Tuesday, February 25, 2014

There's Still Crime in the City

The data on attrition from the Costa Mesa Police Department are pretty dismaying.  (http://abubblingcauldron.blogspot.com/2014/02/city-releases-pd-statistics.html )  One might think the report will be the wakeup call we need to develop a more cooperative relationship between the whole City Council and our officers.  Maybe we can move forward to rebuild the PD in an atmosphere of mutual respect and understanding.  Wouldn’t that be great? 

Unfortunately, I’m not real hopeful.  This is partly due to council members’ past attacks on our police in the press and a continuing atmosphere of recrimination.  I’m also pessimistic because of some council members peculiar understanding of the police function as stated by Jim Righeimer at the City Council meeting of January 21 , 2014  (Video at 2:11:27)

“We have to have a police department in place.  We have a fire department in place.  They cost so much to have the fire department there, to have the trucks, to have the equipment there.  It costs us every single day, whether there’s one fire or no fires.  We still pay for it. 
“For a police department you pay for it every day to have that police department there.  If they’re driving around and doing patrol checks, they’re doing whatever they’re doing, they’re there.  They’re ready to do something.  Call it “on call” time.  It’s the time that it takes just to be there. 
“We don’t say there’s an activity, call up somebody, have them put on a uniform and come on down.  We put them in place. 
“That’s your cost of doing business.  Any company, whether you have a repair business, that you go repair something.  You don’t say, “What does it cost for that person to come down to fix the refrigerator?  Well his time is $21 an hour.  We’re gonna charge, you know, the $21”.  There’s the cost of the truck, the equipment, all that, and even time when that person may not have a call.  We’re still paying for that person’s salary.  It’s no different in the police department.

What?!?  “It’s no different in the police department.”??? 

An officer on patrol is just “ready to do something” and “on-call”?  Like a plumber waiting for someone to call about a leak?

The above explanation of the police function is both stunning and illuminating.  If time between calls were truly down time, then it would make sense to slash the number of officers, as was done adopted in 2011 (Police Bear Brunt of Budget Axe) .  After all,  they're just on standby, aren't they? 

Golly, if patrol time were really “on-call” time for officers “ready to do something” why even have the officers driving around in patrol cars?  Why not just have the officers “in place” at doughnut shops around town and have them wait “on-call” there, like Andy and Barney hanging out at Floyd’s Barber Shop or the Bluebird Diner.  Think of the fuel and wear and tear on police cars we could save.  Reduced greenhouse gases, too!

This viewpoint fails to acknowledge the role of police in crime prevention and education.  It fails to acknowledge the effect of police patrol, in particular, on crime prevention and deterrence.  Numerous studies have shown that directed patrols result in a reduction in crime.  It makes sense that potential miscreants will be less likely to commit crimes if they see police heading their way, or even if they think there’s a good chance police will be heading their way. 

And how many of us have slowed down on the highway after spotting a patrol car in the next lane?  Studies have in areas from Ohio to Texas shown the value of increased patrols in reducing traffic accidents and traffic fatalities.  Meanwhile, in shorthanded Costa Mesa, we had seven traffic fatalities in Costa Mesa in 2013 after having none in 2012 and four in each of the preceding three years.  It's not just a matter of responding to crime, it's maintaining public safety.

The reactive policing model neglects the value of community policing in establishing relationships and police legitimacy.  Not only will people be more likely to call the police and cooperate as witnesses if they know and respect the police, they will be more likely to obey the law in the first place.  As stated by Lawrence W. Sherman in Policing for Crime Prevention  “a growing body of research suggests that police legitimacy prevents crime.” 

A factor in establishing a sense of legitimacy would be positive encounters with local officers.  Officers rushing from call to call might appear brusque and disengaged, when they are actually just under time pressure.

One might wonder how repeated comments denigrating our officers on the radio and in the press might affect perceived legitimacy of the police as well.

After the January 21 Council meeting, I got in my car pondering the vast gulf between our viewpoints regarding the role and function of police.  Neil Young’s Freedom was in my CD player.   There's Still Crime in the City  started to play.



6 comments:

Mike McNiff said...

Maybe the 'on call' officers can use their time better, washing Righeimer and Mensingers cars or pouring drinks over at Skosh's.

My god, people actually voted for these guys. It's truly mind boggling.

Dave said...

Very well said Sandy by an experienced and competent member of the council. Thank you.

Where's said...

Mike, I know. It's mind boggling, isn't it.

Thank you Sandy for exposing what idiots these councilmen really are.

kwahlf said...

Thank you, Sandy for pointing out how disconnected the councilmen are from understanding the jobs our CM Police officers do on a daily basis.

They have made their jobs more difficult with the toxic work climate, extreme shortages in staffing, Righeimer's animosity towards our CMPD and his
(and Mensinger's) lawsuit against them.

They try to run our city like a business and fail miserably at both.

November cannot come soon enough.

Gericault said...

Sandy is the best council member. We used to have great city councils. What happened to the voters here?

valan2 said...

Thank you, Sandy, for being a Councilmember who understands how a city works!

Let's not overlook Righeimer's lack of understanding of the Fire Department, too. He says we "have them there...whether there's one fire or no fires." He overlooks the fact that the vast majority of their calls are for paramedic services. And, even when there are no calls for anything, the fire companies are doing fire prevention inspections of businesses -- reducing the chances of having fires in the first place.

So, that's Police and Fire that he doesn't seem to understand. I don't have time have time to list all the others.