot answer basic questions:
- Were any calls excluded?
- Were priorities reclassified?
- How many calls barely missed the threshold?
- Are delays concentrated in certain areas?
👉 You’re being asked to trust the output without seeing the inputs.
🚩 5. It Quietly Confirms the City Controls Transparency
Section 2.4 makes it clear:
The City can request any additional data
So if that data is not being released:
👉 That’s not a technical limitation
👉 That’s not a contractual restriction
👉 That’s a policy decision
🧠 What This Means
The system as presented does three things:
1. Creates the appearance of transparency
Structured reports
Official language
Clean summaries
2. Limits scrutiny
No raw data
No independent verification
No ability to audit
3. Controls the narrative
Only certain metrics are shown
Only certain formats are allowed
Only certain conclusions can be drawn
💥 The Core Issue
This isn’t about whether data exists.
It clearly does.
This is about whether the public is allowed to see enough of it to verify performance.
⚖️ Let’s Be Precise (and Fair)
There’s an important distinction:
❌ This is not necessarily a direct contract violation
✅ But it is less transparency than the contract allows
👉 The agreement supports deeper reporting
👉 The current reports do not provide it
🚑 Why This Matters
This isn’t abstract.
This is emergency response.
- Minutes matter
- Seconds matter
- Outcomes depend on it
When performance falls short of the standard: 👉 People deserve to know
👉 People deserve to understand why
👉 People deserve to verify the data
❓ The Question That Matters
If the City has the data required to prove compliance…
👉 Why won’t it release it?
🧾 Bottom Line
- The standard is 90% under 6 minutes
- The actual combined performance is 76.9%
- The reports are summaries, not full datasets
- The contract allows for more transparency than we’re getting
👻 What We’re Left With
A system where:
- The numbers are below standard
- The data can’t be independently verified
- The reporting is controlled through templates
That’s not full transparency.
👉 That’s curated reporting.