View Full Version : Oakland police will not longer respond to these crimes
I did a search and didn't find anyone else posting on this so hopefully I didn't miss it. I find this to be pretty stunning news. I'm not normally concerned with what people do as far as arming themselves but they better do so in Oakland if they can.
I'm paraphrasing the article. You have to wonder how many other cities are going to be in this situation soon.
http://cbs5.com/local/Oakland.loses.nearly.2.1805474.html
80 Oakland Police Officers Laid Off
(7/14/2010)
The City of Oakland, one of the nation's most crime-ridden cities, faced the first day Wednesday of the grim reality of a smaller police force — after laying off almost 10 percent of its officers.
Police have released a list of crimes — including grand theft, burglary, vehicle collision, identity theft and vandalism — that officers would not respond to in person due to the layoffs.
Victims would have to report those and other crimes online.
LOL
That is simply awesome!
Whats next on the chopping block? Rape? Murder? Kidnapping?
Hey, guess what, a couple of guys from our company got laid-off a couple of years ago and I had to take over a few projects. No one in our company told our clients that "we downsized so their building projects will no longer be supervised by us, good luck with the contractor on your own."
This is BS
VooDoo6Actual
07-22-10, 11:14
The HITS just keep on coming.... PERFECT !
The taxes they get from marijuana sales will get they all back and lower crime. (seriously)
I read about this when it first hit the news. What happens if you don't have a computer or online access? Maybe they can rehire those 80 Officers with the extra tax dollars they'll be making from their COSTCO sized marijuana production that just passed. End of thread: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=50297&page=5
variablebinary
07-22-10, 11:26
The taxes they get from marijuana sales will get they all back and lower crime. (seriously)
Never happen, and what you are suggesting is the problem, not the solution
CA needs to completely rethink its current way of governing, not look for new taxable avenues.
CarlosDJackal
07-22-10, 11:59
So basically they announced to the world that Oakland is the Disneyland for those types of criminals!! :rolleyes:
Littlelebowski
07-22-10, 12:11
Extortion for union pushed pension plans probably.
I'm going to throw a little logic in here since everyone else is jumping to the conclusion that Oakland police will not be responding to crimes. I think the intent here is that the department will not respond to certain calls that just require making a report. They will still probably respond to "in progress" calls.
Chicago has a similar system. Some reports can be made over the phone and detectives will follow up depending on what kind of case it is and if the victim stays in contact. 911 will encourage some callers to go to a police station to make a report. Traffic accident reports are supposed to be made at police stations if both cars are still drivable. Calls of domestic batteries will get a police response whether the offender is still on scene or not. This helps alleviate some of the workload, but the amount of BS calls combined with understaffing still means longer response times. AND don't forget that police are still supposed to be PROactive as well.
As the world keeps tanking and the wrong people are in charge, the citizens and police everywhere are all losing out.
Never happen, and what you are suggesting is the problem, not the solution
CA needs to completely rethink its current way of governing, not look for new taxable avenues.
Screw that. This is perfect. CA is a virtual loser magnet. Think of all the trash that will migrate there from other states.
The listed crimes that the Oakland PD will no longer send an officer to in person are property crimes where the suspect has left. In these instances the officers were responding to simply take a report. For instance, a person comes home from work and finds that their mountain bike was taken from their back porch or some kids spray painted the wall behind their house. No evidence was left behind and their are no witnesses to the incident. If an officer responds to the residence, that officer takes what the victim says and writes a report about it, maybe including the serial number of the bicycle in the off chance that the victim wrote it down....many times the only purpose the report serves is for the victim to file an insurance claim since there really isn't anything to follow-up on. Under the new policy the victim would file a report on-line or in-person at a police station, including serial numbers of any property taken and a detective would later read the report to see if anything could be done to further investigate the incident. If not the case would be closed. Serial numbers would still be listed in state and nation-wide databases and the case would be reopened if the property turned up in someone's possession. This frees up on-duty patrol officers to take crimes against persons or crimes in progress in a more timely manner.
Now, will this policy lead to fewer arrests for these property crimes? Sure, officers won't respond to the scene to dust for fingerprints, take photos, etc. However, in my experience the impact will be minimal since the percentage of the time that the collection of fingerprint evidence, photos, etc. lead to an arrest is minuscule.
Screw that. This is perfect. CA is a virtual loser magnet. Think of all the trash that will migrate there from other states.
Indeed!
But as others have said, IF it's that only incidents requireing a police report and nothing more will be the ones no longer resonded too. I happen to agree.
A cop is much better utilised daling with real crime than taking down a report about a fender bender.
As for the pot debate, come on guys, is it really that evil? Alcahol is okay to purchase and consume, pot does not more damage than beer/wine/liquor. Sell it legally for recreational use, and tax the shit out of it like cigarettes. Will it solve CA's debt problems? No. Will it help? Sure.
The US started the "War on Drugs when? almost 30 years ago, did it work, hell no. Now I understand dealing with drugs like Coke, Heroin, PCP, Meth and so on, but pot? Come on. Let them smoke it and pay for it.
Nothing new here, and not unique to CA. Many small and large metro agencies already direct people to on-line reporting, don't respond to certain property crimes, won't handle prop-damage only MVAs, and similar offenses.
Many jurisdictions have ceased handling fuel thefts/drive-offs, bad checks, and certain similar promise-to-pay offenses and now regard them as civil matters. Even if the cops still handle them, the prosecuting attorney may no longer charge them.
Many have also ceased handling of private nuisance offenses. Neighbor's music too loud, and you're the only complainant? Some will tell you to go next door and knock.
Then there's multi-family housing problems. Complaints within the trailer court or apartment complex? Some will tell you to notify management, it's private property.
In cases of fraud, theft, identity theft, and like offenses, the use of pre-report checklists is becoming increasingly common, even in the most responsive, PR-oriented agencies. When citizens report those, they are given a list of things to assemble and forms to fill out, and only when they're complete will the report be taken.
There have been issues in some communities when citizens either could not report via web, could not go to a location to report, or could not participate in gathering the required pre-reqs for the report. Agencies should be careful to make the necessary accomodations.
Some are good things, some not. All are at least risky for PR, especially if done poorly.
Think of all the trash that will migrate there from other states.
Don't you mean have?
hope a lot of illegals from PHX head their :) heheheheheh
The listed crimes that the Oakland PD will no longer send an officer to in person are property crimes where the suspect has left. In these instances the officers were responding to simply take a report. For instance, a person comes home from work and finds that their mountain bike was taken from their back porch or some kids spray painted the wall behind their house. No evidence was left behind and their are no witnesses to the incident. If an officer responds to the residence, that officer takes what the victim says and writes a report about it, maybe including the serial number of the bicycle in the off chance that the victim wrote it down....many times the only purpose the report serves is for the victim to file an insurance claim since there really isn't anything to follow-up on. Under the new policy the victim would file a report on-line or in-person at a police station, including serial numbers of any property taken and a detective would later read the report to see if anything could be done to further investigate the incident. If not the case would be closed. Serial numbers would still be listed in state and nation-wide databases and the case would be reopened if the property turned up in someone's possession. This frees up on-duty patrol officers to take crimes against persons or crimes in progress in a more timely manner.
Ummmm, no.
Loud music is something they no longer respond to. That means they won't stop it anymore. That means you have to deal with it. Nobody comes to stop them.
And the others aren't "after the fact" crimes. If somebody is vandalizing your property right now, they aren't coming out. You go down and fill out a police report. They don't come make anyone stop vandalizing your property.
Same as a vehicle accident you just had. They aren't responding anymore, you go down a fill out a report.
You are looking out the window at somebody stealing your car right now? Well they aren't coming out, nobody is gonna stop them. Come down and fill out a report.
Basically anything where you are not in immediate and imminent danger, they aren't gonna do a damn thing. Come down and fill out a report.
Oakland has perfected "Don't make me do my job" policing.
Basically anything where you are not in immediate and imminent danger, they aren't gonna do a damn thing. Come down and fill out a report.
Oakland has perfected "Don't make me do my job" policing.
Agreed. If all the Police in Oakland are going to do is be bodyguards 15-30 minutes after you need them and investigate property crimes at the point that the vast majority can't or won't be solved what is the point of having a Police Department? You might as well fire them all.
This is a classic example of punishing the taxpayer for not wanting to pay through the nose for something they can't afford.
Is pot really that evil? Ask BPA Alexander Kirpnick's mom. Ask BPA's Juan Villa and Chris Brinkoff if pot is evil (Both Newton-Azrak award winners, oh BTW, Google why Newton and Azrak were killed). Ask Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman the root cause of 100% of the office's homicides and armed robberies the last two years. Yeah, legalizing weed will make everything better.
I wonder if they will respond to a burglary call if the burglar (or his body) is still there.
Ummmm, no.
Loud music is something they no longer respond to. That means they won't stop it anymore. That means you have to deal with it. Nobody comes to stop them.
And the others aren't "after the fact" crimes. If somebody is vandalizing your property right now, they aren't coming out. You go down and fill out a police report. They don't come make anyone stop vandalizing your property.
Same as a vehicle accident you just had. They aren't responding anymore, you go down a fill out a report.
You are looking out the window at somebody stealing your car right now? Well they aren't coming out, nobody is gonna stop them. Come down and fill out a report.
Basically anything where you are not in immediate and imminent danger, they aren't gonna do a damn thing. Come down and fill out a report.
Oakland has perfected "Don't make me do my job" policing.
I am not aware of any law enforcement agency that, due to layoffs, reduced the types of crimes they respond to that has also limited the officers' response to the same crimes if they are in progress. As the article didn't go into specifics, I assumed that the Oakland PD would still respond to in progress crimes. Let's say you are correct. Would you agree that if the crime was not in progress (for example you came home and found that someone had stolen your bike) that it would be a waste of resources to send an officer to take the report? They would only be documenting what you told them, something you could easily do yourself. Wouldn't those resources be better utilized responding to crimes that are in progress or are of a more serious nature?
Your last comment about "Don't make me do my job" makes me believe that you don't understand the nature of police work. The article stated that Oakland PD laid off 10% of it's force. A given patrol division has only a finite number officers working any given shift that is now reduced because of the layoffs. Calls are prioritized based on, to put it simply, the level of threat to the public. Obviously, a person being assaulted is a higher priority than say, your example of someone stealing a car. In one case a person is being physically injured, in the other a person's possession is being stolen. With a reduction in manpower the division may not even have enough officers to respond to the crimes against persons in a timely manner. By the time an officer is able to respond to the property or quality of life crimes you listed they may be several hours old. Now what good does it do to send an officer out then? They are going to simply document in a report what had happened, something the victim could easily do themselves. These resources are better utilized responding to crimes against persons, in progress crimes, or patrolling in an effort to deter crime.
Your post makes it seem that you believe the Oakland PD is no longer responding to these calls because they are too lazy or don't want to. In fact, the reductions stem from a cut in the department's manpower, forcing them to make decision to how more efficiently utilize their resources.
I suspect the real culprit in all of this is a city government that, much like our federal government, mismanaged it's taxpayers dollars and is now making the citizens pay the price.
This is a classic example of punishing the taxpayer for not wanting to pay through the nose for something they can't afford.
You are assuming that the City of Oakland can't afford adequate public safety. Would the city be able to afford it if the city government managed it's resources more effectively or based it's financial decisions on the public good instead of increasing their odds of being reelected?
You are assuming that the City of Oakland can't afford adequate public safety.
No I am not, I am assuming the move is based on a lack of funds for whatever reasons. This is a classic liberal government move, slash more important services like Police/Fire/EMS and then expect the taxpayer to beg for a taxhike.
We see this in the Seattle/Tacoma area on a routine basis.
Washington State using a similar technique even holds the commuter hostage by pissing away our transportation budget on light rail and other fool's errands instead of widening highways.
Is pot really that evil? Ask BPA Alexander Kirpnick's mom. Ask BPA's Juan Villa and Chris Brinkoff if pot is evil (Both Newton-Azrak award winners, oh BTW, Google why Newton and Azrak were killed). Ask Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman the root cause of 100% of the office's homicides and armed robberies the last two years. Yeah, legalizing weed will make everything better.
I think you're confusing "pot" with "Prohibition".
At least you were able to work through to a logical conclusion at the end there.
Littlelebowski
07-23-10, 10:41
The "war on drugs" sure is evil.
arizonaranchman
07-23-10, 11:10
The listed crimes that the Oakland PD will no longer send an officer to in person are property crimes where the suspect has left. In these instances the officers were responding to simply take a report. For instance, a person comes home from work and finds that their mountain bike was taken from their back porch or some kids spray painted the wall behind their house. No evidence was left behind and their are no witnesses to the incident. If an officer responds to the residence, that officer takes what the victim says and writes a report about it, maybe including the serial number of the bicycle in the off chance that the victim wrote it down....many times the only purpose the report serves is for the victim to file an insurance claim since there really isn't anything to follow-up on. Under the new policy the victim would file a report on-line or in-person at a police station, including serial numbers of any property taken and a detective would later read the report to see if anything could be done to further investigate the incident. If not the case would be closed. Serial numbers would still be listed in state and nation-wide databases and the case would be reopened if the property turned up in someone's possession. This frees up on-duty patrol officers to take crimes against persons or crimes in progress in a more timely manner.
Now, will this policy lead to fewer arrests for these property crimes? Sure, officers won't respond to the scene to dust for fingerprints, take photos, etc. However, in my experience the impact will be minimal since the percentage of the time that the collection of fingerprint evidence, photos, etc. lead to an arrest is minuscule.
Exactly. Taking BS reports in person takes 3 or 4 times longer than doing it on the phone or via online. As cities and counties and states continue to collapse financially you'll see more and more of this.
Littlelebowski
07-23-10, 11:12
Power play by the police union. Some rank and file cops on the street will lose their jobs while the desk jockeys put for the press releases like this to terrify the city gov't into caving into their pension and compensation demands.
This happened only after the city and the union's pension talks failed.
California police unions pull this crap all of the time. "Give us money or you won't be protected" and what the money is really for is pensions.
Nathan_Bell
07-23-10, 11:26
Power play by the police union. Some rank and file cops on the street will lose their jobs while the desk jockeys put for the press releases like this to terrify the city gov't into caving into their pension and compensation demands.
This happened only after the city and the union's pension talks failed.
California police unions pull this crap all of the time. "Give us money or you won't be protected" and what the money is really for is pensions.
Yup, that is what is behind most of these cities' and states' financial woes. To cushy of a pension for too long.
Dirk Williams
07-23-10, 11:53
Ive been a cop well over 20 years now I MIGHT see a pension of 3400.00 before taxes.
Ive been shot at multiple times, in multiple shootings. Had people try to stab me, hit me with stuff, gotten spit on.
Ive been in more ****ing fights then I can count, responded to more dead people calls then I care to think about, and still show up on your door step to take your barking cat complaint without complaining.
I missed pretty much every event or special event my children had, Not for the money, there is none, but because I believed in what im doing for we the people.
I can't tell you what upper management is doing as I never sold out, and tried to promote.
I do take exception when you say my retirement package is a problem cuz after I did the job, you feel like I got to much.
So why don't you ladies step up to the plate, pin a badge on work 20 plus years at every shit shift there is, every nasty job there is dealing with all the bad society has to offer, then let's have this chat.
You won't do it, if you did you would have nothing to snibble about.
Dirk D Williams
Littlelebowski
07-23-10, 11:56
Dirk, I didn't mention you individually so there's no need for the personal soliloquy. If the shoe doesn't fit in regards to your pension, don't try to force it on. I can cite exactly what I'm talking about. Would you like the links?
As far as stepping up, United States Marine Corps Infantry. And I won't go into a litany of all the crap I had to put up with in order to make my point.
I MIGHT see a pension of 3400.00 before taxes...
I can't tell you what upper management is doing as I never sold out, and tried to promote.
These 2 things go hand in hand.
I missed pretty much every event or special event my children had, Not for the money, there is none, but because I believed in what im doing for we the people...
So why don't you ladies step up to the plate, pin a badge on work 20 plus years at every shit shift there is...
Many of us here have missed months and years of being with our families due to being in the military, for me it was the USN. I used to work shitty shifts too, they lasted 6 months at a time, and my last shitty shift was 11 months out of 12.
I think you're taking these comments way too personally. Step back and realize that people can criticize and critique what's happening with and in an organization without slandering the individual Officer.
I am not aware of any law enforcement agency that, due to layoffs, reduced the types of crimes they respond to that has also limited the officers' response to the same crimes if they are in progress. As the article didn't go into specifics, I assumed that the Oakland PD would still respond to in progress crimes.
Well the article in the OP is hardly the only one on this subject. The reality is that is EXACTLY the case. The Oakland PD simply ain't rolling out for many things anymore.
Let's say you are correct. Would you agree that if the crime was not in progress (for example you came home and found that someone had stolen your bike) that it would be a waste of resources to send an officer to take the report? They would only be documenting what you told them, something you could easily do yourself. Wouldn't those resources be better utilized responding to crimes that are in progress or are of a more serious nature?
So who ya gonna call? Ghostbusters? The PD are supposed to come out so they can do something about it like "investigate" and talk to potential parties that may be involved. But they probably stopped doing those things decades ago. They reduced their involvement to documentation only (file a report - do nothing else) and now they have gotten to the point where they won't even come out to do that, because the victim can now do that job for them.
Bottom line if you don't have a PD that functions as a PD (and this includes disturbing the peace calls and taking reports) then you really don't have a functioning PD.
Your last comment about "Don't make me do my job" makes me believe that you don't understand the nature of police work. The article stated that Oakland PD laid off 10% of it's force. A given patrol division has only a finite number officers working any given shift that is now reduced because of the layoffs. Calls are prioritized based on, to put it simply, the level of threat to the public. Obviously, a person being assaulted is a higher priority than say, your example of someone stealing a car. In one case a person is being physically injured, in the other a person's possession is being stolen. With a reduction in manpower the division may not even have enough officers to respond to the crimes against persons in a timely manner. By the time an officer is able to respond to the property or quality of life crimes you listed they may be several hours old. Now what good does it do to send an officer out then? They are going to simply document in a report what had happened, something the victim could easily do themselves. These resources are better utilized responding to crimes against persons, in progress crimes, or patrolling in an effort to deter crime.
Your post makes it seem that you believe the Oakland PD is no longer responding to these calls because they are too lazy or don't want to. In fact, the reductions stem from a cut in the department's manpower, forcing them to make decision to how more efficiently utilize their resources.
I probably understand the nature and demands (and unfortunately the the sad reality) of police work more than you think. And I have seen everything from competent efficient community policing to minimum required effort policing. Only part of Oaklands problem is budget. The other parts are a community that tolerates crime and criminals so they have them in larger numbers than most communities. And a police force which has adapted to that community and has an apathetic view towards the situation. Worst thing you can be is a good cop in Oakland.
I suspect the real culprit in all of this is a city government that, much like our federal government, mismanaged it's taxpayers dollars and is now making the citizens pay the price.
Almost a certainty. Crime certainly isn't their number one priority.
Dirk Williams
07-23-10, 12:36
Two tours, 8 years in the USN, and 4 as a weekender in the guard.
Been is a uniform of some sort since I was 4 years old, I am a believer, and tired of the poooo getting hammered everytime you guys think we did something wrong, not even knowing the facts.
There are thousands of cops in america, guess what even the good ones make a mistake from time to time, it's the nature of the beast, split second choices with nothing but shitty conclusions.
Standing in front of the boss taking your medicene from a boss you think is a cheese dick.
Never the less you except the responsibility for your actions no matter how many times you have been second guessed by folks who wern't even there and don't have a ****in clue.
Fella's why don't you share with us cops on the board what you think is a fair retirement benifit
D irk D Williams.
Littlelebowski
07-23-10, 12:39
Dirk, you're still complaining. Do you want to address the topic of the thread or maybe just start your own on your personal grievances?
thopkins22
07-23-10, 12:51
Fella's why don't you share with us cops on the board what you think is a fair retirement benifit
Something that doesn't bankrupt the city. That may be more than they're making now, it may be less. If the citizens want a police force that has better retirement for it's public servants, they can elect officials who will make cuts in other areas to accommodate these pensions, or they can elect officials who will tax the ever loving crap out their residents to the point that the city begins a decline into Detroit style poverty and economic stagnation.
At some point it becomes Toyota employees vs. GM employees. One is a relatively well run company with employees, one is a company that should be bankrupt and gone with no employees.
I say that as a person who recognizes that most police officers are woefully underpaid. But I don't like the notion of pensions at all. Pay the officers more and allow them to be responsible for their own retirement. Frankly I feel the same way about most public and private sector workers. Pensions cost too much for too little benefit to those whom they're supposedly for.
Nathan_Bell
07-23-10, 13:00
Two tours, 8 years in the USN, and 4 as a weekender in the guard.
Been is a uniform of some sort since I was 4 years old, I am a believer, and tired of the poooo getting hammered everytime you guys think we did something wrong, not even knowing the facts.
There are thousands of cops in america, guess what even the good ones make a mistake from time to time, it's the nature of the beast, split second choices with nothing but shitty conclusions.
Standing in front of the boss taking your medicene from a boss you think is a cheese dick.
Never the less you except the responsibility for your actions no matter how many times you have been second guessed by folks who wern't even there and don't have a ****in clue.
Fella's why don't you share with us cops on the board what you think is a fair retirement benifit
D irk D Williams.
Any 20 and out retirement system that does not have a disability requirement or minimum age is idiotic. The state will be supporting someone for 30+ years (average lifespan) for doing 20 years of work.
There is one issue for you
Dirk Williams
07-23-10, 13:35
Bowski, your right im on a rant for some reason. I have lot's of friends at OPD, they work their butts off in a "state side" war zone.
I don't pretend to understand the politic's of any of this, the bottom line is simple America is broke, the media and apperantly you guys want to balance the books on the backs of public employee's.
Regarding the OP those crimes are pretty serious, however most big citys have gone to a you "Make your own report system" for many cold crimes.
The prisons are full, no cops to respond to some hot calls, and we are spending more money per prisoner then we are on our school children.
Something is out of wack, and it dosen't appear that we the people are going to consolidate and fix the problems. Hmmmmmmmmm think Ill go to the range and shoot my 338.
D Williams
No I am not, I am assuming the move is based on a lack of funds for whatever reasons. This is a classic liberal government move, slash more important services like Police/Fire/EMS and then expect the taxpayer to beg for a taxhike.
We see this in the Seattle/Tacoma area on a routine basis.
Washington State using a similar technique even holds the commuter hostage by pissing away our transportation budget on light rail and other fool's errands instead of widening highways.
I misunderstood your post, we are in agreement.
As an officer, I can see the public's point that some police union pensions can be inflated, and can harm the city's funds, the department's budget, etc. I also understand the appearance that Oakland cops don't want to do their job, though I disagree with that observation, as would anyone familiar with American policing. Is some civilian oversight needed? Sure; my city is in the middle of this debate right now.
Some key points:
By and large, many American police unions (hose jockeys too) are prohibited by state statute or by the city's charter or ordinances from any sort of work stoppages, slowdowns, or impediments, commonly called a STRIKE. In fact, some areas can levy criminal charges against strikers or their unions. Not sure how or if there's ever been a notable case on this, but the fact remains that a long used or threatened tool to improve wages and conditions is not available to us.
Larger cities will often have separate police unions. The unions in these cases are often divided at a certain point around where an officer would cease working the street entirely. Example: our union represents us up to and including the ranks of Sergeant, Detective, and Investigator (sworn crime scene analysis). More often than not the "last hired, first fired" method applies; though its definitely the most expedient way to determine who gets to feed their families, its not always the most fair. Not talking socialism here, but who should go first- the old vet who doesn't leave the station, or the younger cop who's still running traffic and names? Who's really working, and who goes first? The answer's usually the same. Problem is, there's really no other way to do it as quickly.
As public employees, cops and firefighters lose 3 of the most fundamental employee rights: the right to complain about working conditions, the right to publicly criticize its employers, and the right to negotiate their own wage. The first is closely tied to my first point about unions. The third looks like its tied to collective bargaining, but its often not. The police and fire departments, like the military, aren't places where you can walk into your bosses' office, and ask for another $.25 an hour, an extra day off, permission to take a half day, show how the shop across the street does it, and offer to leave if not compensated what you're worth. The second is all politics.
This is more universal to anyone who wears a uniform and knows how to stand at attention: You're expected to make it in to work when any sane person would stay home due to the weather or catastrophe. You have to expect being called away from your personal life for a day, a week, a year, with often little to no prior notice.
No other job in America, not even the military, is as tolerant of civilian control of their day to day activities than police departments. While one can argue that the military is under civilian control, as it well should be, its not under civilian supervision. You don't have American citizens looking over your shoulder questioning your every move and complaining to your CO, or the rest of the citizens, that they know your job better than you do. I've never seen anyone tell a firefighter that he's fighting a fire wrong. Somehow, people have that mentality when it comes to cops. Not that I don't recognize that I work for the Chief and the Mayor, and therefore by extension, the citizens of my city.
No other job runs the risk of running into a dissatisfied customer that wants to do you harm, when you're not working. Firefighters don't have worry about a crash victim finding them, nor does the military worry about Hadji knocking on their door when they're back at home. Or worse, finding my family. I do.
Only police unions, through the past actions of a few very bad eggs, immediately conjure up an image of corruption, croneyism, sloth, and graft. Ask about a serviceman's retirement, or even a firefighter's, and there's no question that they've earned it. Police? Its assumed that its not earned.
On budget and staffing issues:
Show me a job where you're expected to perform the same number and frequency of duties, at the same standard of quality, with 10% less manpower than you had the day before.
Show me another job where that same 10% staffing reduction made your job that much more dangerous. Military? You bet! Firefighters? Sure.
Show me a job where your bosses understand that. Again, private sector types will. Public sector types won't.
Show me an industry where the public and the bosses expect you to perform to such a high expectation when the chips are down, but won't provide the budget for that to happen. Paul Howe shooting on a Boy Scout budget. We also have a bigger fight getting some of the tools that we need. The libs want us to not look intimidating, and hard right doesn't want us to outgun the public. Go far enough to one side and it just loops around.
That's why cops have pensions. That's why those pensions appear to be high for public sector retirements. That's also why unions are rightfully so protective of them, so people who think that pensions are the reason that budgets are out of control, or the cops are being lazy, don't come and take them.
A word on that: A half a lifetime of adrenaline spikes and drops, constantly witnessing and dealing with the decline of your own society and community, without a release, government funded PT, counseling, along with the hazards of shift work, leaves cops with higher alcoholism rates, divorce rates, suicide rates, and heart disease rates. Some studies have even shown that we generally have less time after retirement to enjoy it.
I have a feeling that this will be my last post here in a long while. We'll see; the crowd has changed. I'm off to enjoy my vacation; I'm sure I haven't earned it.
Society will always get the police service it wants, and the type of criminal it deserves.
Littlelebowski
07-23-10, 17:05
Ya know, post one critical word about LEOS or more precisely, their departments or unions and people come out of the woodwork beating their breasts about how tough their job is, how they deserve this, and no one can understand how rough it is. Now, even the military doesn't have as tough of a job as LEOs.
It's just tough all over on the criticism. That's what happens when abuses occur and they do every day. It would be heartening to hear "gosh, maybe unions should have agreed to cut ever yofficer's pension a bit, maybe raise contribution levels instead of playing hardball and firing the guys out on the street." Heck, even an admission that silly, wildly optimistic promises forced upon city councils during better economic times (before the economic recession) should be negotiated back down to more realistic levels so that towns don't literally go bankrupt would be nice. Is it going to happen? No.
No, instead we hear a long litany about how rough it is to be a cop. And it is rough. And it's a volunteer job. And large city and CA police unions are running amok.
God, I'm sick of the "poor me" litany. Can't we have a discussion without the appeals to emotion? Can you guys not take informed criticism at all?
Excellent article on police unions (http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/25/if-you-dont-give-us-150-percen).
Society will always get the police service it wants, and the type of criminal it deserves.
You could say the same thing about Congress and the President. The only problem is "society" doesn't represent every individual. And it is those individuals who have to suffer the Obama's, Pelosi's and Ted Kennedy's as well as departments like the OPD.
They suffer as much as the few "good cops" stuck in those departments. Ignoring these "crimes" will only make their job harder (not easier) because it will encourage criminals and criminal activity. It will only help the cops who "don't care" anymore.
Littlelebowski
07-23-10, 17:08
Why Would 80 Police Officers Cost Oakland $100 Million? (http://reason.com/blog/2010/07/20/why-would-80-police-officers-c)
Little noticed in the story of the Oakland police layoffs and the city's ensuing crime spree is that less than six years ago Oaktown voters approved a tax specifically to pay for more cops.
As Damon Root earlier explained, the city has laid off 80 officers.
"Measure Y" [pdf] created a parcel tax and raised parking taxes, with the revenues designated for some crime prevention programs and the hiring of 63 additional officers.
One argument against rule by ballot initiative is that it creates situations like this one, wherein funds are pre-committed in ways that make nimble budgeting (never a high priority at City Hall) impossible. In the event, Measure Y's benefits were remarkably slow to show up, and the city is now considering a new pair of ballot initiatives to create another parcel tax and to "fix" Measure Y.
At the Defending Measure Y blog, Marleen Lee offers this assessment:
Let’s just review what we got with Measure Y. So far, it has cost us over $100 million. We were promised full staffing at 802 for 10 years. What did we get? Full staffing at 802 for less than five months out of five years. And now the City has to abandon Measure Y. So we got 63 officers for less than 5 months, for a price tag of $100 million. Ripoff of the century. Nobody in their right mind would support another parcel tax under those circumstances.
I'm not confident of Lee's $100 million figure, in large part because data on Measure Y revenues and expenditures are as opaque as only a major California city government can make them. Such a large failure -- after voters had shown the commitment to "taxing themselves" that good government believers call for -- helps explain why there is so little sympathy for the police officers' union. At East Bay Express, Robert Gammon applauds the city council for rejecting the Oakland Police Officers Association's no-layoff, no freezes, no-cuts proposals:
The council also deserves credit for rejecting the unreasonable no-layoffs demand. In reality, it was a poison pill. The reason is that if tax measures planned for the November ballot fail (a definite possibility even if the union had given up the no-layoffs demand), the city will have to lay off 120 cops — or request even more concessions from the police union. Both options would have been impossible if the city agreed to the no-layoffs plan.
At his own blog, City Council Member Ignacio de la Fuente explains how little the OPOA is willing to give:
I firmly believe in and will continue to push for management tools and technological enhancements within our police department because I believe that until we have these critical systems in place to accurately measure and analyze police workloads, deployment tactics, response times, and real-time crime stats, we will never know how many officers Oakland needs.
Systems such as GPS devices, In-car video cameras, and Comstat are being used by cities and police departments all over the country to not only enhance officer and public safety but also to make officers more accountable to citizens...
Delaying the implementation of these tools is costing taxpayers’ money, the same way the City’s lack of urgency to balance this budget has driven us into an even deeper financial hole.
I recognize and agree that Public Safety is a core function that ought to be a priority of local governments but in an effort to avoid laying off police officers, I have for months been urging the Oakland Police Officers Association (OPOA) to come to the negotiating table and agree to contribute to a portion of their pensions. Today their contribution is zero. A 9% contribution from police sworn personnel would save the City approximately $7.3 million per year. This figure is equivalent to the annual cost of 36 fully loaded (salary & benefits) police officers. Thus far the Oakland Police Officers Association (OPOA) has been unwilling to agree to this concession and have said publicly that they will “not agree to any concessions that include layoffs”. There is no logical way that we could guarantee there wouldn’t be layoffs when we have even bigger budget deficits next year and the following year, and meanwhile, the police and fire departments continue to make up more than 70% of the general purpose fund costs for the entire city.
It should be noted that Oakland police work can be violent; last year the department suffered the horrific murders of four officers in a single day. In the current dust-up a union official has managed to make even that tragedy into farce. Mish Shedlock (who counsels bankruptcy for the overwhelmed city) quotes the OPOA's president:
"Every time you lay us off, there's a gun to the citizen's head as well," said Sgt. Dom Arotzarena, president of the Oakland Police Officers Association...
[Sgt. Arotzarena] compared the slaying of four officers in the line of duty in March 2009 to Tuesday's layoffs, saying the 80 were released "not by the hand of a gun, but by the hand of a pen."
In the Real Clear Markets article that Damon cited earlier, Josh Barro calls for federal aid that would be tied to a basket of reforms:
The federal government is in a position to provide a helping hand to strained localities. But it must combine that help with a demand for reforms that make local government more sustainable and efficient -- so that no city has to say it can't afford a large enough police force because it has to pay each officer $162,000 per year.
I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree... The best way for the federal government to help Oakland and other cities out of their respective jams is to keep its mouth shut and its pockets closed. Nobody makes concessions except under duress. Barro sensibly suggests that states should outlaw public-sector collective bargaining, but Washington is in fact moving that ball in the wrong direction. Right now, 21 states prohibit or limit public sector bargaining rights. (That group includes Virginia and Maryland, the two states that sandwich Washington, DC.) But they stand to lose these restrictions under a Senate bill with the translated-from-Burmese title Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act (S 3194). The bill has six Republican supporters.
Littlelebowski
07-23-10, 22:35
The Oakland police officer's union was asked to contribute to their OWN pension plan! No! If you ask us to contribute to our own pension plan, then you HATE cops! You want your children to be unsafe! Think of the children!
I'm quite sure in the minds of some on this board that calling attention to police not contributing to their own pensions, union scare tactics, and the need for cities and states to balance their budgets and pay their bills that I am now a cop hater. It's tough all over. Read the article and then if you have an intelligible argument, post it.
Seriously, read the damned article. Show that you have something else other than emotional arguments "like the military doesn't have it as bad as us" "this job makes you drink" (see Chameleox's comment) etc.... Show me you have enough pride as a man to not make emotional complaints about your job when men are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan without going home at night and for less than $30k a year.
The Oakland Police Pension Problem (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/the-oakland-police-pension-problem/Content?oid=1792232)
The Cadillac benefits that the city awards to its police officers are not sustainable in the economic downturn.
By Robert Gammon
At times, Oakland feels like ground zero for the Great Recession. The city is grappling with alarmingly high rates of unemployment and foreclosure. The economic downturn also has crippled the city's budget. Since the housing bubble burst, Oakland has lost about 20 percent of its annual tax revenues, or about $100 million a year. The city council made huge cuts last year, but is now facing another $30 million budget hole, and is talking seriously about laying off 200 cops — or about one-quarter of Oakland's police force.
The one bright spot in Oakland has been the substantial drop in violent crime in the past eighteen months. But a massive layoff of police officers threatens to reverse that promising trend. Police Chief Anthony Batts told the Oakland Tribune that he has serious concerns about cutting so many officers and how it will affect crime fighting in Oakland. But the city council may have no choice — unless the well-paid members of Oakland's police officers' union agree to start contributing to their own pension plan.
Oakland awarded the union its generous benefits, which include the ability to retire at age fifty with nearly full pay for life, at a time of relative prosperity. The council figured that over-the-top pension benefits would help the city attract and retain quality officers when unemployment was low and the competition for cops was fierce. But in a time of record joblessness, it's clear that Cadillac pensions are not only unnecessary, they're foolish.
To his credit, City Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente, who helped broker the cops' sweetheart pension deal, openly proposed last week that the police union should begin shouldering its share of the burden. In an open letter to the community published on the local blog, A Better Oakland, De La Fuente said police officers should contribute at least 9 percent of their pay to their own pensions. Although it would amount to a significant pay cut, it's still less than the 13 percent that firefighters contribute to their pensions.
But the cops' union is under no obligation to reopen its contract. That's where the police layoff plan comes in. Union officials will be hard-pressed to watch 200 of their fellow officers lose their jobs so that the other 600 won't have to start paying toward their own pensions.
Yet even if the union agrees, it would only add about $7.3 million to the budget, and thus still leave Oakland with a $23 million hole. De La Fuente is proposing a one-time fix by selling off half of Chabot municipal golf course, a portion of Montclair Golf Course, and all of the Henry J. Kaiser Convention Center on Lake Merritt. He estimates that the city could make $46 million on the three properties.
De La Fuente's projections may be overly optimistic in the current real estate downturn, and there's an important debate to be made about selling city assets to fix a single budget, but his ideas are nonetheless worthy of consideration. As a longtime union rep, he also deserves acknowledgement for showing leadership in a time of crisis and for targeting benefits that he helped establish.
Last year, Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums parlayed his Washington, DC connections into $60-plus million in federal stimulus funding for Oakland police officers over three years — the most received by any city in the nation. The money allowed Oakland to avoid cop layoffs in 2009, but with no more plans from President Obama for additional stimulus funds in 2010, Dellums seems to have run short of ideas. For the November ballot, he's proposing an $18 million annual parcel tax to fund police, but convincing Oakland voters to tax themselves again is likely a long shot. As a result, the council appears to be making a wise choice by not depending on his plan.
It also should be noted that none of the three leading candidates for mayor this year — ex-state Senator Don Perata and Councilwomen Jean Quan and Rebecca Kaplan — have publicly put forth a detailed plan like De La Fuente's for solving Oakland's budget crisis. Quan and Kaplan, however, have acknowledged that police pensions are a serious problem, and both are working on solutions for the city's financial woes. Perata, by contrast, has avoided the cops' pension issue. No wonder the police union co-opted a city-sponsored event last year to publicly praise and endorse him.
Finally, no discussion of cops and the city budget would be complete without acknowledging that Measure Y — the 2004 voter-approved initiative — continues to exacerbate Oakland's financial mess. In truth, the city doesn't need to lay off anywhere near as many as 200 cops, but Measure Y makes it so. The reason is that the measure requires that if the city lays off a single patrol officer, it must stop collecting the $20 million in tax revenues that Measure Y generates each year. It also requires that the city slash sixty-plus police positions funded by the measure before a single regular cop receives a pink slip. To her credit, Quan has proposed suspending that portion of Measure Y for three years.
Patrick Aherne
07-24-10, 00:31
Lebowski,
This has nothing to do with emotion. The fact is, back in 2001-2003 when most of the 3%@50 deals were made, you couldn't find someone to be a rookie cop, starting out at $65k in salary and topping out at $100k in 5-7 years. We could not find people to do the job in the local economy. Everybody wanted to be an internet guy, or a mortgage broker. Unions, whether you like them or not, negotiated for the salary and benefits that the officers were worth.
Now, all those folks who couldn't be bothered to raise their right hands and handle a radio call are pissed because they have to honor the deals the Cities made. It should also be noted that many cities took the money they should have been putting into our retirement system and used it to build new parks, libraries and other stuff. Most police officers in CA DO contribute to PERS. I contribute 9% of my salary. My city, because PERS lets them, did not contribute anything to PERS for several years. Now, they have to contribute the regular rate, 14-16%, plus an extra 10-11% because of the current financial crisis. There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth because of this.
I am AGAINST defined benefits pensions! There I said it. But not because of the reasons you might think. If I had been investing 23% of my salary for the last 17 years, I would have upwards of $1 million dollars in my retirement account. At age 50, it would be closer to $3 million. Instead, I have a promise from the taxpayers and government and about $132,000 that I have contributed. If I get fired before I retire, I get just what I have contributed, not what the city has paid in. If you get fired, does your employer take back all their matching 401k contributions?
OPD is not going to go to many of these calls because they don't have the staff for it, not because they are doing this as a protest. Oakland is a busy, dangerous town that in some areas is more like the third world than the first world.
Part of the reason that police officers get so emotional over these types of situations is that the folks who make the best cops are usually very loyal, honest, trustworthy folks. They figure that if you make a deal with them, you will honor it. Believing that the citizens will honor their commitments makes putting up with the crappy hours, missed family time and crappy situations worthwhile.
In modern day America, it's perfectly ok for folks to walk away from under-water mortgages and contracts legally executed. Let's see how that works out for the public in the long term if cities welch on their promises. I am waiting to read about all the current crop of job applicants, who are now in it for the money, do over the next 30 years.
thopkins22
07-24-10, 00:42
Some pertinent videos.
Steven Greenhut, Editor in Chief of CalWatchdog.com and author of the new book, Plunder! How Public Employee Unions are Raiding Treasuries, Controlling Our Lives and Bankrupting the Nation sat down with Reason.tv's Ted Balaker to discuss the widening gap between public and private sector employment. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or7jxSv29E8)
South Orange County is a suburban paradise is southern California. The climate is unbeatable, the surfing is great and the public schools are performing well. But not everything is perfect in the Capistrano Unified School District.
In April 2010, 2,200 teachers went on strike for three days after the school board imposed a 10 percent pay cut. The children who attended school during the strike had to walk past their teachers who, instead of preparing for class, were marching in front of the school with picket signs reading "It's not about the money" and "We'd rather be teaching." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFVGD3bXxuk)
Dirk Williams
07-24-10, 01:07
Bowski, I don't hate you for your oppinion. In fact I do my job so you and every other american can have an oppinion. Pretty simple.
Night Night.
D Williams
This is from the one of the articles littlelebowski quoted
Barro sensibly suggests that states should outlaw public-sector collective bargaining, but Washington is in fact moving that ball in the wrong direction. Right now, 21 states prohibit or limit public sector bargaining rights. (That group includes Virginia and Maryland, the two states that sandwich Washington, DC.) But they stand to lose these restrictions under a Senate bill with the translated-from-Burmese title Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act (S 3194). The bill has six Republican supporters.
What the? Who are these RINOs?
Littlelebowski
07-24-10, 02:54
Now that was an enlightening post, Patrick! Thank you for sharing. Instead of telling me about your woes you broke it down a bit and you made sense and I listened.
My father-in-law was a city councilman in a large SoCal city. The LEO pulled some capers but their antics were nothing compared to the firefighter's unions. His stories are what opened my eyes as to what's going on with public servants unions.
It sounds like both sides need to tighten their belts and folks assumed the money would last forever.
Lebowski,
This has nothing to do with emotion. The fact is, back in 2001-2003 when most of the 3%@50 deals were made, you couldn't find someone to be a rookie cop, starting out at $65k in salary and topping out at $100k in 5-7 years. We could not find people to do the job in the local economy. Everybody wanted to be an internet guy, or a mortgage broker. Unions, whether you like them or not, negotiated for the salary and benefits that the officers were worth.
Now, all those folks who couldn't be bothered to raise their right hands and handle a radio call are pissed because they have to honor the deals the Cities made. It should also be noted that many cities took the money they should have been putting into our retirement system and used it to build new parks, libraries and other stuff. Most police officers in CA DO contribute to PERS. I contribute 9% of my salary. My city, because PERS lets them, did not contribute anything to PERS for several years. Now, they have to contribute the regular rate, 14-16%, plus an extra 10-11% because of the current financial crisis. There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth because of this.
I am AGAINST defined benefits pensions! There I said it. But not because of the reasons you might think. If I had been investing 23% of my salary for the last 17 years, I would have upwards of $1 million dollars in my retirement account. At age 50, it would be closer to $3 million. Instead, I have a promise from the taxpayers and government and about $132,000 that I have contributed. If I get fired before I retire, I get just what I have contributed, not what the city has paid in. If you get fired, does your employer take back all their matching 401k contributions?
OPD is not going to go to many of these calls because they don't have the staff for it, not because they are doing this as a protest. Oakland is a busy, dangerous town that in some areas is more like the third world than the first world.
Part of the reason that police officers get so emotional over these types of situations is that the folks who make the best cops are usually very loyal, honest, trustworthy folks. They figure that if you make a deal with them, you will honor it. Believing that the citizens will honor their commitments makes putting up with the crappy hours, missed family time and crappy situations worthwhile.
In modern day America, it's perfectly ok for folks to walk away from under-water mortgages and contracts legally executed. Let's see how that works out for the public in the long term if cities welch on their promises. I am waiting to read about all the current crop of job applicants, who are now in it for the money, do over the next 30 years.
Nathan_Bell
07-24-10, 07:46
This is from the one of the articles littlelebowski quoted
What the? Who are these RINOs?
I would guess Gramnesty, and the Maine sisters are three of them .
Lebowski,
This has nothing to do with emotion. The fact is, back in 2001-2003 when most of the 3%@50 deals were made, you couldn't find someone to be a rookie cop, starting out at $65k in salary and topping out at $100k in 5-7 years. We could not find people to do the job in the local economy. Everybody wanted to be an internet guy, or a mortgage broker. Unions, whether you like them or not, negotiated for the salary and benefits that the officers were worth.
Now, all those folks who couldn't be bothered to raise their right hands and handle a radio call are pissed because they have to honor the deals the Cities made. It should also be noted that many cities took the money they should have been putting into our retirement system and used it to build new parks, libraries and other stuff. Most police officers in CA DO contribute to PERS. I contribute 9% of my salary. My city, because PERS lets them, did not contribute anything to PERS for several years. Now, they have to contribute the regular rate, 14-16%, plus an extra 10-11% because of the current financial crisis. There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth because of this.
I am AGAINST defined benefits pensions! There I said it. But not because of the reasons you might think. If I had been investing 23% of my salary for the last 17 years, I would have upwards of $1 million dollars in my retirement account. At age 50, it would be closer to $3 million. Instead, I have a promise from the taxpayers and government and about $132,000 that I have contributed. If I get fired before I retire, I get just what I have contributed, not what the city has paid in. If you get fired, does your employer take back all their matching 401k contributions?
OPD is not going to go to many of these calls because they don't have the staff for it, not because they are doing this as a protest. Oakland is a busy, dangerous town that in some areas is more like the third world than the first world.
Part of the reason that police officers get so emotional over these types of situations is that the folks who make the best cops are usually very loyal, honest, trustworthy folks. They figure that if you make a deal with them, you will honor it. Believing that the citizens will honor their commitments makes putting up with the crappy hours, missed family time and crappy situations worthwhile.
In modern day America, it's perfectly ok for folks to walk away from under-water mortgages and contracts legally executed. Let's see how that works out for the public in the long term if cities welch on their promises. I am waiting to read about all the current crop of job applicants, who are now in it for the money, do over the next 30 years.
Since it's always good to end on a high note I think we'll finish this thread with this quote. Thanks Patrick!
This is a senstive issue for many and for good reason. I think the important thing we all need to remember is piss-poor management by city officials is the cause here, not the individual LEOs or the Police Dept. We can't fault the officers for being overworked, underpaid and spread too thin in a shithole like Oakland.
Closed.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.