Put me down as a firm NO.
1) The budget has already been grossly inflated over historic trends.
In 1969 the City of Tulsa had a population of about 330,000 people. The police & fire budget was $44.6 Mil including capital equipment (in 2008 dollars
the numbers the report used, real dollars it was $7.7mil). Each citizen of Tulsa spent $135 on police and force.
Today the population is nearly 400,000. The police and fire budget in 2008 was $150mil excluding capital equipment. Each citizen of Tulsa spent $375 on police and fire, plus more money for trucks, cars, guns, computers, etc.
Are we getting three times the service? The excuse seems to be that we need to "keep up with the Joneses." If Little Rock is spending more money, we better do it too! Now, that statement doesn't care about results, and for certainly doesn't apply to education... but gimme more!
Better yet - in 1969 we had 1200 officers and firemen. In 2008 we had 1600. Number of warm bodies went up 33%. Budget went up ~3000%. The money isn't going to more bodies, it sure isn't going to more efficiency, and crime statistics don't show it is having any effect. But don't worry, this time the money will go to more patrol officers.
2) Low correlation between officers and crime.
The
same report shows that there is, at best, a 26% correlation between crime and police budgets. In other words, it is a small fraction of the explanation for a crime rate. Yet, we commit almost all of our resources to it. (education level, unemployment level, and youth service had a much higher correlation. In Tulsa, 76% of the variance can be explained by the unemployment rate between 1995 and 2007)
In 2010 Tulsa laid off 120 officers. Yet the crime rate did not change. When we worked to add most of those officers back to the force, the crime rate didn't change. it is hard to
draw any correlation from the data.
So the data suggests there is little correlation between officer numbers and the crime rate. Our own recent experience shows that there is no noticable correlation... but this time when we add officers crime will go down!
3) Fire department slush fund
Do we have a rash of structure fires that I'm not aware of? Are there sections of town and factories burning down that just aren't making the news? With EMSA as our EMT service, TFDs primary responsibility is to fight fires...and serve as first responders in a more vague roll for everything else. The vast majority of their calls are for rescue/EMS, many of whom are responding to car wrecks and sweeping up glass and soaking up fluids (recall EMSA is the primary EMT). The second highest category is false alarms. Structure fires are way, way, way along the bottom of the list.
Obviously a fire department is a key component to public safety. Not only for fires, but also for hazmat situations and as backup EMT if we decide to continue using EMSA. But in our system, fighting fires is their primary purpose. There are 6-700 structure fires per year in Tulsa, causing about $16,000,000 in property damage.
If you take their budget and spread it out to each structural fire they fight, it comes to nearly $80,000 per structure fire. We have 1 fire station for every 12,000 residents. Since 1980, the number of structure fires decreased by 30%... yet we have increased fire department runs by 400%! Albuquerque has 130,000 more people and 10 less stations. Ft. Worth has nearly twice the people and 8 more stations.
As we saw above, the budget has grown faster than any other city budget. We've been given no real reason as to why they need more money, more staffing, or more anything. I'm sure there are anecdotal reasons - but is their really a problem?
4) Salary and benefits are just fine
One of the key gauges to tell if you are offering the right salary and benefits is to check the number of qualified applications for open positions. Even with a low unemployment rate, more than 200 people apply for each open fire fighter position in Tulsa. The average salary and benefit compensation for TPD is $85,000 per employee. For Tulsa Fire department the number is $78,500 per employee. For everyone else in the City of Tulsa it is $52,000.
In some instances, it may not matter that much. You pay someone, but that someone lives in your community. So the services they provide coupled with the economic impact of them pumping that money back into the economy helps wash it all out.
But more than 50% of Tulsa Police officers and more than 60% of Tulsa Fire Fighters don't live in Tulsa. Many cities require police to live within the city limits if they want to serve the City. Others add the requirement that the applicant must live in the City for a year before even applying, and must live there after applying. Still others offer incentives for officers to live in the City by giving housing subsidies to spread police out over the city or by adding seniority points if you live in the City. The result? More police presence and localized lower crime rates.
5) Wrong Tax.
I disagree with the argument that we need to "properly fund" public safety. While I'm sure we can improve our services, I don't think the data supports the notion that we need a massive increase in both police and fire. Nor do I believe the data supports the notion that it will have the desired effect.
But assuming I bought into all of that, proper funding for public safety is not VISIONARY. It is a mundane City service like sewer or water. It should be built into our core tax base. We should fund what we can of it from property taxes and as little as possible from sales taxes.