The April 7 Az Star has an article that confirms the strategy of the Oro Valley police union. Basically, it comes down to intimidation and looking out ONLY for its own.
Do these people care about any other town employees? It certainly doesn't look that way.
Do we need more police, especially since we are basically paying for them via the Utility Tax imposed on the property owners?
Is it necessary that many police officers have the added benefit of taking their police cars home, especially the many that are NOT Oro Valley residents?
Do we really need two or three police officers to give out one speeding ticket, catching an unsuspecting driver going a few miles over the limit?
Do you know that 1/3 of all town employees are in the police department, and approximately 1/2 of our budget is spent on the police?
We hope the majority of the Council Members will NOT cave in to these tactics. When ALL municipalities are having difficulty balancing their budgets, we hope our elected officials will be fair in doing what is necessary----and won't bow in to those that are supposed to protect us----not intimidate us.
Read the Star article here.
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/85737/287622
21 comments:
Where do I start?
I do not believe that OVPD allows patrol officers to take home cars like the Sheriff's Department or the Highway Patrol. I wish they did so they would be ready at any time to deploy to a large scale emergency but this is a different point.
How do you know that many of the officers are not residents of Oro Valley? I know of many that live within the town limits. Do you have a list of names and addresses?
I like how you victimize those who are violating our traffic laws. If you are speeding and get pulled over and ticketed, it is simply your fault for speeding. It is not that hard to obey the traffic laws.
Reference your comment about needing two or three officers to hand out a speeding ticket, I am sure that whenever you see two police cars behind a car that they pulled over that all they are doing is writing a ticket. I hope my sarcasm is coming accross. Believe it or not there are other vehicle related crimes that may require more than one officer to assist with a beligerant drunk or a car full of criminals that just robbed a gas station or Subway restaurant at gunpoint. Those are people that you want more than one officer dealing with... DO YOU NOT REMEMBER WHAT JUST HAPPENED IN OAKLAND WHERE TWO MOTORCYCLE OFFICERS WERE SHOT AND KILLED AT A TRAFFIC STOP!!!!!!! If there was a third officer there, maybe the story would have been different.
I know you are saying "well that was in Oakland, not here is peaceful Oro Valley." IT CAN HAPPEN ANYWHERE.
I'm sorry, is this a scare tactic?
It is reality.
As I stated on other comment pages. Do the officers not have the right to speak out? They RISK THEIR LIVES every day to protect you and your rights and this is how you thank them.
Wow!!
LBC09,
Regarding your comment, "If you are speeding and get pulled over and ticketed, it is simply your fault for speeding" read my post under Mary Reilly Opines.....the one that begins with, Terry, Glad you're back.
Sorry, but I beg to differ with your assertion that this "speeding" incident was in any way my fault.
The issue should be fair and equal cuts between all departments in the town.
I think the OVPD should take a fair share of lay-offs.
As for all you speeders out there.
If you cant do the time (fine) dont do the crime.
Let's get back to the original question.
If "ticketing" is such a big money-maker, has anyone checked what the total gross income is to the Town from traffic citations?
Does that cover the cost of the police department plus the magistrate court plus the finance department? In other words, is ticketing a money loser (from a cost/revenue standpoint) but a winner from the safety standpoint?
The bigger question is: Who's in charge? The Council? The Town Manager who received a raise worthy of an AIG executive? The Chief of Police? The union reps? Terry Parish? (Just kidding, Terry).
Who has ultimate authority here? And is that responsibility being exercised in the best interests of the majority of the community?
Tolanguageborderssculture09
I know where to start.
Let's address the "take home vehicle" issue first.
You obviously do not have any knowledge as to Oro Valley's policy on "take home vehicles."
Here then are the facts:
As of Dec. 2008, OV had a total of 198 registered vehicles. Included in this number are 102 police vehicles.
A total of 78 vehicles are taken home. This includes 68 police vehicles. That means almost 70% of the police vehicles are taken home by the officers.
Can you imagine the cost savings to the town if this policy was eliminated?
As to the number of police officers not residents of OV,I do not have that number at this time, but you can be assured it is many.
Your assertion that I have "victimized" those drivers that are ticketed for going a few miles over the speed limit is inaccurate. It's one thing to get ticketed for excessive speeding. It's a totally different issue when OV police ticket drivers for going as little as 2mph over the limit.Recently many citizens have come forward with this scenario. Might they all not be telling the truth?
Having said all this, as Nombre W commented in a subsequent post, the issue reverts back to the police union taking whatever action they deem necessary to avoid losing any positions. This is what many of the citizens find very disturbing.
One last comment. I, and probably most other citizens appreciate that police officers "put their lives on the line" each and every day. That however, does not dismiss the fact that their union reps have seen fit to try to intimidate the citizens and most recently the town manager & town council members. That is inexcusable.
Nombe
Your argument for fairness lacks logical thought and instead relies on the emotional quest for departmental fairness and equity.
I don't want to see anyone lose their jobs but I understand that jobs all have a recognized level of importance.
For example custodians are important but not much help during a bank robbery, car wreck, prowler search, etc. No one dies if the weeds grow on the side of the road. Lay off cops response times go down and every study ever done will tell you people will suffer more and some may die.
So if there is anyone that needs to "man up" it is perhaps our children after being say struck by a car or say stabbed by a drug dealer. Happened 2 weeks ago right here 5 Oro Valley kids in the hospital.
Maybe our wives need to "man up" after their car wreck. They can lay there and bleed a little longer because there is no cop to do first aid while waiting for the fire dept.
Or maybe, just maybe, you could "man up" and realize that life isn't fair and things aren't always equal.
As beings we are equal the results of our lives are not.
By the way ticketing is not a cost effective method of revenue enhancement. The State Govt. gets a large share of the fines actually paid. The court costs take some. You have to pay the cop to come in and testify, sometimes on that meanie's day off. The there are the administrative costs associated with the whole process including going after the people who don't go to court and don't pay. Just so you know cops don't have ticket quota's either.
artmarth
I highly doubt anyone has been recently ticketed for doing two over. I would challenge them and even go so far as saying that this is a bold faced lie to try to stir up anger. Produce these tickets. SHOW PROOF. Most of the speed cameras are set to start snapping pictures at 11 over the limit. That's too high.
Writing a ticket for going two over is unreasonable at best. Not everyone calibrates their speedometers on a regular basis nor should they be expected to.
So this is my challenge to you. You don't have to show me the tickets..I highly doubt these do exist..but when you hear of such events, ask to see their copy of the citation. If they do not provide it, they are lying.
VC
If you fail to keep your vehicle at the limit and you are caught, it is your fault. This is the problem with the modern day liberal mentality..nothing is your fault is it?
Back to artmarth
Thank you for the stats on the take home cars. I did not know this. However I do not see the cost savings of taking away the take home vehicle.
There are numerous studies that show that take home cars in all areas of work (law enforcement, construction, education, utilitite..etc), last longer than "pool cars". When the employees take them home, they treat them better as there is more accountability when it comes to the vehicles.
I will find said studies and provide the link so you can read for yourself. I will even go so far as to try to find a study that show otherwise.
As far as tickets go in reference to revenue.
Terry is right, most of the money goes to the state, then to the courts, admin and process fees and lastly about 2%, if that, goes to the department that writes it. If a person ticketed fails to appear then the cost goes up.
Please tell me what you see as excessive speed. Is 10 over excessive? 20 over? 30 Over?
2 over is most definately not. if someone has been ticketed for 2 over, I agree this is reidiculous but I will say that those coming forward with this scenario are lying.
And lastly, I do not fully agree with what the union is doing. But when jobs are on the line which will affect the community, lives, and the families of those terminated, I would expect them to fight till the end.
What is excessive speeding? If you are going a few miles over the limit then a warning would be warranted. If you are going close to 10 miles over the limit, then you deserve the ticket. Just my two cents. Asked my better half and he thought I was too tough!!
MsCoyote
I agree. A few miles over should not even be paid attention to. Humans are not machines that can keep the speed exactly at the limit at all times. Sometimes we inadvertantly go over by 3 or 5 or so. 10 over is excessive and should be stopped. Ticketed, I dont know but definately stopped and talked to.
Recently I received an E-mail from one of the council members requesting that by [sending a notification of agreement that the Town should pursue a federal 'COPS Recovery Program' grant, this would be THE affirmation of "support for OVPD"].
In a rather lengthy response that I sent to all Counclmembers, the Town Manager, the Town Assistant Manager and the Town Clerk, I asserted that " I disagree that this type of determination should have been isolated in such manner"; in short 'that by my approval of going after a Federal grant this was my only option for expressing support for OVPD'. I replied with a dissent argument.
Within this dissent writing I included the following (the quote marks denote my own verbiage):
"I am emphatically in support of the OVPD's passion for it's dedication to law enforcement"
"I AM NOT IN SUPPORT of over-staffing or allowing same to be a standard to be determined at will by this (or any other department)."
"I AM NOT IN SUPPORT of a department tactic that shows up at not just one but two council meetings and by the use of intimidation (overwhelming attendance, repetitious meanderings, attacks on a blog site, fear-mongering, etc.) attempts to instill a sense of guilt and necessity, and claim, without providing substantive evidence, that by easing their budget/workforce we would end up in crises". I subsequently added that realizing that "a 'call to audience' is, in essence, a forum for citizen input into our governing system with certain attachment to our constitutional right to 'freely speak', regrettably the OVPD along with certain other 'supporters' attempted to 'gang-bang' these meetings with repetitive and 'threatening' feed.
"I am not in support of allowing for our Federal Government to further get it's claws in into the structural chain of provisions long established as the Constitutional norm within our society."
After having read an article in the 'Star' relative to this situation I took issue with the gist of it and added commentary relative to it.
The above is a SYNOPISIS of the meat of my commentary, there was additional elaboration; the following is what I wrote in concluding my opinion:
"If the OVPD has MUST NEEDS to retain additional officers that now EXCEEDS the numbers that were allotted, then let them provide solid evidence of 'what, where' why' when' and how in order to PROVE this need. I am in support of our OVPD, I AM NOT IN SUPPORT of their tack."
Do we, the citizens, represented by our Town administrators, dictate what our policies are or are we to allow ourselves to be pushed by a 'special interest' branch of governance. I, for one, even though federal grant monies could be made available, would emphatically embrace the former and deny the OVPD's crusade in any case unless absolute need is proven absolutely. JUST SAY NO!"
LBC-09,
You said that you know MANY police officers who live within the town limits. The fact that you know MANY police officers indicates that you are connected to the police somehow which of course would explain why you keep defending them and why some of your comments show a lack of objectivity....
Such as, "it is not that hard to obey the traffic laws."
Just how does one obey a speed limit sign that is not visible?
I say it's not hard to attach an orange flag to a portable speed limit sign to MAKE it visible.
But nothing is EVER the town's fault and nothing is EVER the cop's fault. Everything is ALWAYS the citizen's fault.
You said, "it is simply your fault for speeding." Really? It's the citizens fault that the sign is hidden? Nothing in this scenario is the town's fault?
And it wasn't harassment on the part of the police officer who continued to aim his radar gun at a vehicle that was going 10 miles per hour UNDER the speed limit?
In any other town I've been, when an officer aims his radar gun at my car and sees that I'm not speeding, he immediately lowers the gun. Only in Oro Valley does an officer continue to aim his radar gun at a vehicle that is NOT speeding! That is not public safety. That is harassment!
You also contradicted yourself:
Statement #1:
"If you fail to keep your vehicle at the limit and you are caught, it is your fault."
Statement #2:
"Humans are not machines that can keep the speed exactly at the limit at all times. Sometimes we inadvertantly go over by 3 or 5 or so."
I get it now. If YOU are caught going 5 or so over the speed limit, it's not YOUR fault. You're not a machine after all. But if the rest of us get caught it's OUR fault for failing to keep our vehicle at the limit, even when the speed limit sign is well-hidden.
I have been driving for over 30 years without incident. Not even a fender-bender. And I've never even hit an animal. I don't apply make-up or talk on a cell phone while I'm driving. And since I don't drink or use drugs, I've never driven under the influence either. But I move to Oro Valley and suddenly I'm a menace to society!
Zev,
I also received the e-mail to which you refer. I did not respond to it since they appeared to be looking for letters in support of the OVPD. I wholeheartedly agree with the comments you sent the council, however.
I've had 4 interactions with OV police in my 6 years of living here. If I were to "grade" these interactions, only 1 of them would receive a superlative grade. So from my experience, 3 out of 4 interactions with OV cops left me with a very uneasy feeling.
LBC-09,
Just as you said that people who claim they were ticketed for going 2 mph over the limit should show PROOF of this, I think the OVPD should also show proof that Oro Valley will turn into anarchy if we remove even one officer from the payroll!
Mr Parrish.
I understand from your post that the police department should be exempt from any lay offs.
You provide many excellent examples of why law enforcement is needed and, indeed, should be exempt from any upcoming cuts.
You will note, however, that many of the postings to the two threads relating to the OVPD are almost exclusively devoted to the belief that the OVPD is patrolling the area - do-nut in hand - handing out tickets to unsuspecting drivers who are "only" a few MPH over the speed limit. These postings recommended less traffic enforcement and more attention to other crimes. Please also note that I was not one of these posters.
It appears the OVPD has a public relations problem when such a majority of the postings do not concentrate on the need for law enforement (as you so clearly listed )and neglect the fact that a modest reduction in force (RIF)would force some concentration/realignment of police resources and operations.
My only issue, as you pointed out, was fairness. I am fully aware that life is unfair.
with respect - nombe
Nombe W
Court records don't demonstrate that OVPD gives 2-7 mph over citations. In the 1980s they were famous for it and I got one for 3mph over so I know it does or has happened.
However, since about 1991 things changed and now the force has been professionalized. When I was on the Council I studied their stats and it was clear that the citations for small mph violations were cops being nice by writing the ticket for a lower violation despite the fact that the higher speed was documented.
People don't seem to understand that most cops hate writing tickets they are boring and require alot of paperwork and they know when they write the ticket that some people will never forget it and will always blame the cop for their infraction.
Of course their are other cops that are overly aggressive and write tickets when a good talking to would suffice and that's where a good supervisor is important and can take corrective action to prevent such things from reocurring.
People forget that cops are people and when they meet the citizens it is almost always at their worst, family fight, car wreck, child injured, they're late and speeding, people never call cops because things are going well and that often makes it difficult for the person who is a cop to be as personnable or understanding as they should be.
Thanks for thinking about what I have written.
VC
Did you go back to the place where you were ticketed and take pictures of the lack of visibility of the speed limit sign so you could show the judge your argument and get the ticket dismissed?
If the sign was indeed not clearly visible due to bad location or vegetation growing in the way then you should have done the above mentioned actions to fight the ticket.
I standy by my two comments that seem to contradict themselves. I should have elaborated more as I can see what you are saying.
If you are driving in escess over the limit (more than 5 over because everyone seems to cruise at 5 over as a standard), then I believe you are speeding and should be ticketed for such. If you are driving just a few miles an hour over the limit then I dont think an officer should stop you for speeding.
In your case, if the sign was not clearly visible, then no it is not your fault and it would be the towns fault for not posting it correctly or trimming the trees around it and it would be the officers fault for not making sure that it was clearly visible before enforcing speed in the area.
I am still not understanding how you felt harassed by the officer pointing his radar at you. He is doing his job.
You say "In any other town I've been, when an officer aims his radar gun at my car and sees that I'm not speeding, he immediately lowers the gun."
I can accept that. That it what I have seen when driving and I see a motorcycle officer lower his radar gun after he sees that I am not speeding. After the officer lowers the radar gun, that would be a good oppurtunity to speed up because he is not looking at your speed anymore would it not?
And It is not hard to obey the traffic laws. Im not saying I am perfect. Ive been ticketed twice for speeding and once for running a stop sign.
I appreciate that you are a careful driver. That means one less person is out on the street driving recklessly putting the rest of us at risk. Im glad. If an officer pulls me over for doing 5 over and gives me a ticket, then so be it. If I was speeding then I was speeding. I think they give a little more of a buffer than just 5 miles per hour over though.
If the OVPD is so much in tune with the enforcement of law, how is it that they themselves can defy it. Aside from the fact that, in the name of 'protection', they brush aside that 'others' can have the same right to free speech that they do as GUARANTEED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, that a temporary tax with a sunset clause can just willy-nilly be reset in order that they can retain and grow in numbers the size of their 'brotherhood', that they cannot grasp that they MUST accommodate other needs of the community by understanding the concept of cooperation instead of confrontation.
Victorian Cowgirl makes some excellent points. Adding to her experiences, I have had police cars speed by me, without sirens, without lights, and did so when it appeared evident that they were doing it without real cause, or the MANY times I have seen them tailgating or simply following too closely in a menacing and/or unsafe manner,a basic practice of safe driving education, and, I too, have gotten confused or have unintentionally defied the speed limit or safe lane changes because of the staggered range of speed limits, the method(s)of signage, the lack of clarity in lane markings, etc.
Is the fact that I feel safe in Oro Valley because of the types of neighborhoods we have here or is it because of the type of policing that is in effect; most probably it is a combination of both.
However, though numbers are, within certain limitations, important, I will still continue to state that it is the quality of a department NOT the quantity (especially when a department has higher numbers than that which is considered as a standard) that makes for refined and efficient operation. Again OVPD, prove to me that added numbers will do what you claim absolutely and I might become more in tune with your advocacy.
Now, as another note, if you can't do your share in adapting to the realities of the current fiscal
situations, then perhaps, as in the business world, perhaps a reorganization might be in order.
YOU WANT OUR SUPPORT, WE WANT YOURS!
LBC-09,
As a matter of fact, yes I did go back to the scene of the incident and I took pictures of the "invisible" sign and showed them to the judge. Guess what happened?
Although the judge agreed that the sign was not visible, he allowed the citation to stand because I "live in the area and should have known that it was a school zone."
The "should have known" part is what really gets me. Because even after I pointed the problem out to the town, at which point they DID KNOW that the sign was not visible, they proceeded to do absolutely nothing about it! I asked them to place a bright orange flag on the sign to make it more visible as I've seen done in other parts of Tucson. They couldn't even manage to do that! Instead, they kept the sign as is and kept the police officer at the intersection ticketing more unsuspecting motorists.
Now you know why I have "issues" with the OVPD and certain people who work for the town.
Yes, I knew it was a school zone but the 15 mph school zone is not in effect 24 hours a day. It's in effect at various times during the day and the times change every day so the only way you can know if the speed is currently 15 or 45 is if there is a clearly visible sign. And there was not.
Thank you for finally understanding that I was not the one who was at fault.
Personally, I think the judge who heard my case should be fired.
VC
I can surely see your frustration with the judges ruling on that one. With the time changes of the school zone, and lack of visibility, your citation should have been tossed.
Period.
There should not have been a presumption that you memorize all of the speed limits on the various different roads at various different times near your residence.
HEADS UP
HEY EVERYONE I MADE A MISTAKE.
OVPD WAS FAMOUS FOR CHINCY SPEEDING TICKETS IN THE LATE 70S EARLY 80S IN LATE 1983 THE PROFFESSIONALIZATION BEGAN TO OCCUR.
SINCE AROUND 1984 OVPD HAS HAD A POLICY WHERE NO TICKETS ARE ISSUED FOR LESS THAN 10 OVER THE SPEED LIMIT UNLESS A SCHOOL ZONE IS INVOLVED.
wHAT THIS MEANS TO ME IS THAT SOME OF US HAVE EXCEEDINGLY LONG MEMORIES OR WE HAVE AN INTEGRITY ISSUE AT HAND. TICKET PLEASE, LET ME READ IT
Terry,
If I understand you correctly, the policy is not to issue a speeding ticket unless the driver is exceeding 10 miles over the limit?
What the xxxx? Why have a speed limit? We should just post a sign saying "suggested speed is ----. geez it sounds like an option to obey the speed limit.
Wake me when the insanity stops :)
They can ticket you for going ONE over if they want to. A lot of officers just don't write a ticket unless you are going more than 10 over or they write you for a lesser ticket (like the last one I received - waste of finite resources).
I find it hard to believe there could be an actual policy allowing that, but I have no doubt that some cops will give you a bit of wiggle room as long as there isn't something else going on. Like a suspended license. Or a pot stick hanging out of your mouth.
Post a Comment