---
One of the "issues" some residents raised during the call to audience portion of last week's Town Council Meeting was a fear that a management study of the Police Department would somehow result in a decrease in the effectiveness of the Police Department. They fear that Oro Valley will somehow become an unsafe town because of the study's recommendation.
If such a study did occur and if it did result in recommendations that decreased the effectiveness of the Police Department then such a study would be of no value to our community. In fact, it would be wrong. We live in a town surrounded by danger. Safe is good. Very safe is even better. We applaud the efforts of our police force to keep us safe. We would never want that to change.
It is also wrong, however, to never independently challenge whether the manner in which we spend our money is most cost effective. The entire purpose of a management study is to improve the cost effectiveness of the department(s) under study. Can we get more for our money? Can we get the same excellent results by spending less? We don't know. The Town Council doesn't know. Greg Caton, Town Manager, doesn't know. None are experts in the management of a police force. Thus, an independent assessment can provide value since it does not rely on those who spend the money, the Chief of Police and his management team, to "do surgery on themselves."
Would we not agree, for example, that the Oro Valley Development and Infrastructure Department is efficient? Would we not agree that they "do their homework?" Would we not agree that this department is more efficient in its operation and more effective in its spending that it was when the Department was not one, but many? The Oro Valley Development and Infrastructure Department was the result of combining operations of several departments. It resulted from a management study.
Why do some assume that a management study would recommend closing the Rancho Vistoso sub station? Why do some assume that the study would result in recommending a reduction or even a change in the support for an Oro Valley Community Volunteer Force (CVAP)? Why do some assume that examining something that "ain't broke" is a bad thing? Sometimes, breaking something that ain't broke makes it better!
Fear on the part of residents that a management study of the Oro Valley Police Department will result in making Oro Valley an "unsafe city" are groundless. That is not going to happen. There is no Council Member who would ever approves such recommendations.
---
26 comments:
Old expression......"When the horse is dead, get off of it."
The ONLY reason this blog supports a management study it to reduce the cost of the PD. Just come out and admit it and quit trying blow smoke about any other reason. No one that know has used the word "fear" in relationship to a study is YOU.The rest of us don't fear it we just think it is not needed and would be waste of money.
I do not understand the fixation on this topic. It is not supported by the vast majority of residents.
The Town is is relatively good financial position.
Are we still reeling because the former blogmaster received two traffic citations and Councilman Garner has a personal vendetta against the Police Chief???
I obviously did a poor job of proof reading the above. Third sentence should read: "The only ones that I know that have used the word fear in relationship to a study is YOU.
I would be happy to get off the dead horse. I would be willing to do so, if the police department would provide a verifiable list of the changes that have been made, as part of good management practice, that have either a. increased safety, b. reduced cost, c. improved quality, d. improved service
also a list of improvements that are being considered and the cost of doing them.
at that point i would either be comfortable that there is no need for a study or their is the need
Chuck.....I would suggest that you refer to two documents that are a matter of public record which, when read and reviewed, will probably answer your questions.
The first is the approved 2012-2013 Town Budget, with specific reference to the Police Department portion of that budget.
The second document is the Police Department Annual Report. It contains a plethora of information.
Lastly you refer to "improved quality". I would submit to you that "quality" is in the eyes of the beholder, especially when the product delivered is a service. What may be quality service to you may not be a quality service to OV Cares or Nombe.
You might want to ask yourself, how many times have you been robbed, mugged, beaten, or assulted in the past year. If the answer is none than you may consider that superb quality.
Responding to OVOT's comments:
(1) "The ONLY reason this blog supports a management study is to reduce the cost of the PD."
As far as I know, there are two reasons why management studies are performed - (1) increase efficiency, and (2) decrease costs.
You don't want to find ways to increase efficiency? Shouldn't efficiency be paramount in a police department?
What's wrong with wanting to reduce costs if it's feasible? Aren't you the one who's always chanting "less government spending?"
(2) "The rest of us don't fear it..." and none of those who are against the study have used the word "fear."
The word "fear" has been implied. What was Mr. Balston talking about when he said, "Do you know what it is to feel safe when you are in your 70's, 80's, 90's? It is the most important thing in the world."
Translation: We FEAR that police staffing will be cut. We FEAR that we will no longer feel safe.
(3) "It is not supported by the vast majority of residents."
How do you know this?
OVOT
Again Don, when you cannot argue with any factual information you resort to personal attacks.
“Are we still reeling because the former blogmaster received two traffic citations and Councilman Garner has a personal vendetta against the Police Chief???”
You imply that the traffic citations caused the former blogmaster to turn into an avenging angel against the police department. This is laughable!
I imagine a number of Oro Valley citizens may have traffic citations. Have we all turned into “raging lunatics” against the police department? What poppycock!
Then you specifically state that Councilman Garner has a personal vendetta against the Police Chief. That is pure conjecture and libelous unless you have some factual information (not opinion) to back it up.
Don, you then state that: The ONLY reason this blog supports a management study it to reduce the cost of the PD.
Management studies are not done for cost reduction ONLY!
Among the dozens of management studies I personally did, one was for a major non-profit hospital that wanted to schedule operating room doctors and nurses more efficiently to reduce delays. The result was that the hospital was understaffed and we recommended an increase in staff doctors and nurses. We also studied the use of medical instruments required for operations and found the same set of instruments (80) were simply charged out for every operation whether it was for an appendix or tonsil removal. We set up specific named instrument lists that a doctor would call out for an appendix (55) or tonsil (36) removal. It saved on inventory replenishment and cost to the patient.
John Musolf
John....Where is there a personal attack? I am very confident that if there was a personal attack my comment would not have been approved.
"You imply that the traffic citations caused the former blogmaster to turn into an avenging angel against the police department." John, those are your words, not mine. I am quite capable of framing my opinion in my words. The facts are (not personal attack) that the former blogmaster did receive two traffic ciatations. If you want to believe it is simply coincidence, then do so. I choose to closely associate the two.
Your next faux pas..."Then you specifically state that Councilman Garner has a personal vendetta against the Police Chief. That is pure conjecture and libelous unless you have some factual information (not opinion) to back it up.
I would refer you any lawyer to discuss "libel" when it is in reference to an elected official. I think you will find that your statement is factually incorrect....again.
The fact that you have done X number of management studies is immaterial to this topic. We are not discussing the, "dozens of management studies I personally did". We are discussing THIS management study and I opine that the true reason for supporting it is to reduce the cost. The fact that nearly every reference to the study during the election cycle was predicated by a statement that the police budget was 50% of the Oro Valley budget (another complete fabrication)supports my opinion.
cox---Once again, you show the traits that everyone knows you for: arrogance, ignorance, and a total depth of avoiding the issue at hand.
Instead of the BS about me, that you only know because your "cop insider" tells you all this crap is of no signifiocance to the issue.
Instead, why don't you try and justify how the OVPD works their shifts, so the BIG benefit of overtime can be paid by the OV taxpayers.
That is only one reason why a management study is necessary.
You would rather divert the reader's attention from that by noting crap that never should have been posted ion the first page.
The blog readers know you well enough that your words are like you: empty headed!
Of note: 3 OVPD cars at Harvest rstnt last nite when 2 guys got into an argument in the bar section. Wish the police would have devoted some time to enforcing the law concerning theft &/or destruction of candidate signs. Numerous signs were run over by a truck; many others were stolen. I recognize that this doesn't carry the same weight as robberies, assaults, etc, but I'm tired of govt officials choosing which laws to enforce!
Art.....It's so good to hear from you again. I have missed your warmhearted comments. Welcome back.
Actually Art, the court docket (with names and citation number) is a matter of public record and is in fact posted on the Town web site. That's where I obtain the vast majority of my court information, including your ongoing failure to obey the traffic laws of the Town.
I am not sure I know what you mean by "why don't you try and justify how the OVPD works their shifts, so the BIG benefit of overtime can be paid by the OV taxpayers." Maybe you could clarify.
However I'll take a stab in the dark and guess that you are again referring to the use of ten hour shifts.
Studies have shown that, for police departments, ten hour shifts are the far more effective and economical. If you would like I will copy one and ask Richard to post it on the blog. A ten hour shift does not in itself creat an overtime liability.
Lastly I don't want to divert readers attention at all. I do my very best to attempt to get them to focus on the big true picture rather than the silly little red herrings that are thrown out there by those who rely on smoke and mirrors rather than seeking out fact.
As for your last comment, I do try to keep an open mind and some room in it to learn new things. That is opposed to others who's head is so full of bitterness that they cant't seem to learn or listen to anything or anyone else who may have something to offer.
In closing, I would refer John Muslof to your last statement. John....THAT is a personal attack.
cox---If ignorance is bliss, you are truly blessed!
"Studies have shown that, for police departments, ten hour shifts are the far more effective and economical."
OVOT,
My research indicates that the benefit of a 10 hr shift depends on the size of the department & peak times. Ten hr shifts are generally better than 12 hr shifts due to fatigue associated w/ longer shifts. Most policemen like 10 hr shifts because they can spend more time w/ their family & have off more days in a row.
Corona Solutions offers a modeling feature that finds shift patterns and schedules to best fit individual agencies. It enables comparison of different "fits"; and once you find a fit that works, you can match the number of resources you have with the workload.
Out of curiosity, has OVPD used a similar tool? I am all for supporting the health & morale of our fine officers w/ 10 hr shifts if they are "far more effective & economical" for our Town. This type of analysis would certainly clear up some concerns & I'd like to see that posted on the blog along with your study if it is available.
Faveaunts........One of the studies is by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). I think the rules of the blog are such that I cannot provide you a like to the article but I would be happy to to send it to you if you provide an e-mail address. I am not familiar with Corona Solutions but I will look into them.
Art....Thank you for your kind comments. I am blessed in many, many ways.
Richard....Would you like the link to the NIJ to post?
Art...I just ran across this article which was written on February 10, 2012.I know you will find it interesting.
"Just last week, the Minneapolis Police Department, which has its patrols working ten-hour shifts, announced that it paid out its lowest amount of overtime in a decade. According to the Star Tribune, the MPD spent $2.8 million on overtime in 2011 when it had set aside $5.3 million. The department may use some of the extra $2.5 million to rehire a dozen officers, Deputy Police Chief Scott Gerlicher told KSAX-TV. MPD investigations and support staff work eight-hour shifts but are given the option to work ten, the department's public information officer, William Palmer, told Governing."
I especially like the part about being able to hire additional officers.
I'll send the entire article to your personal e-mail.
---
Bloggers may provide a url location to sources not in this blog as log as these url's as posted are not physically linked such that one can leave the blog by clicking on the link.
--
LOVE IS THE BEST BLOG IN ORO VALLEY
The free exchange of opinion on this blog is a true local treasure. Other, newer, local blogs only permit posts which fit the viewpoint of the narrow minded, humor-challanged "Blog Master".
The LOVE blog remains number on in the OV!
Nombe.....I found the other blog very refreshing and informative also.
To all here is the link to the article I referenced:
http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/stress-fatigue/shift-work.htm
OVOT refuses to acknowledge that the "other" blog, which shall remain nameless, is so narrow minded that the blog master can see though a key hole with both eyes.
Point of fact, the TRUTH, if you will, is that every commentator published in the region thinks TREO is a joke, yet every taxpayer in the OV has to give multimillion heir Snell one US dollar...... sad. I need the money for my OV utility tax.
Nombe,
You are correct about the "other blog." That's why I only read it a couple of times and never bothered with it again. And we all know who the "humor-challenged Blog Master" is to whom you refer! Although he tries to be anonymous, his comments give him away.
Contrast this to the LOVE Blog where the Blog Master has always revealed his identity. I believe that's called integrity!
This is why people, including the Town Council majority refuse to allow for an OVPD Management Study.
***********************************
Phoenix Police Department should downsize, firm says
Consultant offers ways to make Phoenix agency more efficient
The Phoenix Police Department should downsize its force of patrol officers to reflect the department's decreased workload in recent years, says a consulting firm hired to find ways to streamline the agency.
Berkshire Advisors Inc., a Pennsylvania firm, said in its "innovation and efficiency review" made public Thursday that the department could "reallocate" almost a quarter of its jobs if officers worked five eight-hour shifts instead of the current four 10-hour shifts.
Several of those positions could be eliminated, reassigned or handed over to civilian employees who can do the work at a lower cost, but one key city official said layoffs are unlikely.
Study findings
• Patrol staffing may be too high, considering that the department's workload has decreased in recent years. The department handled 159,003 fewer calls for service in 2010 than in 2007.
• Officers working four days a week in 10-hour shifts is inefficient.
• The department could reduce administrative staff in certain areas.
• The department could save in certain situations by deploying one officer instead of two.
• Sworn officers are performing some duties that can be done at lower cost by civilians.
• Additional resources could be freed up through privatization. The city could consider privatizing the mayor's security detail, parking enforcement downtown and security on the Metro light rail.
See the full report at phoenix.gov/efficien
---
You can download a copy of the Police Study to which Art refers by entering the following in your browser URL line:
phoenix.gov/citygovernment/efficiency/studies/058341
This will start a download of the report which was submitted in April of 2011.
---
---
I have edited the comment posted above this one from OV Objective Thinker to eliminate its first paragraph, which was not germane to the conversation. The following is the rest of his commment:
---
From Objective Thinker:
"It would appear that the Phoenix police department is grossly overstaffed to begin with. When overstaffed almost any change in shifting will decrease costs and improve efficiency. While there is a recommendation to change the shifting from 10 hour shifts to 8 hour shifts there is no foundation for that statement other than it is "inefficient". There is no qualifier for "inefficient". There is no explanation of why it is "inefficient". One would think that there would be some explanation as to why that recommendation is made. There is no mention of officer safety, morale or fatigue. To further confuse the recommendation, this same consultant company did an extensive survey of the Kansas City Police Department. That report is posted on their web site. I read much of the Kansas City report. In that report this same group RECOMMENDED 10 hour shifts.
So the logical question to ask is:
Why would a 10 hour shift be "inefficient" in Phoenix but not Kansas City? Could it be that there was some outside influence strongly suggesting that an 8 hour shift would be preferred by the powers to be in Phoenix????? Inquiring minds would like to know. That would exclude art.
And lastly I would also point out that I also read another report from Berkshire Advisors on the Ardmore, Texas police department. In both the KC and Ardmore reports, the practice of providing take home vehicles was HIGHLY RECOMMENDED."
---
Why would a 10 hour shift be "inefficient" in Phoenix but not Kansas City?
OVOT,
Not sure if you meant KS City KS or MO? You'd have to review more than the summary page to see the reasoning. I'm sure the report fully details why the 10 hr shifts are inefficient in PHX. But I'm guessing population & coverage could be factors. See below for population & land area according to 2010 US Census Bureau data:
Phoenix 1,445,632
land area 516.70 sq mi
Kansas City, KS 145,786
land area 124.81 sq mi
Kansas City, MO 459,787
land area 314.95 sq mi
Ardmore, TX no city info (Could it be Ardmore OK?)
I checked Mapquest to see where Ardmore, TX was located. Nothing came up.
So in this town that apparently exists in another dimension, did the police study indicate that the practice of providing take home vehicles was also highly recommended for officers living an hour away from Ardmore?
Fave....Ardmore, OK.
Post a Comment