06-29-09, Herbert Molano Comments on the Bottom Line of Policing

 

The editorial by the GNP last week sheds some light on the dynamics of policing and the pay disparity between the GPD and Glendale fire fighters.  But the editorial perpetuates some common misconceptions and leaves out significant issues of accountability.

 

We can’t discuss the scheduled 6% pay increase the GPD will have in July out of context of the trends in the general fund, the four-year contracts, the comparative pay with the annual gross pay fire fighters get, and the performance of the department.

 

These discussions are not helped when the city council has generally taken a hands-off approach to the two safety departments.  We don’t get an evaluation of safety performance.  The lack of external oversight and the councilmen’s eagerness to please the safety unions have resulted in safety budgets that are now out of control and out of proportion to the city’s total general fund.

 

Most people who undertake discussions about policing usually bring some anecdotal evidence as justification for their opinion.  It makes it more difficult to evaluate performance when the police leadership does the same and relies on telling a story as justification for major policy issues such as pay rates or the decision to keep or abandon the SRO’s – The cops at the schools (Student Resource Officers.)

 

On one point the GNP was spot on.  The revenues the city receives are insufficient to meet its expenditures.  Though the slowdown in the economy has had an impact, the greater impact, in my opinion, has been self-inflicted.  The management of the city of Glendale has made major increases to its internal staff, increased its salaries significantly, and increased its pension benefits to the point that those actions by themselves have pushed the budget to nearly unsustainable levels without lower services and imposing higher fees on the public.

 

The police department and the fire department have been the primary beneficiaries of those increases in pay and benefits, but no one at the city council has taken on the job of evaluating if the increases have been truly justified.  What we do know is that the income gap between the typical fire-fighter and the typical policeman is huge – easily about 30 to 40 thousand dollars per year in favor of fire fighters.

 

Sadly, instead of a reasoned and determined evaluation of efficacy or performance, we get hero-making or self-sacrifice stories.  Those make for great newspaper copy but they do little to create reasoned budgeting or departmental performance evaluations.

 

For years, the city council has failed to address the three major components of the budget deficit: Overtime pay, increased costs of medical benefits, and the changes to the pension system that two of the sitting councilmen approved eight years ago.  Those changes alone account for tens of millions of additional safety costs to the city each year.  It is my perception that without those additional costs and irrespective of the national economy, Glendale’s budget would not have been in deficit.

 

 

We are in dire need of changing the public dialogue to a more mature form of discussion and accountability.  My suggested reading for our city council members and for the public at large is a document that was funded by the U.S. Department of Justice and Published by the Police Executive Research Forum: The “Bottom Line” of Policing – What citizens should value (and Measure!) in Police Performance.

 

If we can’t have Glendale city leaders change to a more mature dialogue, then we need to do a wholesale change in top management with a couple of the self-promoting, self-serving councilmen as part of the exit package.

 

Herbert Molano