Sunday, July 17, 2011

Interesting Numbers For Tucson By Joe Higgins & Chris DeSimone Of "Wake Up Tucson"

We thought our readers might find the data supplied by Joe Higgins & Chris DeSimone of "Wake Up Tucson" in a column from Inside Tucson Business.

Reading through the whole list,one really caught our eye.

2.4 - the number of police officers per 1,000 population in Oro Valley. In Marana the figure is 2.05, Tucson is 2.0 and unincorporated Pima County is 1.28.


Hmmm!

http://insidetucsonbusiness.com/opinion/columnists/higgins_desimone/tale-of-the-tape-tracking-the-numbers-that-make-a/article_d1b72720-ae3a-11e0-b88b-001cc4c002e0.html#user-comment-area

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

The numbers only tell part of the story. It is my belief that Tucson has a higher incidents of crime and as a result should have higher numbers than a safer area, eg oro valley. Of course, the other side of the argument is that the higher number of police officers keeps one from becoming a high crime area.

Maybe both arguments have some validity, maybe they do not. Here is an idea-- how about a management study of our police department in Oro Valley. Oh, I forgot we tried that once. Prior council approved it and current council killed the study. I guess they do not want us to know the truth.

OV Objective Thinker said...

Chuck.....I think the answer is quite obvious and you already stated it and the numbers prove it. There is a higher incidence of crime in marana and Tucson because they have few police.

The greater question is: Are the citizens of Marana and Tucson satisfied with their higher crime rate. I suspect the answer is no.

Are the citizens of Oro valley satisfied with their level of public safety. In survey after survey that state that one of the reasons they live in Oro valley is because they feel safer

So the only logical conclusion to draw is that Oro Valley appears to have the correct number of officers AND evidently deploys them in a very effective manner.

OV Objective Thinker said...

Pardon my typos VC!!

Nombe Watanabe said...

it is the demographics stupid!

OV is as white as the driven snow. Therefore, less crime, number of police is only a minor factor here.

Anyway with the number of take home vehicles, we could cut the number of police to 68 and just run over anyone who looks.....suspicious.

bobpiano said...

As the Chief has said on numerous occasions, OV doesn't so much suppress crime as move it around to other communities. Does this make the town safer? Yes. Does it directly correlate to the number of police officers? Who's to say.

arizonamoose said...

Good ole Objective Thinker (Don Cox)

Don makes the following statements:
“Are the citizens of Oro valley satisfied with their level of public safety? In survey after survey that state that one of the reasons they live in Oro valley is because they feel safer”
What survey after survey is Don talking about (one he gave himself)?

“So the only logical conclusion to draw is that Oro Valley appears to have the correct number of officers AND evidently deploys them in a very effective manner”.
Don is a great user of logical inference: Inference is the act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true. The conclusion may be correct or incorrect, or correct to within a certain degree of accuracy, or correct in certain situations.
Good examples of how Don arrives at a logical conclusion:
1. All A are B.
2. C is a B.
3. Therefore, C is an A.
1. All apples are fruit. (True)
2. Bananas are fruit. (True)
3. Therefore, bananas are apples. (False)



This following information is available on the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Web Site. Danny Sharp’s fellow police chief colleagues state that agency staffing should not be based on population ratios. To quote the IACP position on agency staffing: “Defining patrol staffing allocation and deployment requirements is a complex endeavor which requires consideration of an extensive series of factors and a sizable body of reliable, current data”.

Police Officer to Population Ratios
Bureau of Justice Statistics Data

Introduction
The IACP Perspectives series is intended to help local agency decision-making by providing useful information gleaned from our network of information sources. The Perspectives series does not present IACP positions on the topic being addressed, nor does it replace long-term research. Perspectives publications raise thoughtful issues regarding complex policy topics- in this case, police officer to population ratios- to inform the debate at the local level.

Ratio Data and Agency Staffing
Before presenting BJS data, it is first important to clarify IACP’s position on police to population ratios and why they should not be used as a basis for agency staffing decisions. The following is a quote from IACP’s Patrol Staffing and Deployment Study brochure: Ratios, such as officers-per-thousand population, are totally inappropriate as a basis for staffing decisions. Accordingly, they have no place in the IACP methodology. Defining patrol staffing allocation and deployment requirements is a complex endeavor which requires consideration of an extensive series of factors and a sizable body of reliable, current data.
BJS ratio data presented here can be useful to local agencies in other ways, including historic perspective on staffing trends across all US law enforcement, and in conducting long term staffing trend analysis, locally, regionally and nationally.

BJS Ratio Data
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), within the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), within the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) publishes Local Police Departments report every three to four years. This report contains excellent and highly reliable data on state and local police personnel throughout the U.S. One aspect of this report is the average ratio of full time officers per 1,000. (250,000/2.5, 100-249,999/1.9, 50-99,999/1.8, 25-49,999/1.8, 10-24,999/2.0, 2500-9999/2.2, 1000-2499/2.6, All Sizes/2.5)

However, the IACP states that according to the Bureau of Justice Studies (BJS) (last study was 2003) the ratio BJS suggests for a Town of Oro Valley size is 1.8 officers per 1000.

It looks like Danny prefers the population figure of 250,000 or more as his staffing level (maybe Danny thinks he is still working in Tucson) or perhaps he likes the “All Sizes” designation because our population is too small or cannot be determined!

John Musolf

Victorian Cowgirl said...

I agree with Nombe. It's not the AMOUNT of people in a town that should be the deciding factor in how many police that town has...it's the TYPE of people living in the town.

I believe that you would find MORE crime (and therefore need more police officers) in a town of 20,000 people consisting mostly of high-school drop-outs, and you would find LESS crime in a town of 40,000 people (like OV) consisting of mostly college-educated people.

I wouldn't even mind the extra police in OV if they didn't devote so much of their time on ticketing speeders AND if they didn't show up at council meetings acting like they own the town.

Over the past week or so, I have seen OV police EVERYWHERE, hiding behind trees with their motorcycles or cruisers waiting to catch speeders. I understand that people who commit OTHER crimes are also more likely to speed and therefore catching a speeder is also a good way to nail those who have committed other crimes, but it's not "the bad guys" who are going 5-7 miles over the speed limit. That's just Joe Taxpayer on his way home from work.

For some reason, whenever I see someone going 20 miles over the speed limit, tailgating, or weaving in and out of lanes...there is never an OV cop in sight!

Ann said...

bobpiano wondered "Whos to say?" as to whether or not Danny's claims that he's moving crime to other communities correlates to the number of police officers. The managment study, bobpiano. That's who's to say. The real question is, who's afraid of what it will say?

OV Objective Thinker said...

VC.....Just an FYI. The OV police don't stop folks doing 5-7 mile over the limit.

I would also take exception to your comment about the "type" of people. Just what "type" of people are you referring to? Sounds a bit prejudicial to me.

Ann......

I don't know of anyone that is afraid what it will say. Do you?

artmarth said...

cox--- Get serious! "whose afraid of what a management study will say?"

The five that voted to rescind the previously approved Management Study of the OVPD---Hiremath, Snider, Hornat, Waters & Solomon; that's who!

Don't bother to say they were concerned about the expense. When the cop budget accounts for almost 50% of the whole town budget, anyone that's not afraid of the findings, would let the study happen.

But, NO. These five, four of whom that got elected with the full backing of the OV cops, wouldn't want to find out how much waste is in that department.

And, before anybody wants to know why ONLY four got the support, it's only because Solomon NEVER would have been elected, and is only on the council because these four appointed one more crony.

OV Objective Thinker said...

Art...et al,

"When the horse is dead, it's time to get off." For some unknown reason you (Art, VC, Nombe,Ann,Moose and others that have just not responded) you all just don't get it.

Oro Valley is a safe community.

The residents tell us that in the many surveys that have been done (they're available moose if you want to take the time to request them).

I have the results of the one done in 2003 in conjunction with the General Plan update still archived on my computer. When asked, "What do I like most about Oro Valley?" the number three response was public safety/low crime. And tied for fifth was "Police Department".

When economic development surveys are done the results are very similiar.

What is it about this that you don't understand?


Have a great evening and sleep well knowing that you will be protected by the women and men of the OVPD who are out there in sufficient numbers to protect all of us.

artmarth said...

And if there are not enough cops on duty to protect us, you can be sure that others not on duty can drive their take home cars from all parts of southern Arizona and be here "lickity split," or perhaps within a 1/2 hour.

Rest easy my friends. cox has given us all peace of mind!

Anonymous said...

There are many good arguments regarding our police dept-- some pro and some con. As for me, I would like to see an objective study of this department done by an unbiased third party. I just do not see any good reason for cancelling the study that was approved by the past council. Anybody got a good reason for the cancellation?

Victorian Cowgirl said...

The "type" of people I'm referring to are the type of people who commit blue-collar crimes...high school dropouts from marginal families who can't get a job, are too lazy to look for one, or who can make only minimum wage and that's not enough to pay for their drugs, so...they break into people's homes and steal money or computers and flat-screen TV's that they can sell to get the money they need to buy the drugs.

That's not prejudiced. That's a fact.

It's funny, because if I had used the term "demographics" instead of "type" I wouldn't have been labeled prejudiced even though they mean the same thing.

Anonymous said...

Is there any way an unbiased-third party study of the OVPD could be put back on a future agenda and approved by this council?

John, please find a way to get your information out to more citizens. Thank you for all your dedicated, hard work.