I actually sat down to watch the news the other night, and quickly remembered why I don't like local news. For some reason the story of Jason Andersen being arrested on 5th degree assault was the top story (over a missing boy in Northern Minnesota). I have no intentions of getting into the whole Fong Lee debate but I did make some observations from the Andersen story.
I was first shocked that he is living in Big Lake, that's quite a drive from Minneapolis. Also, I happened to notice how nice his home was, and that he had a very nice looking boat in the driveway. Now I believe that Police Officers have a very thankless job, and I'm grateful to them for putting their lives on the line ever day. However, the story got me interested in what a police salary is. I did some digging on the Star Tribue website and found this story from 2007 that shows officer's base salaries and overtime pay. It's the policy of the MPD to have their officers work 4 - 10 hour shifts, with 3 consecutive days off. In theory this should have them rested and alert for their 4 days on. However, it is also a policy that they can work unlimited overtime. Apparently this overtime idea is in place to 'make do' with the force we have rather than hiring full time officers to cover the gaps.
I did some very crude math on the numbers from the article and found that in 2007 the MPD, as a whole, doled out $1,556,721 in overtime pay. If you figure an officer's base pay to be right around $60,000 a year, it would mean that the city could have added 26 full time officers. I'm not a criminal justice expert but I have to think that adding 26 officers would certainly serve the purpose of protecting us all better than stretching the current staff to work double their normal hours. If the purpose of 4 - 10 hour shifts is to keep the force fresh then what is the point of allowing them unlimited overtime?
Precinct 2 in Mpls has the least amount of officers patrolling the streets. As a matter of fact, in the year I have been in my home I have seen 1 squad car drive by my house on routine patrol. I think I speak for most people when I say that I'd rather be proactive in policing rather than reactive. If there is a presence of police in the area, crimes are much less likely to happen. Adding 26 officers to the street would be a great start to adding the presence that is needed. Am I totally off on my thinking here?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No you are not totally off. You are absolutely right. Although I'd haggle with the numbers a bit, you didn't factor in pension, health insurance and other personnell costs. So it's probably closer to 13 cops, than 26.
ReplyDeleteThis was the whole point of the 50 More Cops campaign that I helped organize two years ago. Too many in the party refused to listen and hear.
I also think that it's a huge waste having all those traffic cops in downtown during rush hours. I'd rather see the City enforce traffic laws. Put some cops out there with ticket books and ticket anyone and everyone who finds themselves in the middle of an intersection when their green light turns red. Why have the laws if we refuse to penalize those who don't follow them?