Fort Wayne, IN
The following Article was contributed by Police Chief Tom Emely.
THE POLICE MANAGEMENT VIEW
I have read several of the recent letters to the editors where citizens have expressed opinions on how effectively or efficiently the police department operates. I feel as though it is time to clear up some misconceptions.
First, I would like the address the issue of the police cars that certainly is the center of attention. The police cars are parked in the city lot because the Police Department works from the City Building, not the Street Department, WPC, or the Parks Department. Police need to respond to calls from where we work, not several blocks away. Currently there are (26) officers assigned to three shifts for patrol. Police Administrators made a decision several years ago about the number of police vehicles. At one time, the police department had only 4-5 line cars, so the vehicles were driven 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Cars were out of warranty within 18 months, always in need of repair and looked terrible. A decision was made to increase the fleet, assign two officers per car, and hold them accountable for taking care of their vehicle. This decision has improved the fleet, kept vehicles on the road, and not increased year-to-year purchasing costs.
The average year of manufacture for the current fleet of police vehicles is 2002, with the average miles per vehicle at 63,000. If you owned a six-year-old vehicle with that number of miles, would you consider it a new vehicle? Insurance cost per vehicle is just over $200.00 a year. These vehicles are required to respond to all type of emergencies and keep our officers safe at the same time.
The idea of buying motorcycles was proposed by one writer. The cost of a fully equipped motorcycle compared to a vehicle is almost identical. However, we can only use a motorcycle for about 7-8 months a year. Higher maintenance and insurance costs on motorcycles take away any fuel savings. I do not see a benefit or savings with that idea nor do I see our department large enough to assign personnel strictly to traffic enforcement.
Since the first of the year, I have made it mandatory that officers double up when possible to save fuel. I implemented additional restrictions on the use of all vehicles, such as no excessive idling and more efficient patrol techniques. Within the first seven months as compared to previous year, we have saved the taxpayers 9 % on fuel consumption, or about 1500 gallons, which equates to approximately $4500.00. However, our costs still went up 23%. Our only other option is to not allow officers to patrol. The total number of vehicles in the parking lot does not lower fuel costs. I also made it mandatory that we would only unlock your vehicle once a year, not the 3-4 times some of the taxpayers think we should. Be a responsible adult and have a spare key available. We could stop unlocking vehicles altogether and save, but we kept the service going as a measure of good will to the public.
We have held the line on spending this year by only buying what we really need to continue to provide service to the public. We now double side print case reports and utilize electronic technology within the department. We have done away with leasing equipment where it is practical and saves money. Continued utilizing bicycles in patrol details where possible. Actively pursuing methods to allow for bulk purchasing and more efficient methods of having vehicle maintenance done at the city garage vs. outside vendors. We have obtained numerous pieces of equipment through grants and creative funding without any cost to the taxpayer totaling over $70,500 since January 2008.
We are in this together and need you as much as you need us. The Huntington Police are committed to spending your tax money wisely but still respond to yours call for police service. If you do not understand, why the police need equipment and personnel, or handle calls in certain method, call and ask. I will be glad to explain our viewpoint in detail.
Tom Emely
Chief of Police
I’d like to thank Emely for explaining the car situation in such detail. It is very much appreciated that someone actually ran the math.
BUT, I think one flippant comment shows the disconnect between this administration and the situation the people of Huntington are facing.
“The average year of manufacture for the current fleet of police vehicles is 2002, with the average miles per vehicle at 63,000. If you owned a six-year-old vehicle with that number of miles, would you consider it a new vehicle?”
I would contend most in Huntington, that are not government employees would say no to this, whereas, life long city employees like Emely and the Updike clan, think this is a no brainer to upgrade cars. Even myself, 6 years/63k mile would be a tremendous improvement over my 11 year/ 180k mile car. But then if I had the ability to raise my own income, had a pension, and job security, I would be looking for the latest and greatest as well.
My point is: this Updike administration of lifelong public leaches have no experience doing without. No wonder Pam Updike was crying at the LOIT meeting that they have cut everything possible. Maybe from her government employee persective that is the case. By I’m sure I can find some areas to cut. How about one of the 4 administrative positions in the parks department? For a department that does very little, why do you need 4 administrators.
And how about the Police department. According to the City website they have 36 officers, 5 reserves, and 10 dispatch. For comparison, Westfield has 24 officers for a growing city of 24k. They will add 3 more this coming year. I’m thinking Huntington could lose a couple of positions here. And this is just an example, I’m sure every city department could due without one position, thus if you can cut 10 positions city wide at an average salary of $30K + benefits, that is tremendous savings to the public.
The city needs to realize that the people of Huntington are already stretched very thin, and its about time the City and its employees felt that same stretch. Then and only then will Huntington begin attracting more business.
You must remember however stealth that even though some of your points are well taken…These vehicles aren’t your everyday family vehicles. They are police vehicles which are put to high stress driving on a normal basis. These are also all city miles not highway which even is worse on the vehicles.
With the economy in the state that it currently in, the crime rate is surely to be on the rise. People are going to do, and will do whatever it takes to survive. When it comes to police protection, I would rather have more than enough rather than be short on staffing and, or patrols.
Management is the key here as is rules and regulations. The police cars in our force belong to us, the taxpayers. I have no problem with seeing multiple cars out on the street at any given time. But I would have a problem if any car was used on a personal basis and using our fuel rather than the individual the car was being used by.
You say that these are all city miles. Then Why was I on my way from Ft. Wayne and met a Huntington Police car just a 1/2 mile from Roanoke?
Why does it also take 2 cars to pull someone over for a tail light?
Cynni,
Might it be possible the officer was performing police business in Roanoke or Ft. Wayne? Maybe the officer was going to training in another city. Who said the car was pulled over simply for a tail light being out? The person could have been drunk, high on drugs, had active warrants or maybe the officer simply needed additional assistance of some legitimate reason. Would you stop and offer any assistance if an officer was fighting with the person along the road? Most times there is a very simple reason for what appears to others to be something mysterious.
There was probably a female blond driver in need of close inspection