So vacation was good...very, very good...now catching up on what all I missed with limited Internet.
But this caught my eye given all the recent discussions regarding TPD salaries and expenditures under the new budget recently passed. Many argued there was no way salaries and benefits were as high as $60,000+ per officer. But here Channel 2 reports on Tulsa receiving a grant for 18 more officers.
Grant to fund 18 Tulsa police officers
On Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden and Attorney General Eric Holder announced $1 billion in grants to fund the hiring and rehiring of law enforcement officers all across the country under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The grants will be awarded to 1,046 law enforcement agencies from all 50 states, including more than $5,109,915 in grants to fund the hiring and rehiring of 27 law enforcement officers in Oklahoma. The Tulsa Police Department is the recipient of $3,505,446 to pay for 18 officers.
These funds will provide 100 percent of the approved salary and benefits for these officers for three years. All police departments receiving the grants will then be required to retain the grant-funded positions for a fourth year.
"A big part of the Recovery Act is about building communities – making them as strong as they can be, allowing every American family to live a better life than the one they are leading now," said Vice President Joe Biden. "And we can't achieve the goal of stronger communities without supporting those who keep our streets safe."
The Recovery Act grants, which will be administered by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) through the federal agency's COPS Hiring Recovery Program, provide much needed financial support to state, local and tribal governments, and will help the nation's law enforcement agencies add and retain the manpower needed to fight crime more effectively through community policing. The Department of Justice received over 7,200 applications for more than 39,000 officer positions, representing a total of $8.3 billion in requested funding.
"These Recovery Act funds will pump much needed resources into communities through a program with a proven track record," said Attorney General Holder. "The tremendous demand for these grants is indicative of both the tough times our states, cities and tribes are facing, and the unyielding commitment by law enforcement to making our communities safer."
Oklahoma City Police Department will receive $1,372,371 to pay for 7 officers. Choctaw Nation Law Enforcement is receiving $114,998 to pay for 1 officer. The Broken Bow Police Department is receiving $117,100 to pay for 1 officer.
For more information about the COPS grants, or to learn which law enforcement agencies received funding, please visit www.cops.usdoj.gov.
Now the grant received is to provide Tulsa with 18 hired or rehired officers for the next 3 years. Those monies are to cover salaries and benefits for those officers. That averages to $64,915.66 per officer/year.
In the case of OKC, they will average $65,351.
Cherokee Nation will average $38,332.66/year.
Broken Arrow will average $ 39,033.33/year.
I was surprised by the disparity between Tulsa/OKC and Broken Arrow, a rapidly growing suburb of Tulsa, third fastest growing city in the state are I think. While Tulsa/OKC are larger municipalities, they are averaging 66% higher salares and benefits than BA.
Hmmmm, makes one think there is some credibility to all the stuff Martinson was pointing to in his presentation or at the very least, some areas where the TPD budget could be tightened when it comes to salaries and benefits.
And before everyone jumps on the educational requirements bandwagon...TPD recruits must have a bachelor's degree with a minimum C+ (not aiming high are we?) while BA recruits must have attained a minimum 64 college credit hours. Does the completion of a full bachelor's degree and hours justify the 66% increase in salary & benefits?
And when the short-term grant runs out do they just walk away or are we left holding the bag?
I really don't see how a BA would make someone a better officer. I appreciate the general value of education to many people and encourage education, but it isn't really a requisite to be a good cop. Common sense, control, and practical knowldge would seem to be intellectual requisites. I'm guessing a 2 year program in something vocational oriented would produce more qualified candidates entering the academy.
So to me, probably not.
Yeah Downtownnow I totally agree with you. These Tulsa Police Officers are TOTALLY OVERPAID. I think they should just volunteer their time because they aren't doing anythying for the city that grants making a living wage! GET REAL!
Quote from: patric on July 28, 2009, 12:27:18 PM
And when the short-term grant runs out do they just walk away or are we left holding the bag?
The article says "salary and benefits for three years". It does not include everything else. Where I work we are supposed to get funding for 10 officers, but nothing for any of the equipment from gun and taser to the patrol car.
Quote from: dbacks fan on July 28, 2009, 02:44:32 PM
The article says "salary and benefits for three years". It does not include everything else. Where I work we are supposed to get funding for 10 officers, but nothing for any of the equipment from gun and taser to the patrol car.
At $65K/year, I'm sure some of that can come out of the pay. I'm sure the police has extra cars. If not, then yes, that may hurt. Guns, clothes and other equipment should be a one time expense not totally more than a couple thousand dollars.
Doing away with the four year requirement for Tulsa police officers would be a big mistake. I have actually researched this. Here is a large summary of what the reseach shows. Hopefully, I will get some more time to come back to this subject.
Significant Findings from Previous Literature (Carter, Sapp, & Stephens 1989:ix-x)
College-educated officers perform the tasks of policing better than their non-college counterparts.
College-educated officers are generally better communicators, whether with a citizen, in court, or as part of a written police report.
The college-educated officer is more flexible in dealing with difficult situations and in dealing with persons of diverse cultures, life-styles, races, and ethnicity.
Officers with higher education are more ―professional and more dedicated to policing as a career rather than as a job.
Educated officers adapt better to organizational change and are more responsive to alternative approaches to policing.
College-educated officers are more likely to see the broader picture of the criminal justice system than to view police more provincially as an exclusive group.
The quality of college education varies significantly; this appears to co-vary with officers' attitudes and the effect of education on police performance.
Law enforcement agencies have fewer administrative and personnel problems with the college-educated officer compared with the non-college officer. Colleges and Universities should institute some form of quality-control mechanism for criminal justice educational programs.
The best philosophical model for police education, thebestcurriculum for policing, and the optimum amount of college needed for policing are largely unknown and subject to conjecture.
The true effects of higher education on policing probably cannot be empirically determined—a qualitative, intuitive approach may be just as accurate.
I don't know why I can't post longer responses without the screen always going back to the top and not allowing me to see what I write. Anyway, here is some more stuff on the matter...
A study by Roberg & Bonn (2004) suggest a strong argument for college-educated police officers. They argue that:
The benefits provided by a higher education, combined with social and technological changes, the threat of terrorism (along with civil rights issues) and the increasingly complexity of police work, suggest that a college degree should be a requirement for initial police employment. (p.13)
Aamodt, Michael G. Research in Law Enforcement Selection. Boca Raton, Florida: Brown Walker Press, 2004.
Summarizes 330 studies investigating the validity of methods used to select law enforcement personnel. Concludes that officers with a college education perform better in the academy, receive higher performance ratings on the job, have fewer disciplinary problems, have less absenteeism, and use force less often than their peers without a college education.
Fullerton, Ernie. "Higher Education as a Prerequisite to Employment as a Law Enforcement Officer." Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2002.
Summarizes the works of ten researchers from 1967 to 1992 who found important desirable traits for officers that are achieved through college education: less cynicism, less authoritarianism, less attrition, fewer disciplinary problems, more local pride in the police department, fewer sick days, higher academic performance, more awards, higher felony arrests made, higher performance evaluations, better decision making, flexibility in problem solving, greater empathy toward minorities, less negativity toward legal restrictions, more discretion and less control-oriented, less inclined toward rigid enforcement of the law, and less support for insularity.
Kappaler, V. E., Allen D. Sapp, and David L. Carter. "Police Officer Higher Education
Thanks for the info MH2010. Interesting to see actual studies on the issue. I may have to reevaluate my position.
not only does TPD require a 4yr college degree, they also give you a monthly "bonus" for having it as well. You receive an additional 100 dollars a month (1200 yr total) for having your 4yr degree and is referred to as "education pay". You can receive an additional 600 dollars per yr for continuing education.
I am assuming this is for officers that were grandfathered in before they enacted this "rule".
One of the officers on here can correct me if I am wrong, but officers receive 600-1200 dollars a year for uniforms, equipment, etc of their choice?
I think TPD deserve each and every penny they make, earn, however you want to say it. I would be willing to bet that atleast 50% of the posters on this forum would not even make it past all the stages to even be accepted into the academy, let alone pass the academy itself. The screening process isn't a walk in the park, nor is OHP.
Quote from: TUalum0982 on July 28, 2009, 07:37:25 PM
not only does TPD require a 4yr college degree, they also give you a monthly "bonus" for having it as well. You receive an additional 100 dollars a month (1200 yr total) for having your 4yr degree and is referred to as "education pay". You can receive an additional 600 dollars per yr for continuing education.
I am assuming this is for officers that were grandfathered in before they enacted this "rule".
One of the officers on here can correct me if I am wrong, but officers receive 600-1200 dollars a year for uniforms, equipment, etc of their choice?
I think TPD deserve each and every penny they make, earn, however you want to say it. I would be willing to bet that atleast 50% of the posters on this forum would not even make it past all the stages to even be accepted into the academy, let alone pass the academy itself. The screening process isn't a walk in the park, nor is OHP.
Officers receive $100 per month 'education pay' for having a bachelor degree.
I have never heard of the $600 per year for continuing education. What type of continuing ed are you referring? Each officer is required by statute to obtain so many hours of continuing ed per year, but the department provides that training in house. The city will also cover some costs of college courses for all city employees, but I don't know the amount.
Officers receive $625 per year for a clothing allowance, but the list of items it applies to is determined by the city.
Both of these items, education pay and clothing allowance, are common across the country, although, the dollar amounts very widely.
Quote from: Wilbur on July 29, 2009, 06:37:33 PM
Officers receive $100 per month 'education pay' for having a bachelor degree.
I have never heard of the $600 per year for continuing education. What type of continuing ed are you referring? Each officer is required by statute to obtain so many hours of continuing ed per year, but the department provides that training in house. The city will also cover some costs of college courses for all city employees, but I don't know the amount.
Officers receive $625 per year for a clothing allowance, but the list of items it applies to is determined by the city.
Both of these items, education pay and clothing allowance, are common across the country, although, the dollar amounts very widely.
the 600 dollar continuing education pay was something their website had said. Everything else I mentioned, I was told first hand when I did an internship with TPD while I was in college a few yrs back. I plan on turning in my app for them very soon and get this process started. I am hoping they have an academy in either Dec or Jan.
Quote from: TUalum0982 on July 29, 2009, 10:11:17 PM
the 600 dollar continuing education pay was something their website had said. Everything else I mentioned, I was told first hand when I did an internship with TPD while I was in college a few yrs back. I plan on turning in my app for them very soon and get this process started. I am hoping they have an academy in either Dec or Jan.
Sorry dude, but don't hold your breath.
Even after the agreement to take furloughs, there is still talk of layoffs coming at the first of the year. I would not be surprised if there was no new academy for the next 2 years or more, depending on sales tax receipts.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2009/20090730_Plante20090730.jpg)
Quote from: DowntownNow on July 28, 2009, 11:58:05 AM
I was surprised by the disparity between Tulsa/OKC and Broken Arrow, a rapidly growing suburb of Tulsa, third fastest growing city in the state are I think. While Tulsa/OKC are larger municipalities, they are averaging 66% higher salares and benefits than BA.
The disparity you speak of may be so great because Broken Bow is not in any sense a suburb of Tulsa, much less a rapidly growing one. ;D
Skimming isn't reading. :P
Quote from: TUalum0982 on July 28, 2009, 07:37:25 PM
I would be willing to bet that atleast 50% of the posters on this forum would not even make it past all the stages to even be accepted into the academy, let alone pass the academy itself. The screening process isn't a walk in the park, nor is OHP.
On what basis do you feel TN posters are inadequate? Moral terpitude? Physical fitness? Intelligence?
The whole academy and degree thing is a scam and a fraud. MP's are not required to have any degree. Sherriff's are not required to have degrees. The troops with automatic weapons (both USA and foreign troops) training to lock down NORTHCOM are not degreed. Boy scouts being trained to take out terrorist vets do not possess advanced education. It is like saying TFD should require college physics to handle fires. Bunk! We need to focus on core attributes and hire on that basis.
No academies for two years? Fine. Let us waive certain requirements and see how many people we can bring on board.
Quote from: Know Nothing on July 31, 2009, 08:36:04 AM
No academies for two years? Fine. Let us waive certain requirements and see how many people we can bring on board.
No academies and waiving hiring requirements are two completely different issues. One is money, the other are available candidates.
Ask any police chief across the country if they would rather have an officer with a 4-year degree or an officer with no degree. Should would be surprised by the answer? A college degree officer has more maturity and receives less complaints then a non degree officer. Believe me, it's been studied.
And waiving hiring requirements just to see how many people you can hire in a short time span is dangerous. Just ask Miami and Houston when they tried that.
Quote from: Know Nothing on July 31, 2009, 08:36:04 AM
Boy scouts being trained to take out terrorist vets do not possess advanced education.
What the he!!?
Where do you get this stuff?
Quote from: swake on July 31, 2009, 08:52:55 AM
What the he!!?
Where do you get this stuff?
Nowhere. Just some rag. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html?_r=2&hp (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html?_r=2&hp)
Quote from: Know Nothing on July 31, 2009, 08:36:04 AM
On what basis do you feel TN posters are inadequate? Moral terpitude? Physical fitness? Intelligence?
The whole academy and degree thing is a scam and a fraud. MP's are not required to have any degree. Sherriff's are not required to have degrees. The troops with automatic weapons (both USA and foreign troops) training to lock down NORTHCOM are not degreed. Boy scouts being trained to take out terrorist vets do not possess advanced education. It is like saying TFD should require college physics to handle fires. Bunk! We need to focus on core attributes and hire on that basis.
No academies for two years? Fine. Let us waive certain requirements and see how many people we can bring on board.
I am basing my opinion on several factors. I believe I can say quite confidently that 50% of TN posters would fail one of the steps to be accepted into the academy. Rather it be the written test, the physical test, the background check, psych test or review board. It is isn't exactly a walk in the park.
I know OHP troopers don't have the best reputation in lieu of what has taken place the past several months, but the failure rate for people trying to get into their academy, is quite high. Their phsyical test is much more grueling then TPD or any other police dept in the state that I can think of. If you ever are in the position to ask a trooper a question, askt hem about the physical portion of the test. It is very difficult.
I think you are missing the point of of Wilbur not saying there wouldnt be an academy for two yrs. It is not that there arent enough people for them. There are many people qualified for the job with a 4yr degree, just the funds arent there.
Quote from: Know Nothing on July 31, 2009, 09:11:31 AM
Nowhere. Just some rag. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html?_r=2&hp (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html?_r=2&hp)
Take a deep breath Tim.
Explorer Scouts aren't Boy Scouts first off, it's a BSA affiliated program, but it's not Boy Scouts.
It's very much like a high school ROTC programs or VoTec programs. Explorers are "exploring" programs that are vocational in nature, to often see if that's what they want to do for a career. There are Police programs, Firefighters, Architecture, Health, Aviation, you name it.
It's not at all the way you are positioning it, that Boy Scouts are hunting terrorists.
Quote from: swake on July 31, 2009, 09:22:12 AM
Take a deep breath Tim.
Explorer Scouts aren't Boy Scouts first off, it's a BSA affiliated program, but it's not Boy Scouts.
It's very much like a high school ROTC programs or VoTec programs. Explorers are "exploring" programs that are vocational in nature, to often see if that's what they want to do for a career. There are Police programs, Firefighters, Architecture, Health, Aviation, you name it.
It's not at all the way you are positioning it, that Boy Scouts are hunting terrorists.
The entire thrust of the article discusses the use of Explorers in lar enforcement activities. The very first example used is 'Ten minutes into arrant mayhem in this town near the Mexican border, and the gunman, a disgruntled Iraq war veteran, has already taken out two people, one slumped in his desk, the other covered in blood on the floor.'
Quote from: TUalum0982 on July 31, 2009, 09:16:29 AM
I think you are missing the point of of Wilbur not saying there wouldnt be an academy for two yrs. It is not that there arent enough people for them. There are many people qualified for the job with a 4yr degree, just the funds arent there.
We could get by a lot cheaper would be my point, attitudes and sick-days aside.
Quote from: Know Nothing on July 31, 2009, 09:34:23 AM
The entire thrust of the article discusses the use of Explorers in lar enforcement activities. The very first example used is 'Ten minutes into arrant mayhem in this town near the Mexican border, and the gunman, a disgruntled Iraq war veteran, has already taken out two people, one slumped in his desk, the other covered in blood on the floor.'
Let's see, I read the article and it was discussing the fact that this was a
"TRAINING EXERCISE" for kids that are in the Explorers program, and a few of the kids in the program came from families with parents in law enforcement. Nowhere did it state that they were going to be used for actual raids and tactical situations. It gives them a taste of what the real traing is like and prepares them if they choose to pursue that as a career. I was a member of the Explorers in the 70's at the Sun Oil Refinery labs. I am not a chemist now but it was a great way to learn about things with regards to refining and testing petroleum products.
Quote from: Know Nothing on July 31, 2009, 09:38:28 AM
We could get by a lot cheaper would be my point, attitudes and sick-days aside.
Cheaper? Really?
Lets see. A person with a degree earns $1200 a year more then a person without one, and that extra pay doesn't start until your second year. You've stated before (I believe it was you) it costs about $64000 per officer per year with salary, benefits and equipment. $1200 into $64000 doesn't make a dent. You'd have to hire 53+ officers with no degree until you started to realize any savings.
Quote from: Wilbur on July 31, 2009, 04:35:27 PM
Cheaper? Really?
Lets see. A person with a degree earns $1200 a year more then a person without one, and that extra pay doesn't start until your second year. You've stated before (I believe it was you) it costs about $64000 per officer per year with salary, benefits and equipment. $1200 into $64000 doesn't make a dent. You'd have to hire 53+ officers with no degree until you started to realize any savings.
Was not me. $1200 is $1200 is $1200, assuming your figgers are accurate. How much do Sherriff's deputies make? Ya'll should not be paid more than they are.
Quote from: Know Nothing on July 31, 2009, 05:07:59 PM
Was not me. $1200 is $1200 is $1200, assuming your figgers are accurate. How much do Sherriff's deputies make? Ya'll should not be paid more than they are.
Yes, they should.
I'll probably severely piss someone off here (please don't bust in my door), but most TCSD deputies couldn't get into the TPD academy, degree or not.
That's kind of like saying TPD's shouldn't get paid anymore than the guy working for Night Owl Security.
NathanM...you are absolutely right, I did miss that. Thanks for correcting.
Quote from: DowntownNow on August 01, 2009, 12:51:22 AM
NathanM...you are absolutely right, I did miss that. Thanks for correcting.
Yeah, great get, Nate! An incredible observation on the issue! Wow!
Quote from: Conan71 on July 31, 2009, 08:26:09 PM
Yes, they should.
I'll probably severely piss someone off here (please don't bust in my door), but most TCSD deputies couldn't get into the TPD academy, degree or not.
That's kind of like saying TPD's shouldn't get paid anymore than the guy working for Night Owl Security.
What kind of Praetorian Guard do you people think are in the TPD? I can accept the notion that most of the TN posters may not be Academy grads - even though I think that is a little high - but now not even Sherriff's deputies? Next ya'll be saying that Special Forces have a higher acceptance rate? And what kind of service are we Tulsans getting that we think so glowingly of the TPD? My point is that intelligence and intuition are not a matter of training, and that we can increase the number of applicants by dropping the silly degree requirement. I do not know what national bodies need to certify our force and what training requirements those bodies hold, but I firmly believe we can save boo-koo bucks by scrapping the academy and going straight to trainee status.
I am not even denigrating or belittling or being disdainful of peace officers. I just think we can get more bang for our buck by looking at the whole process of what we need to do to get more ossifers on the street and equipping the force with what it needs to keep Tulsans safe.
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 02, 2009, 07:39:16 AM
I do not know what national bodies need to certify our force and what training requirements those bodies hold, but I firmly believe we can save boo-koo bucks by scrapping the academy and going straight to trainee status.
WOW! Tulsa could have the dubious distinction of being the only police force in the entire country who doesn't require any police academy training.
Thank god you're not in charge. Thank god state law trumps that crazy idea!
Quote from: Wilbur on August 02, 2009, 12:34:22 PM
WOW! Tulsa could have the dubious distinction of being the only police force in the entire country who doesn't require any police academy training.
Thank god you're not in charge. Thank god state law trumps that crazy idea!
We need to look at state law then. If local municipalities need the authority to do what it takes to finally get some decent law and order on the streets instead of random interjections with snobs with badges like you, than thar you go. Ha ha!
TPD could just add that dubious distinction to their Federal oversight for racism, their chief cheating new grads when it comes to assignments, the annual freak-with-a-gun-and-a-badge story, cops crashing their cars drunkenly at official events, and on and on. What is the latest scandal, there, Wilbur? Care to share? Any rumors of 'shakedowns,' 'time padding,' 'excessive force'?
NEVER hear these kind of crazy antics with the Sherriff's department. At least not all over the front pages. We need to streamline the process of getting new badges on the street. Period. Sorry to have to step on your toes, but the waste and BS that bloats the Department has to be confronted. Sorry to have to say that a BA in English Prose makes one more qualified than anyone else in the world to be a member of the TPD.
At least I am not such a crazy, classless pig as to call a Senator of the US a 'b*tch.' Thank god YOU are not in charge of any more than you are! Ha ha ha!
I have to wonder why you have to resort to personal attacks to make your point. Sorry to all for keeping this off topic.
That said, how on earth are we going to get better protection from people with ZERO training as you want it?
How are you going to get more cops on the street by requiring zero training and no education requirement? Where is this magic money and magic savings we are going to see?
How would police know when to pull their gun or when to talk someone down from a bad situation if they don't have academy training?
As for the comparison to the sheriff's department, you must not pay attention or know many people in law enforcement if you think the Tulsa County Sheriff's department is above scandal. That said every department has its issues, getting rid of training is never a good option to "improve" the quality of our safety.
Quote from: godboko71 on August 03, 2009, 07:42:57 AM
I have to wonder why you have to resort to personal attacks to make your point. Sorry to all for keeping this off topic....snip...
Not to get this off topic too much, but that is kinda funny, isn't it? Given that he complains about being personally attacked by every poster that has ever responded to him.
Something about dishing it out comes to mind...
...ok, back to the topic at hand now.
Quote from: godboko71 on August 03, 2009, 07:42:57 AM
I have to wonder why you have to resort to personal attacks to make your point. Sorry to all for keeping this off topic.
That said, how on earth are we going to get better protection from people with ZERO training as you want it?
How are you going to get more cops on the street by requiring zero training and no education requirement? Where is this magic money and magic savings we are going to see?
How would police know when to pull their gun or when to talk someone down from a bad situation if they don't have academy training?
As for the comparison to the sheriff's department, you must not pay attention or know many people in law enforcement if you think the Tulsa County Sheriff's department is above scandal. That said every department has its issues, getting rid of training is never a good option to "improve" the quality of our safety.
I have to wonder why every post you engage in is full of disinformation and distractions. I mean what is wrong with your reading skills? Can you even read? This is a sad commentary on your ability to reason and comprehend, really degrading your own abilities. Do you honestly think using this forum is the best place to demonstrate your logical acumen to potential customers? Thanks for the heads up. I will be sure to pass that along. :-[
So we have the above-reproach TPD HR signing up Councilor Westcott's son for the Academy, wasting goodness knows how much money just to yank him out of the class, but we cannot question at all the TPD's process of acquisition and placement of badges on the street. We have the former chief defrauding grads by hand-picking their assignments in violation of some kind of rule but all is well. Some badge gets on here and uses misogynist sexist language of the most vile kind and you want to make me out to be a name-caller? If he is the average good cop what are the others saying and thinking when no one is listening? Lucky we do not have the Feds investigating sexism in the TPD.
Four years after Mayor Taylor promised 200 mo badges on the street and we have how many? And is crime out of control? No. At this point we need to question the TPD more than ever.
Quote from: Hoss on August 03, 2009, 09:00:21 AM
Not to get this off topic too much, but that is kinda funny, isn't it? Given that he complains about being personally attacked by every poster that has ever responded to him.
Something about dishing it out comes to mind...
...ok, back to the topic at hand now.
I cannot remember the last time you contributed anything but nonsense to any thread I have ever read on this forum. Just nothing is going on with you. I mean there is zippo coming from you of any kind of substance. No ideas. Nothing out of the box. Just using crayons to snipe at people on the web.
Mentoring. Screening. Looking at the probationary period for new recruits. Lots of ways to get badges on the street without the rigidity of the current process. If 'wilbur' is right, and local polities are limited by state law in the hiring and training of police than that is something to look at. Our whole focus should not be on spending more but keeping costs down.
Funny how no one questions Conan's unwarranted, vicious slam against the Sheriff's deputies but are all upset when I supposedly 'name-call' against a cop who is on record using sexist, misogynist slurs against a US Senator.
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 03, 2009, 09:32:46 AM
I cannot remember the last time you contributed anything but nonsense to any thread I have ever read on this forum. Just nothing is going on with you. I mean there is zippo coming from you of any kind of substance. No ideas. Nothing out of the box. Just using crayons to snipe at people on the web....snipped useless bantering
Thanks a million for proving my point, Timmah. You can dish it out, but when someone questions you at all, you resort to veiled name-calling and the like.
Seriously, get out of the house more. Or at least from under your rock.
Quote from: Hoss on August 03, 2009, 09:37:55 AM
Thanks a million for proving my point, Timmah. You can dish it out, but when someone questions you at all, you resort to veiled name-calling and the like.
Seriously, get out of the house more. Or at least from under your rock.
And you questioned me how? You have contributed to this notion of how to get more cops for less money how? Now I am accused of 'veiled' name-calling! Oh my! How naughty!
Right there. Three ideas for more cops less money. Right there. Defending the honor of our sworn law officers. Right there. Confronting sexism and misogyny on the TPD. But okie doke let us make this about ME.
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 03, 2009, 09:20:35 AM
Four years after Mayor Taylor promised 200 mo badges on the street and we have how many?
Just to correct this...Candidate Kathy Taylor never promised 200 more policeman. That was Candidate Randi Miller.
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 02, 2009, 07:39:16 AM
What kind of Praetorian Guard do you people think are in the TPD? I can accept the notion that most of the TN posters may not be Academy grads - even though I think that is a little high - but now not even Sherriff's deputies? Next ya'll be saying that Special Forces have a higher acceptance rate? And what kind of service are we Tulsans getting that we think so glowingly of the TPD? My point is that intelligence and intuition are not a matter of training, and that we can increase the number of applicants by dropping the silly degree requirement. I do not know what national bodies need to certify our force and what training requirements those bodies hold, but I firmly believe we can save boo-koo bucks by scrapping the academy and going straight to trainee status.
Why would we want to increase the number of applicants when there are already too many applicants applying for the number of positions available? So instead of 20, 30, or 40% of the people applying make it to the academy, that number would drop to 5, 10 or 15%? If anything, it would cost the city more money to weed out ALL of the people that applied who werent qualified.
And instead of rambling on and on about problems which alot of people in our fine city tend to do, why don't you propose a solution. No offense, but eliminating the degree requirement would be absurd. How would that help us hire more officers and get better qualified officers on our streets? enlighten us please sir/mam
back on topic . . . . .
I don't see why the City wouldn't be moving heaven and earth trying to get the money ? ? ? Yes, they have to come up with some money to train and equip the officers, but their salaries for THREE YEARS are paid.
It is very likey the academy is going to be cancelled this year, so there will be no new officers coming through, but still plenty of them retiring.
The requirement to keep them a fourth year is also a no-brainer, it's not like it's an additional 18 officers, they will be replacements of officers that leave over the next 3 years.
I am sure there are details I don't know about, but the basics seems pretty obvious to me, kind of like when your company matches your 401k and you don't do it. Even if it's just a few bucks, why would you through free money away, ever ? ? ?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 03, 2009, 10:18:30 AM
Just to correct this...Candidate Kathy Taylor never promised 200 more policeman. That was Candidate Randi Miller.
Huh. Above-all-question blogger Michael Bates thought not. http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:17257 (http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:17257). Somehow that 'magick 200' seemed to this guy to be needed. http://www.kentmorlan.com/CrimeWave.htm (http://www.kentmorlan.com/CrimeWave.htm)
In terms of increasing the number of applicants, just think it makes sense to widen the pool of possibilities. Rambling on? Shur, shug. Whatever floats yer boat.
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 03, 2009, 01:31:46 PM
Huh. Above-all-question blogger Michael Bates thought not. http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:17257 (http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:17257).
Considering how Bates' credibility got majorly dinged a few months ago, I would take his missives with a 50-pound sack or two of salt.
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 03, 2009, 01:31:46 PM
Huh. Above-all-question blogger Michael Bates thought not. http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:17257 (http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:17257). Somehow that 'magick 200' seemed to this guy to be needed. http://www.kentmorlan.com/CrimeWave.htm (http://www.kentmorlan.com/CrimeWave.htm)
In terms of increasing the number of applicants, just think it makes sense to widen the pool of possibilities. Rambling on? Shur, shug. Whatever floats yer boat.
Bates (and Medlock) has been consistently wrong about this, it was Randi Miller. From 2/6/2006:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=060209_Ne_A9_Mayor56011&archive=yes
Miller, a Tulsa County commissioner, said public safety is her priority and that she would add 200 police officers to fight the growing crime rate.
Havent gotten to check on this much lately catching up with work at all but...posted by the TW today:
Tulsa Police Chief: Tulsa should take stimulus money
by: RANDY KREHBIEL World Staff Writer
Monday, August 03, 2009
8/3/2009 1:29:52 PM
Tulsa Police Chief Ron Palmer said Monday it is in the long-term best interests of Tulsa to accept a $3.5 million stimulus grant that would allow the city to add 18 police officers.
"In the long-term, you have to look past the '09-'10 budget," Palmer said. "You have to look forward."
Opposition to the grant has developed because it would require the city to pay to equip the officers and commit to keeping them on the force after the grant expires after three years.
Palmer and Mayor Kathy Taylor said the biggest obstacle is the equipment cost, estimated at $850,000. Palmer said his staff is looking for ways to come up with the money through such things as extending the service life of its patrol cars.
Can't believe I am siding with Kathy Taylor and Ron Palmer on this one...the world must be coming to an end, but I must. Tulsa does have to look past its current financial woes and do everything it can to curb the rising crime rates and ensure proper public safety.
I think Palmer came to a brilliant, albeit known for quite some time, realization with that last statement about extending the service life of patrol cars...that same fleet of vehicles sitting in the parking lot waiting to be outfitted..not being used, not being of service and laying idle.
I believe Tulsa can, between now and the end of the 3 year grant period, come up with a way to better use resources, extend service life of lots of things and negotiate future contracts in a much more responsible fashion to compy with the 4th year requirement.
If we cant, something is wrong and the state of the budget will be the last thing we need to worry about.
Quote from: DowntownNow on August 03, 2009, 02:35:27 PM
Can't believe I am siding with Kathy Taylor and Ron Palmer on this one...the world must be coming to an end, but I must.
I knew there was hope for you...
The city buys over a hundred new police cars every year and surpluses the old ones...maybe we can squeeze a few more days out of the old ones just this once...
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 03, 2009, 03:11:40 PM
...maybe we can squeeze a few more days out of the old ones just this once...
Yeah, but that will screw up the supply of fresh taxicabs... what about the poor cabbies?
The best way to combat the rising crime rate has more to do with fixing people's economic situation than it does with more police. But as long as we refuse to attack the root of the problem, more police is a damn sight better than doing nothing at all.
The vast majority of property crimes come down to the want of money, whether for wholly legitimate and universally accepted needs like food and shelter or for societally unacceptable needs like drugs. (say what you want, to an addict the drug is a need right up there with food, which is why the drug war is doomed to continued failure)
Crime didn't fall precipitously in the 90s because of any major policy initiatives or putting more police on the streets. It fell dramatically because most people had a decent economic outlook. More people were in a position where they could feed and shelter themselves and their families through legal means, so had no need to risk incarceration.
Not one more dime to the TPD. Hiring freeze. Decimation. New chief. Start over.
From todays T.World Letters to the Editor: 'For the second time in six months an employee of mine (a male person of color) has been pulled over by police. The first time, he was driving my car and started from his parking place without securing his seat belt, which he was in the process of fastening when stopped. He wasn't given a ticket but was humiliated soundly.
'The second incident happened in his own car (late model) while driving at the 30 mph speed limit. They told him he had been driving 43 mph. He politely told the officer that he didn't believe that could be right, and the officer said if he would say he didn't have his seat belt on, he would give him a $20 ticket instead of a $150 ticket. My employee said, "Are you asking me to lie?" and the officer said, "Yes." Because my employee knew he didn't deserve the speeding ticket he said, "Yes," but when he told me what had occurred, I was livid.
'I wish officers would catch the offenders, mostly white ones, who turn right on red illegally at 31st Street or speed on Peoria Avenue. Betty P. Morrow, Tulsa'
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 03, 2009, 04:30:51 PM
Not one more dime to the TPD. Hiring freeze. Decimation. New chief. Start over.
From todays T.World Letters to the Editor: 'For the second time in six months an employee of mine (a male person of color) has been pulled over by police. The first time, he was driving my car and started from his parking place without securing his seat belt, which he was in the process of fastening when stopped. He wasn't given a ticket but was humiliated soundly.
'The second incident happened in his own car (late model) while driving at the 30 mph speed limit. They told him he had been driving 43 mph. He politely told the officer that he didn't believe that could be right, and the officer said if he would say he didn't have his seat belt on, he would give him a $20 ticket instead of a $150 ticket. My employee said, "Are you asking me to lie?" and the officer said, "Yes." Because my employee knew he didn't deserve the speeding ticket he said, "Yes," but when he told me what had occurred, I was livid.
'I wish officers would catch the offenders, mostly white ones, who turn right on red illegally at 31st Street or speed on Peoria Avenue. Betty P. Morrow, Tulsa'
in your first situation, the person WAS breaking the law. He was operating a motor vehicle without his seatbelt on. Whats so hard to comprehend about that? In your second situation, there are two sides to every story. Only one side is being told. I wasn't there and neither were you, so no one knows for the sure what truly happened, but I find that situation hard to believe. None the less, you have your opinion and I have mine...so I will leave it at that, and rant to my wife what I really think about you and the POS that you really are.
end rant.
Quote from: tulsa_fan on August 03, 2009, 01:16:37 PM
back on topic . . . . .
I don't see why the City wouldn't be moving heaven and earth trying to get the money ? ? ? Yes, they have to come up with some money to train and equip the officers, but their salaries for THREE YEARS are paid.
It is very likey the academy is going to be cancelled this year, so there will be no new officers coming through, but still plenty of them retiring.
The requirement to keep them a fourth year is also a no-brainer, it's not like it's an additional 18 officers, they will be replacements of officers that leave over the next 3 years.
I am sure there are details I don't know about, but the basics seems pretty obvious to me, kind of like when your company matches your 401k and you don't do it. Even if it's just a few bucks, why would you through free money away, ever ? ? ?
I think to rub for most people is, the city keeps 'finding' money to fund things while their employees are forced to take eight days of furlough (so far) without pay because the city has no money. Add this to our new email system where they 'found extra money' to the tune of extremely expensive, and you start to wonder where all this 'extra money' is coming from.
On the opposite side, the hiring of these 18 with this money would mean no more layoffs since the 'contract' would stipulate no lay offs. Someone will have to consider that, especially since lay offs are still being discussed.
Quote from: TUalum0982 on August 03, 2009, 04:48:49 PM
in your first situation, the person WAS breaking the law. He was operating a motor vehicle without his seatbelt on. Whats so hard to comprehend about that? In your second situation, there are two sides to every story. Only one side is being told. I wasn't there and neither were you, so no one knows for the sure what truly happened, but I find that situation hard to believe. None the less, you have your opinion and I have mine...so I will leave it at that, and rant to my wife what I really think about you and the POS that you really are.
end rant.
Let me ask [REDACTED]. 'Say, Rock, how many times have you been pulled over in the past year?' 'Fifteen times.' 'And you are black.' 'Yes.' 'How many tickets have you been issued?' 'Four. Two were dismissed.' 'Do you think the TPD are racist.' 'I am not going to call anyone racist unless they are wearing a KKK robe. I think they racially profile.'
WHO SAID THIS? "The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it."
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 03, 2009, 05:55:17 PM
Let me ask [REDACTED]. 'Say, Rock, how many times have you been pulled over in the past year?' 'Fifteen times.' 'And you are black.' 'Yes.' 'How many tickets have you been issued?' 'Four. Two were dismissed.' 'Do you think the TPD are racist.' 'I am not going to call anyone racist unless they are wearing a KKK robe. I think they racially profile.'
WHO SAID THIS? "The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it."
you can't stay on topic can you? Last time I checked, you were bitching and moaning about TPD's degree requirement, and how they shouldn't be paid what they currently do. How on earth did we now jump to racism? Oh thats right....you pulled some BS letter to the editor off of Tulsa Worlds website. My bad. now I see how its all connected. Get off the boards.
Quote from: TUalum0982 on August 03, 2009, 11:59:40 PM
you can't stay on topic can you? Last time I checked, you were bitching and moaning about TPD's degree requirement, and how they shouldn't be paid what they currently do. How on earth did we now jump to racism? Oh thats right....you pulled some BS letter to the editor off of Tulsa Worlds website. My bad. now I see how its all connected. Get off the boards.
Please don't feed the trolls.
;)
Quote from: TUalum0982 on August 03, 2009, 11:59:40 PM
you can't stay on topic can you? Last time I checked, you were bitching and moaning about TPD's degree requirement, and how they shouldn't be paid what they currently do. How on earth did we now jump to racism? Oh thats right....you pulled some BS letter to the editor off of Tulsa Worlds website. My bad. now I see how its all connected. Get off the boards.
Just reacting to being called a POS. Kind of unwarranted IMHO but if you want to act silly well there you go. And be sure to tell your wife that next time she gets you panties to get the ones with the frills. That is so you! Ha ha! YOU go away! You ask for ideas and I give them and you jumpskip those just to go and be all snarky. I think Victor's Secrets has a sale on hose. So YOU get going. Chop chop.
No academy this year? Bunch of geezers getting off the roads with their cruisers? Retiring? At what, 50? 55? How many of you can do that? No one but our civil 'servants.' We need to do a stop-gap on that retirement BS. Those civil 'servants' damn well better be ready to train, mentor, grab a radio and be ready to get back on the horse. Retire at 65 with the rest of us. Oh wait. That would 70. The TPD wants to evoke some air of elitism or esprit de corps but all they succeed in doing is creating an 'us vs them' attitude and demand we pay up - or else. Any other racket that would be called extortion. Sorry that I want to put more badges on the street and am just brainstorming ways to do that while challenging the dysfunctional, Federal-oversight-requiring system that we have in place now.
Say, Wilbur, we all know you call women 'b*tches,' but do you agree with Conan that the Sherriff's deputies are the stupidest bunch of goons with guns in the state, and that the majority of them could not make it into the academy? Do you also believe that the majority of people reading this or posting on this forum would also be rejected for the TPD force?
At the risk of staying on topic . . .
I have heard from several sources that Sheriff jobs were/are patronage jobs and that on other occasions the biggest boys that could be found were stocked into the department. But the Sheriffs I have dealt with personally seem as professional as the TPD. What is the hiring requirement for the Tulsa Sheriff and is there level of professionalism generally regarded as the same?
On that same token, Tulsa County COPS will be on Spike in the not too distant future.
My personal experience is that they are suited to their responsibilities which are different than municipal cops. They often deal with the more rural citizens who would object to a college educated city cop with authority issues. They usually are pretty big guys with nothing to prove and a good sense of humor. But admittedly that is my personal experience.
I doubt the two forces could do each others jobs very effectively.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on August 04, 2009, 09:02:12 AM
At the risk of staying on topic . . .
I have heard from several sources that Sheriff jobs were/are patronage jobs and that on other occasions the biggest boys that could be found were stocked into the department. But the Sheriffs I have dealt with personally seem as professional as the TPD. What is the hiring requirement for the Tulsa Sheriff and is there level of professionalism generally regarded as the same?
On that same token, Tulsa County COPS will be on Spike in the not too distant future.
At the risk of staying on topic? And you are more on topic than me because why? Just because you are, so you! No one was even speaking about reqs until . . . well. And where is the outrage at Conan's broadside at the Deputies? Asking posters to stand by their idiotic remarks should be an integral part of the discussion.
We need to look at all aspects of the force, it is true. From hiring to retiring.
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 04, 2009, 09:20:27 AM
Asking posters to stand by their idiotic remarks should be an integral part of the discussion.
Said without a trace of irony.
My idiotic remarks can stand by themselves, thank you.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on August 04, 2009, 09:22:38 AM
Said without a trace of irony.
Idiotic talk here, fo shur! Increase the number of potential applicants, keep more 'retiring' ossifers on the force, pay less for more. Stooooopid. Give traffic cops a cut of the tickets they write, or at least designate funds go to force. IDIOT! What am I thinking?
Quote from: Know Nothing on August 04, 2009, 07:19:55 AM
Just reacting to being called a POS. Kind of unwarranted IMHO but if you want to act silly well there you go. And be sure to tell your wife that next time she gets you panties to get the ones with the frills. That is so you! Ha ha! YOU go away! You ask for ideas and I give them and you jumpskip those just to go and be all snarky. I think Victor's Secrets has a sale on hose. So YOU get going. Chop chop.
No academy this year? Bunch of geezers getting off the roads with their cruisers? Retiring? At what, 50? 55? How many of you can do that? No one but our civil 'servants.' We need to do a stop-gap on that retirement BS. Those civil 'servants' damn well better be ready to train, mentor, grab a radio and be ready to get back on the horse. Retire at 65 with the rest of us. Oh wait. That would 70. The TPD wants to evoke some air of elitism or esprit de corps but all they succeed in doing is creating an 'us vs them' attitude and demand we pay up - or else. Any other racket that would be called extortion. Sorry that I want to put more badges on the street and am just brainstorming ways to do that while challenging the dysfunctional, Federal-oversight-requiring system that we have in place now.
Say, Wilbur, we all know you call women 'b*tches,' but do you agree with Conan that the Sherriff's deputies are the stupidest bunch of goons with guns in the state, and that the majority of them could not make it into the academy? Do you also believe that the majority of people reading this or posting on this forum would also be rejected for the TPD force?
Wrong wrong wrong. Both of my parents retired before the age of 55. As did several people that I have worked with in the past. It is not that uncommon, especially if you start saving at a young age. Don't get mad at the rest of us who were financially responsible and started saving early.
I challenge you to go and test for TPD Know Nothing and lets see how far you make it. That is assuming you have a college degree and are under the age of 37 (I think that is the limit).
While I said I had to agree with Kathy Taylor and Chief Palmer on this one topic, it didnt take long for Taylor to screw up what little hope I had that she might have come to her senses and wanted to put Tulsa's interests ahead of her own.
Councilors demand to talk with mayor
by: BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
8/5/2009 3:43:43 AM
Tulsa city councilors demanded Tuesday to speak directly to Mayor Kathy Taylor rather than hearing from her staff or through the media about the federal stimulus grant awarded to the city to hire 18 police officers.
"I want the mayor to sit down with us herself," Councilor Rick Westcott said during the council's committee meetings. "We deserve that much."
Councilor G.T. Bynum said Taylor and Police Chief Ron Palmer — not their designees — need to be at next week's committee meetings, and the agenda item will reflect that.
"I have a number of serious concerns that need to be addressed," he said.
Councilor Jack Henderson said that for the council to make an informed decision on whether to accept the grant, "the right people need to be at this table."
Mayoral spokeswoman Kim MacLeod said Taylor will be out of town next week but that an e-mail will be sent inviting the councilors to discuss the matter with her later this week.
The council's reactions follow Taylor's appearance over the weekend on CNN and in other media interviews, in which she accused councilors of "playing politics" with the stimulus money.
On the hot seat Tuesday was city Chief Risk Officer Cathy Criswell, who regularly gives the council updates about the city's stimulus-related applications and awards.
"We expect to come back to you with a full presentation next week, but we are still working on the numbers," she said.
Tulsa recently received word that it was awarded a $3.5 million Community Oriented Policing Services grant.
If accepted by the council, the grant would pay for the 18 officers' salaries and benefits for three years, but the city would be required to pay for their equipment, training and at least a fourth year of employment.
City officials estimate that it will cost about $850,000 to equip the new officers and $1.25 million for their fourth-year salaries.
Both Taylor and Palmer have said publicly that the salaries shouldn't be a problem because 25 to 30 officers leave the force in any one year.
It's the immediate $850,000 needed to equip the new officers that is the main concern.
Criswell said the equipment total is the maximum amount that would be needed if all new equipment was purchased.
Police officials are looking to see what is already in stock to present a "more realistic" figure next week.
Taylor crossed the line when she went on national television to publicly call out City Councilors that are questioning Tulsa's ability to pay the upfront costs associated with the acceptance of this grant. While professing that some councilors are "playing politics" with this money...Taylor herself demonstrated yet again what it really means to play politics and did it on a national stage no less. More posturing without substance on Taylor's part.
COT Chief Risk Officer Cathy Criswell responded to Councilor questions in yesterday's committee meeting that she would need to research further to get them a better understanding of how and when those upfront costs could be made available and from where. IMHO that is all the Council has been asking for quite some time now. The Mayor's role in this is to find the grant, apply for the grant and suggest possible ways to fund the requirements...but she has chosen not to do this. The Mayor has provided no information upon which any rational individual, faced with the budget crisis that Tulsa has, can make a decision upon either way.
I believe the Mayor should have taken the time to formulate a concrete plan of action that included possible funding mechanisms and sat with the Council to review, change or approve...to discuss and debate. Instead she wasted her time taking to the national airwaves to promote the very devisiveness she claims continues to tear our city apart...seemingly never realizing she is the biggest reason for it.
Pathetic display of political posturing. While I believe we need to accept the grant and put more officers on the street, it needs to be done in such a fashion as to not jeopardize our financial viability in both the short and long term. I applaud the Councilors for merely wanting answers before rubber stamping such an approval for the Mayor.
In an amazing bit of irony...the Tulsa World published this editorial calling for Taylor to apologize to the Council for her actions on national television.
Playing politics
by: World's Editorial Writers
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
8/4/2009 4:42:13 AM
Mayor Kathy Taylor went on national television over the weekend to push her plan to accept $3.5 million in federal stimulus money (at a cost of $844,000 that the city doesn't have) and to accuse city councilors who have questioned the idea of "playing politics."
We fail to see the reasoning.
Does the mayor think councilors are playing politics because they question her plan to spend more money on police immediately after they approved her plan to slash the police and fire department budgets to balance the city's budget?
It isn't playing politics; it's two different opinions of the city's current economic condition. The mayor owes the councilors an apology, especially since they happen to be right this time.
The city just got through pushing all of its employees into eight unpaid furlough days this year because there isn't enough money to do the business of city government.
Now the mayor wants to accept $3.5 million in federal stimulus money to pay for 18 new police officers for three years. But there's a catch: The city has to pay about $844,000 to train and equip the officers and commit to paying the officers' full salary in the fourth year.
Other than the fact that the mayor would be committing future city governments to spend money they might not have is the main point: We don't have $844,000 right now.
If we have $844,000, maybe it should be used to pay for the officers we've already trained and equipped.
The mayor says the city can't afford to turn down the federal money. There is, however, a certain reality to being broke. The city can't do everything that might make long-term sense if it doesn't have the short-term cash.
Poor people pay rent not because they aren't interested in building equity but because they can't afford mortgage payments.
The mayor says accepting the federal money is in the public safety interest of the city. She has a point and the stimulus money cannot be used to reimburse either the cops or other city workers. And, it is difficult, and sometimes unwise, to pass up money that can be used for public safety.
The mayor and the City Council need to get the city's public safety employees more involved in the decision. They might consider even putting it to a vote of the police officers and firefighters who are taking the brunt of the city's budget problems by accepting the furloughs and see if they agree that accepting the money is a good idea.
It's difficult to turn down money that is sorely needed to help the city out. But before the money is accepted or declined, a fair and reasonable discussion of the matter, by all involved, is a necessary and important step. Let's take the politics out of this one.
WOW. So let me get this straight. The Federal Govt is going to give us 3.5 million dollars and in return we just have to come up with 844K for equipment and training? What about the police officers that will be retiring over the next 3yrs? It is not like we are actually adding working bodies to the force, but rather trying to just MAINTAIN the levels we currently have, which obviously will go down if we dont have an academy anytime soon.
I am sure some local business' would not mind helping out to come up with a measly 844K, come on!
I disagree with your assessments.
Here is what I think happened...CNN calls her and asks her to appear on their show, saying that they had heard comments that Tulsa was considering turning down stimulus money for additional police. Tulsa was the only city in the country they could find that was considering turning down the money.
The Mayor and the police chief think that they have a way to accept the money and pay for the additional charges. She wants to take the money. The republicans on the council are doing all they can to posture themselves against a democrat President and Mayor five weeks before an election.
Once the TV cameras are rolling in their own meeting, the councilors play their role perfectly. The Tulsa World plays along, desperate to have local news that causes people to read their words.
I don't disagree that the Mayor should apologize if the councilors were caught off-guard by her appearance on a national show talking about them. I knew she was going to be on the show because on read it on her twitter and facebook posts the night before. It wasn't a secret.
Back to the real issue, should the city take the money? Politics aside, if we were going to hire them anyway through an academy class planned already, what is the big deal? Take the money, hire the cops and find a way to equip them. The police department has some smart people (degreed and everything) who can probably find a way to share resources, get a few more miles out of some rolling stock, and make it work.
The police chief thinks he can make it work. It is his department and he has tremendous experience in the job. Why do some councilors think they need to tell him how to do the job?
The Tuesday city council subcommittee meetings have become a way for certain councilors to berate city staff and volunteers for city boards. I don't believe that was the intent.
Michael, have to disagree with you yet again.
Mayor Taylor has not sat down and discussed specific plans to pay for the training and equiping the 18 new officers allowed under the federal COPS grant. Cathy Criswell said as much at Tuesday's meeting, replying to questions of how to fund it saying she will have to report back to the Council next week once she researches and has more specifics.
Chief Palmer as early as this last Monday, Aug 3, said he had no definitive idea how to pay the $844,000...only saying that "his staff is looking for ways to come up with the money through such things as extending the service life of its patrol cars."
From the Tulsa World report Monday, Aug 3 - "Palmer and Mayor Kathy Taylor said the biggest obstacle is the equipment cost, estimated at $850,000." So, sorry Michael, as of Monday and Tuesday, neither Taylor nor Palmer had a plan in place to present to the Council but Taylor felt it was better to take the fight to the national media before the committee meeting Tuesday. That is cynicism at its best.
In order to have dialogue, there must be something presented to converse about...so far Taylor, as the self-promoted CEO of the City, has yet to provide anything that in any way says "here Councilors, I propose we fund the $850,000 this way, any questions or other ideas?"
In the CNN report, they never reported Tulsa was the only city they could find that was considering turning down the grant. They reported that Tulsa was one of the Cities to get stimulus money and that there is an issue of whether Tulsa can fund the necessary upfront costs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5r4OQAVExs
Taylor also went on to say it was important to keep the Council fully informed...but fact is, she has failed to do that.
Taylor did highlight one possible funding source, monies held by TARE. The Tulsa World has reported that the Council is less likely to support that source as a generator for the upfront costs for officers since those reserve monies are essentially overpayments for trash services and are used to subsidize trash service for the citizens that already paid in essentially.
But back to the real issue...Palmer and Taylor should put forth their concrete plan with all its specifics before the Council and the public so that everyone is properly informed and a decision made based on the facts. That is all the Council has been asking for..."dont tell us you have a plan...show it to us, and if we can see its a viable one, then yes, lets accept it...if its not, we reject it....but give us a plan"
Does not the council need to have a plan to add new officers before they go and attack free money from the feds?
The republican councilors are acting like they run the town, yet have someone else to blame for everything that is going wrong. Perfect position during an election...
Yes, the Mayor and the council should communicate better. But have you watched those sub committee meetings lately? What happened to make this whole process one of distrust and attack? Why can't the council do anything off camera? Can't the concerns be addressed any other way than "come sit in a designated chair while we surround you and question your every motive"?
If you could take the politics out (impossible, I know) there would be a solution. Instead, all he have the Mayor and the chief (hired to run the city and the police department) on one side and the legislative branch (frankly, unable to do anything lately but complain IMHO) on the other side.
Whose opinion on staffing and federal grant money for police issues do I believe?
Doesn't every politician accuse every other politician of playing politics with political issues as part of their own ongoing politics?
Budget concerns are of course politics. The police force is controlled by politicians. Inherently any decision regarding the two would be a political decision no matter which direction you decide.
It is ridiculous to accuse someone of playing politics with a political issue, and it's equally ridiculous to be offended by someone accusing you of playing politics when you are a politician.
Going on national TV and accusing the council of playing politics was a cheap shot by Mayor Taylor that really makes sense only if she is trying to elevate her national profile. Many on the council have behaved badly on many issues, but asking reasonable questions on this issue does not fall into that category. Even the Tulsa World got this one right.
If the Mayor/Police Chief have a plan to save $850,000 to cover the cost of accepting the stimulus money, then let's hear it. However, if the Mayor/Police Chief have such a plan, where was it when 8-day furloughs were implemented to close the budget gap?
And it just gets better...
Police chief says department slashes amount needed to train and equip new officers
by: BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Police Chief Ron Palmer said Tuesday his department has cut by nearly half the budget needed to train and equip the 18 new officers that the city could hire using a federal stimulus grant.
The initial estimate of $844,000 has now been whittled down to $396,600, Palmer told the Tulsa World.
Rather than each officer getting a new vehicle, Palmer said, the department would keep some of its old vehicles that were to be sold off. Also, there will not be a need for every officer to have a speed enforcement radar unit.
How to fund the equipment has been a source of concern for city councilors, who also have grappled with how the city would pay the $1.25 million fourth-year salaries of officers.
Tulsa recently received word that it was awarded the $3.5 million Community Oriented Policing Services grant.
If accepted by the council, the grant would pay for the 18 officers' salaries and benefits for three years. The city would be required to equip them and keep them on for at least an additional year.
"I see this as a nominal investment at the front end," Palmer said. "I don't see how we can leave this money laying on the table."
The chief said his department can possibly absorb a portion of the $396,600 needed immediately. Finance officials also are eyeing some of the city's capital funds that have balances.
Both Palmer and Mayor Kathy Taylor maintain the salaries shouldn't be a problem because 25 to 30 officers leave the force in any one year.
Some councilors have said the grant-funded officers are not meant to supplant any officers the city would hire anyway.
But Palmer said the grant is meant to push the manpower beyond the city's authorized strength, which is 780 and would be taken to 798. The force actually has about 820 officers.
The Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 93 has endorsed accepting the grant. Its police members, along with all city employees, are taking eight furlough days this fiscal year because of the city's budget crisis.
The city has 90 days from the end of July to decide whether or not to accept the grant money.
The mayor and Palmer are expected to give the council a more detailed presentation next week.
There is something very telling when the TPD can find a way to suddenly slash costs to provide the equipment & training needed for something the Mayor has now nationally endorsed by her stunt on CNN.
Where was the fiscal responsibility when it was '09-'10 budget time? This simply lends more credibility to City Councilor Bill Martinson's arguments when he said the TPD was being handed too much of the third penny sales tax for its budget while strangling the other City departments. Same goes for the Fire Dept...wonder what they can save.
Its amazing that it takes something like this to make this Chief, Department and City Officials really look at making the costs and efficiencies count.
Quote from: DowntownNow on August 11, 2009, 06:53:34 PM
And it just gets better...
Police chief says department slashes amount needed to train and equip new officers
by: BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Police Chief Ron Palmer said Tuesday his department has cut by nearly half the budget needed to train and equip the 18 new officers that the city could hire using a federal stimulus grant.
The initial estimate of $844,000 has now been whittled down to $396,600, Palmer told the Tulsa World.
Rather than each officer getting a new vehicle, Palmer said, the department would keep some of its old vehicles that were to be sold off. Also, there will not be a need for every officer to have a speed enforcement radar unit.
How to fund the equipment has been a source of concern for city councilors, who also have grappled with how the city would pay the $1.25 million fourth-year salaries of officers.
Tulsa recently received word that it was awarded the $3.5 million Community Oriented Policing Services grant.
If accepted by the council, the grant would pay for the 18 officers' salaries and benefits for three years. The city would be required to equip them and keep them on for at least an additional year.
"I see this as a nominal investment at the front end," Palmer said. "I don't see how we can leave this money laying on the table."
The chief said his department can possibly absorb a portion of the $396,600 needed immediately. Finance officials also are eyeing some of the city's capital funds that have balances.
Both Palmer and Mayor Kathy Taylor maintain the salaries shouldn't be a problem because 25 to 30 officers leave the force in any one year.
Some councilors have said the grant-funded officers are not meant to supplant any officers the city would hire anyway.
But Palmer said the grant is meant to push the manpower beyond the city's authorized strength, which is 780 and would be taken to 798. The force actually has about 820 officers.
The Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 93 has endorsed accepting the grant. Its police members, along with all city employees, are taking eight furlough days this fiscal year because of the city's budget crisis.
The city has 90 days from the end of July to decide whether or not to accept the grant money.
The mayor and Palmer are expected to give the council a more detailed presentation next week.
There is something very telling when the TPD can find a way to suddenly slash costs to provide the equipment & training needed for something the Mayor has now nationally endorsed by her stunt on CNN.
Where was the fiscal responsibility when it was '09-'10 budget time? This simply lends more credibility to City Councilor Bill Martinson's arguments when he said the TPD was being handed too much of the third penny sales tax for its budget while strangling the other City departments. Same goes for the Fire Dept...wonder what they can save.
Its amazing that it takes something like this to make this Chief, Department and City Officials really look at making the costs and efficiencies count.
Third-penny money isn't handed out by anyone other then the taxpayer. Each city department requests items be added to the list of third-penny projects, which is then whittled down to a list presented to the voters. Each item has to be a capital cost ($100,000 or more). Voters then approve or disapprove the list. If approved, those funds HAVE to be spent on the items approved by the voters. The spending of third-penny money is overseen by a citizen panel.
I haven't looked at a list of projects for the past couple of third-penny projects, but I'm fairly confident Public Works gets the most money.