🚀 go-pugleaf

http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-l-a-budget-is-ushering-cops-firemen-
out-the-door/

What will Los Angeles look like in five years? In ten or twenty? 
The answers may depend on some crucial decisions to be made at 
City Hall this month.

Like many American cities, Los Angeles is struggling with the 
effects of prolonged recession, and civic priorities are being 
reassessed with an eye toward declining tax revenues. Earlier 
this month, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the city council 
approved a municipal budget that leaves a $41-million hole in 
the LAPD�s already reduced funding, and they have offered Chief 
Charlie Beck no guidance on how they expect him to close it. 
Attention is now focused on the Los Angeles Police Protective 
League, the labor union that represents rank-and-file officers. 
(Full disclosure: I am a member of the LAPPL.)  Their current 
contract expires at the end of this month, and there is pressure 
being exerted on the officers to make concessions that will 
allow the city to save money.

But officers are asking how much more will they be expected to 
give up while receiving nothing in return. The city�s proposal 
to the LAPD, at least insofar as what�s been presented to date, 
is all stick and no carrot. And as one might expect, the cops 
are saying, �No, thanks.�

There have been no raises for LAPD officers in three years, this 
owing to concessions already made during the last round of 
contract negotiations. And among other accommodations made at 
that time, officers agreed to forgo cash payment for overtime in 
exchange for compensatory time off. But as a condition of that 
concession, the city agreed to return to the prior system of 
cash payment at the end of this month. They are now asking for 
an extension of the current overtime system, but they have not 
incorporated this request into an overall labor agreement to be 
presented to officers for ratification.

Last week the city council jabbed another thumb into the eyes of 
L.A.�s police officers and firefighters by voting to cap retiree 
health benefits at current levels, removing them from the 
collective bargaining process where they�ve traditionally been 
set. It�s interesting to note that the council deviated from its 
customary practice in that neither the public nor the LAPPL were 
provided with a copy of the new ordinance or the opportunity to 
comment on it until after it was passed, suggesting that they 
were not acting entirely above board. Be that as it may, it�s 
their responsibility to make decisions on how the public�s money 
is spent, and though such a move may make financial sense in the 
short term, one entirely predictable effect has been a surge of 
police officers and firefighters retiring sooner than they 
otherwise would so as to beat the July 15 deadline when the new 
cap takes effect. Will all those cops and firefighters and their 
accumulated experience be missed? Only time will tell but 
history suggests they will be.

And now the city is turning up the pressure even further. Chief 
Beck has told hundreds of officers in specialized assignments to 
expect transfers to patrol if an agreement on overtime isn�t 
reached soon. In threatening large numbers of officers with 
reassignment, Beck is transparently hoping to divide the LAPPL�s 
members and railroad them into accepting a raw deal. It�s a 
cynical ploy that isn�t going over well, and I fear it may lead 
to a level of friction between cops and management we haven�t 
seen in a long time.

From 1997 to 2002, the chief of the LAPD was Bernard Parks, a 
man well known for his autocratic, heavy-handed management 
style. In a move that was hailed throughout the department, 
Parks was let go at the end of his five-year contract, making 
way for the civic revival that accompanied William Bratton�s 
appointment to the post. The department had suffered badly 
during Parks�s tenure, losing hundreds of officers who went off 
to find better working conditions in other departments.

The most unfortunate side effect of the LAPD�s turmoil during 
those years was the reversal of what had been a downward trend 
in crime. After peaking in the mid-1980s, crime in Los Angeles 
declined more or less steadily until 1999, by which time Chief 
Parks and his policies had thoroughly ravaged the department. It 
wasn�t until Parks was sacked that crime resumed the downward 
trend that continues to this day. Overall crime in the city 
remains at historically low levels: Part I (i.e., serious) crime 
in 2010 was just 272.9 per 10,000 residents, a figure that 
hasn�t been seen in Los Angeles since the early 1950s. By way of 
comparison, the figure hovered near 1,000 throughout the 1980s 
and remained above 500 through most of the 1990s.

I hasten to point out that when it comes to driving down officer 
morale, Charlie Beck on his worst day couldn�t come within a 
hundred miles of Bernard Parks, who treated his officers like so 
many bugs on the sidewalk. But there will nonetheless be a price 
to be paid if LAPD officers are treated less than fairly, and it 
won�t be paid by just the officers themselves.

So far, at least, the city�s misplaced priorities haven�t 
resulted in higher crime. But the downward trend can�t continue 
forever, especially when the city, in its shortsighted effort to 
save money, idles more than 500 officers every day rather than 
pay them for the overtime they�ve worked. Perhaps worse, 
hundreds of other officers are spending their workdays in 
positions ordinarily staffed by lower-paid civilian workers, 
this owing to an ongoing citywide hiring freeze. Though the city 
has maintained the police department at just under 10,000 
officers, the figure is illusory given the number of officers 
forced to take time off or work behind a desk.

And despite the generally sunny picture on crime in Los Angeles, 
there are real but so far little-noticed consequences to these 
police staffing policies.  There are 21 patrol divisions within 
the city, each with its own station and complement of officers. 
So far this year, six of these divisions have seen increases in 
homicides and five have seen increases in overall violent crime. 
Southeast Division, in South Central L.A., had seen 24 murders 
as of June 11, a 14-percent increase over a year ago and a 50-
percent increase over the same period in 2009. If you were a 
relative of one of those murder victims, how would you feel 
knowing that the detective assigned to investigate the crime is 
sitting at home because there is no money to pay him?

If the increase in violent crime remains confined to the city�s 
poorer neighborhoods, there will be little political impetus for 
devoting resources to combat it. In making the spending choices 
they have, the mayor and the city council have in effect made it 
clear they are content with crime remaining at its current level 
or even rising a bit, a disturbing thought for those living in 
L.A.�s rougher neighborhoods.

LAPD officers have already borne their share of the city�s 
financial difficulties, with many seeing their pay go down by 20 
percent or more with the loss of overtime. They have forgone 
raises for years even as other city workers saw their salaries 
go up during the same period. They already contribute 9 percent 
of their salaries to their pensions and pay for a portion of 
their health benefits. Further sacrifices may indeed be in order 
given the gravity of city�s financial troubles, but the future 
of Los Angeles depends on the LAPD�s ability to compete with 
other departments in the recruitment and retention of police 
officers. The police union has been and remains willing to make 
reasonable concessions so as to help the city through hard 
times, but if Chief Beck and city leaders expect their police 
officers to stay motivated in fighting crime, if they expect the 
city to be safe and livable in five or ten or twenty years, 
there has to be a carrot at the end of the stick they�re giving 
us.