OKC Police & Fire needs

[OSUFan]

I guess the answer to the question is, the unions feel like the city should not do anything to promote any kinds of growth until the unions feel like the have the staff to do so.

Next question, IF MAPS gets voted down and the unions want to make a run at a dedicated sales tax election for staffing, who runs the campaign? Can the unions? Is there any fear of backlash?

I fear that the unions are starting a scary game of tit for tat that will ultimately lead to nothing getting accomplished on either side.

I'm not anti police or fire but I am anti trying to piggyback their issues onto maps.

[Midtowner]

Iron:

Studies are meaningless unless they are willing to publish their methodology. What Patrick did was his own Berkshire Study. He merely compared staffing levels at similar and larger cities and found OKC to be on par with or better than most of them.

You simply can't rest on the laurels of a study unless you understand how the numbers in the study were procured.

[zulu5bravo]

Is it really that hard to grasp the understanding that city workers work for you citizens of the city? Do you get that? Ever been on the receiving end of 911 hold or waiting for fire response for a fire? Ever been on the receiving end of someone stealing your stuff or kicking your door in? If you have, you'll recall the angst from the situation. This is about helping you citizen, not about cash raises (as I state again is not part of the 2010 contract with the PD). I'm tired of hearing the "where's a cop when you need one" because the city doesn't give me the resources to do my job effectively for you and other "special interests" citizens of the city of Oklahoma City. Special Interests is not my words... that's Mayor Cornett's words.

[zulu5bravo]

Iron:

Studies are meaningless unless they are willing to publish their methodology. What Patrick did was his own Berkshire Study. He merely compared staffing levels at similar and larger cities and found OKC to be on par with or better than most of them.

You simply can't rest on the laurels of a study unless you understand how the numbers in the study were procured.

You do realize the City of Oklahoma City funded said study, correct. Why isn't the methodology published on their website? That's a question for the city council, not us.

[iron76hd]

There will be backlash. It will be from the Mayor, City Manager, parts of Counsel and ALL those that stood to personally benefit financially from MAPS3

Those people are in the minority. I care more about regular citizens. The ones that MAPS3 will be taxing. The ones that will fund MAPS3...

We spoken to the top people (mayor/city manager). They've told all city services to take a hike. They haven't supported our staffing problems, so what will happen..

Nothing any different from what they already do. They fight every contract...from pay to benifits...they do that already...SO WHAT...

There BLACKMAIL...or any on this thread won't work either...If you vote down MAPS3..you'll lose support...from who???? Citizens support is what I care about...And the ones i've spoken too...care more about Public Safety than MAPS3...

[iron76hd]

Midtowner... You should read the study, because that's exactly what they did.

The Counsel demanded a study be done because they thought the Chief of Police and his staff were full of it...He basically told them..he wanted more proof that there was a staffing problem.

He supported, voted for and demanded the study.

The study came back. He didn't get the answer he wanted so he left the presentation half way through never to return. Like a small child throwing a tantrum...

I got it though...Patrick cuts and pastes a few numbers from DOJ website from 2004 and it's gospel and the Berkshire is bull. We were all just as surprised to see them ...Berkshire admit we were short period much less by at leas 200 Police officers....

Here you go Midtowner...Pretend I'm Patrick..."There is a shortage of Manpower and the Berkshire study is credible". Now you believe it?

[kevinpate]

The thread was more interesting when issues and not personalities were being discussed. Hopefully, it'll get back to that point before the flame fest consumes what little is left.

[zulu5bravo]

The thread was more interesting when issues and not personalities were being discussed. Hopefully, it'll get back to that point before the flame fest consumes what little is left.

Thanks for the morality check...

[OSUFan]

There will be backlash. It will be from the Mayor, City Manager, parts of Counsel and ALL those that stood to personally benefit financially from MAPS3

Those people are in the minority. I care more about regular citizens. The ones that MAPS3 will be taxing. The ones that will fund MAPS3...

We spoken to the top people (mayor/city manager). They've told all city services to take a hike. They haven't supported our staffing problems, so what will happen..

Nothing any different from what they already do. They fight every contract...from pay to benifits...they do that already...SO WHAT...

There BLACKMAIL...or any on this thread won't work either...If you vote down MAPS3..you'll lose support...from who???? Citizens support is what I care about...And the ones i've spoken too...care more about Public Safety than MAPS3...

I'm sorry I just keep getting confused. On one hand we are told the unions aren't playing games and simply are against MAPS because they don't think they can handle to staff the new projects.

Then post like yours come across as the exact opposite. You defintely sound like you are mad because you don't feel like you got a fair shake from the council and this how you are going to get revenge. Which is it? For the life of me I still can't figure out how staff shortages have anything to do with MAPS?

[Midtowner]

I got it though...Patrick cuts and pastes a few numbers from DOJ website from 2004 and it's gospel and the Berkshire is bull. We were all just as surprised to see them ...Berkshire admit we were short period much less by at leas 200 Police officers....

Here you go Midtowner...Pretend I'm Patrick..."There is a shortage of Manpower and the Berkshire study is credible". Now you believe it?

No doubt Patrick's figures are a little dated, but I doubt the picture has changed all that much in the course of five years. I don't care if you're a janitor or a doctor. If you're posting a study as evidence for your claims, context is key. As far as an MD being credible in this area, yeah, he is. He knows how to read studies and be critical of the information presented. He's also probably done a fair amount of research on his own since he's an OU Medical School grad (they really emphasize research).

Methodology is what gives a study context. It's the only part of the entire study where underlying agendas and dishonesty cannot be hidden. I don't even care about the rest of the study. Cut and paste for us a summary of the methodology. Hell.. if you have a copy, just summarize the methodology.

That said, even if what Berkshire said is 100% true, you have an issue with the political process. Your unions need to start to represent you more in the political process. Police and Fire Union support at the city council election level should and could mean something. If you send your brothers to one of my neighborhood association meetings, I'll damn sure listen to what he has to say. Some disembodied study with no methodology presented? No thanks.

Finally, none of this has anything to do with MAPS. Your solution does not and cannot lie within MAPS because MAPS is about capital improvements while what you're asking for is operating capital. For them to give you operating capital via MAPS would be illegal as the current proposal stands.

[betts]

There will be backlash. It will be from the Mayor, City Manager, parts of Counsel and ALL those that stood to personally benefit financially from MAPS3

There BLACKMAIL...or any on this thread won't work either...If you vote down MAPS3..you'll lose support...from who???? Citizens support is what I care about...And the ones i've spoken too...care more about Public Safety than MAPS3...

There are many, many, many people who stand to benefit from MAPS 3, most of them NOT the mayor, the city manager or the city council. There were many, many, many people who benefitted from the original MAPS. MAPS returned billions in dollars of income to the city from a much smaller investment. MAPS created many jobs, it changed Oklahoma City from a bland, dying city to one with a chance, a hope of becoming a much better, more vibrant place in which to live. If it weren't for MAPS, I wouldn't live here, nor would anyone in my family. I was ashamed to have visitors from other places when we first moved here. The last time one of my relatives from Connecticut came to visit, she was amazed at what had been done to the city, and amazed at the vision embodied in the Core to Shore concept and region.

Every single citizen I have talked to recently has had nothing but positive things to say about MAPS, and they all expressed the hope that our city would continue to improve and go forward. That doesn't mean we can't work on problems with city services. How many ways are there to say one does not rule out the other? Why not spend all your energy campaigning FOR something? You don't like the city council and the mayor? Spend your energy supporting a candidate you do like. That's how it's supposed to be done in our country. We work to elect representatives who support our point of view. A person who truly cares about our city should be able to see that these things are not mutually exclusive, and that one can have both. I would certainly be willing to do whatever I can to make sure our city has enough police and fireman, if I have convincing data that we don't have enough. But, that doesn't mean I won't support MAPS, because they are not mutually exclusive.

[iron76hd]

Really? That's strange I thought you finally got the point when you posted this

I guess the answer to the question is, the unions feel like the city should not do anything to promote any kinds of growth until the unions feel like the have the staff to do so.

that's your post.

As far as being mad, not exactly mad my friend. Shocked is more like it.

Shocked that a City Counsel, Mayor and City Manager won't listen to their employee's. Their own appointed leaders. When they openly ignore information given to them about the safety of their troops and the citizens.

Shocked when they push the agenda's of other Special Interest Groups at the cost of endangering the lives of Civil Servants. Civil Servants that also have families that hopes all decisions made by the Manager and Mayor will be with the best interests of them and their loved ones in mind.

All for the sake of the almighty DOLLAR. All for a park, conference center, and fairgrounds. It's shamful.

You can't call these people Hero's in one breath and Whiners in another.

If I was going to be mad it would be at the obvious conflicts of interests the Mayor has with his new job and his position as Mayor. It's right there in black and white, but no one comments on it or does anything about it. I've seen what's uncovered when one starts digging into who owns what before it's bought with millions of tax payer dollars...or who's employed by who...or who's family member owns what before it's bought...etc..

As more officers, fireman, and city workers are injured or even possibly killed without adequate Manpower to ensure their safety and the saftey of citizens..i'll eventually get mad...

Let me ask you this. Would you have a problem if I was a Police Officer and started giving a card to every traffic accident victim i ran across for my wife who is a personal injury lawyer? or maybe just a card from a law firm that I received a 6 figure salary from?

or calling a wrecker service for every wreck in oklahoma city i saw...one that I received a salary from. to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars? would that be ok?

because that's what the Mayor's doing!!! with tax payer dollars....MY taxpayer dollars....now that bothers me more than anything....

I'd vote NO just for that reason....

[OSUFan]

So you are against MAPS 3 because your mad at the mayor and council?

I think this was great chance for you to lay out why you oppose MAPS 3, what the two issues have to do with one another and how defeating MAPS 3 gets you closer to these goals.

I'm more confused by the motivations then I was before.

[kevinpate]

Not sure I truly have a handle on the position, so andy, iron, do feel free to correct me if I'm offbase here.

The civil servant decision to vocally oppose MAPs3 IS NOT a disbelief in the value to OKC of having the proposed capital improvements within the city.

Rather, the opposition is: before the city proceeds with MAPs3, the city should first dedicate funds to MISP-NOW ala Metropolitan Increased Security Personnel - Need Outstanding Workers.

If I'm following correctly, should MISP-NOW be addressed first, then MAPs3 would be, for the most part, just fine and dandy with the civil servant brotherhoods. However, since there is no one cent tax after the current one expires, y'all want your preference for services to get a dedicated funding source prior to the citizens being asked for another tax for glitz, glamor and city growth via nifty fab things that will help the city continue to shine and improve. This way, if the citizens say nope, we're stopping at the current tax rate, you're already covered.

In short, you want for your folks what MAPs3 supporters want, all desired and wanted items covered, but cover what's most important to my group first.

Not sure I agree you really ought to try tying increased peeps to a temporary tax, but I suppose if the council were receptive, the vote could instead be set to make it a permanent tax that is dedicated to MISP-NOW.

That about cover it?

[Midtowner]

Iron, let me give you a quick tip about conveying political messages. Be clear, don't confuse people with irrelevant information. Be as informed as possible as you can about what is relevant and dismiss what is not.

Now, I think you have been asked several times on this thread to give the methodology of the Berkshire Study, yet you have failed to produce the same. Your ranting and raving and straying from the main point (accusing the mayor?) is not doing you any favors. If you are here to support your cause, consider how name calling and negativity is going to accomplish that for you. It won't.

[iron76hd]

Your ranting and raving and straying from the main point (accusing the mayor?) is not doing you any favors. If you are here to support your cause, consider how name calling and negativity is going to accomplish that for you. It won't.

I didn't know I was ranting and raving. What name calling? You must have me confused with the person who posted Blowhard, Whiner, and idiot numerous times. A little sarcasm maybe. Geez a dissenting opinion is negativity I guess. So be it.

I don't know if you're standing across the table during surgery from you obvious good buddy Patrick, but send him the same message.
The civil servant decision to vocally oppose MAPs3 IS NOT a disbelief in the value to OKC of having the proposed capital improvements within the city.

Rather, the opposition is: before the city proceeds with MAPs3, the city should first dedicate funds to MISP-NOW ala Metropolitan Increased Security Personnel - Need Outstanding Workers.

That's it!!!!! Finally. I frankly don't appreciate not being able to vote for some growth in this city. I want to vote YES.. I unfortunately for me know the real day to day struggles of this Department to meet the needs of this city. If a citizen could walk a day in an officer's shoes his eyes would be wide open at the end of the day.

No doubt Patrick's figures are a little dated, but I doubt the picture has changed all that much in the course of five years. I don't care if you're a janitor or a doctor. If you're posting a study as evidence for your claims, context is key. As far as an MD being credible in this area, yeah, he is. He knows how to read studies and be critical of the information presented. He's also probably done a fair amount of research on his own since he's an OU Medical School grad (they really emphasize research).

Before they were gospel. Now you admit they are dated. Can you be any more condesending Dr? Thank you. I know the reading level in Oklahoma is grade 5, but there are others that are not Doctors that can read. Maybe the Mayor needed a Dr to read the study to him so he'll understand it. Listen from having Doctor's as friends, I'd agree they are smart. You act like your on a planet that the rest of us can only aspire to get to though. Come on.. Don't do that. Maybe we should have hired Patrick to do the study, he in your opinion is a Doctor and would have done better job that Berkshire.

If it weren't for MAPS, I wouldn't live here, nor would anyone in my family. I was ashamed to have visitors from other places when we first moved here.

Wow! Tell me betts you didn't move here because of the Canal, strip of bars, or Minor League Stadium. I am sorry I want to Believe that..I just don't. While I am happy with the progress downtown, I don't stake this city's being a great place to live because of that. This city was a great place to live before the strip of bars in Bricktown.

You don't like the city council and the mayor? Spend your energy supporting a candidate you do like. That's how it's supposed to be done in our country. We work to elect representatives who support our point of view. A person who truly cares about our city should be able to see that these things are not mutually exclusive, and that one can have both.

I agree. I am truely surprised at the lack of support by our counsel. I feel confident that during the next round of elections this issue will be addressed with each candidate. I also agree one can have both, but this counsel promised things to employees in reference to staffing each time...MAPS1..MAPS2....where is the money from all of the revenue going...where? not for public services....that's for sure

[Hawk405359]

Thank you ZULU...

Why doesn't the Daily Oklahoman publish the "Berkshire Study"...for all to read!!!! Call the Oklahoman and demand it!!!!!!!

Here Patrick ...you first...475-3311

Didn't they run a story about it a while ago? I remember hearing about it somewhere.

[zulu5bravo]

You've said it enough iron... you've told him about his "methodology" enough. Regardless if you presented it or not, he would then pick apart the methodology of it all. Funny, he totally missed the point that the man walked out of the meeting because he wasn't ready to "address this right now".
Never questioning any of the other "irrelevant information" of anyone supporting his position (which is improving the city - how ironic, I think we all want that) shows the credibility is not quite as it seems.

[andy157]

That is not right. If they are cancelling leave because we do not have enough personnel to cover, then it is their responsibility to make it right. That could be by hiring new people, or reducing the responsibilities of existing personnel. As I said, I'm not sure we need two firemen responding to all ambulance calls, if that is indeed the case, so there might be options outside of increasing manpower, but something should be done. That assumes people are working at least 40 hours a week, and not asking for less, of course.

betts, I think you've got it. But I also think there may have been some confusion on my part, lets go back and start over. This may take me awhile, so hang with me. We were talking about the Firefighters having their earned leave time cancelled. You ask "wouldn't that be an internal issue". Yes it is an internal issue. You then ask "who outside of the department would have the authority to do that. Noone outside of the department has that authority.

My point had to do with the fact that, leave time, and how that leave time is handled is by State Statute a mandatory subject of bargaining. What this boils down to is this, the City has agreed to a benefit. They have agreed that a Firefighter can earn the leave, accumulate the leave(up to a certain number of hours which is capped, and if not used it is lost), and use the leave anyway they choose, as long as, it is requested in advance, then approved by a supervisor, and placed upon the scheduling calander.

Heres the catch, it can only be approved if, at the time of the request there is manpower(staffing) available, and, it doesn't impeed the normal operations of the department. The City has also agreed that a request for leave can be made up to 6 months in advance.

So for example lets use Sta. 14, there are 9 Firefighters assigned to that Station, 5 on the Engine, and 4 on the Ladder Truck. To operate those apparatus it takes a minimum of 7 personel, 4 on the Engine and 3 on the Ladder. So on any given day there can be 2 of the 9 off duty using their earned leave.

So on april 1st, 2 guys and/or gals ask to use leave on June 1st,(60 days in advance) and their request meets all of the guidelines and is approved. Then on May 28th one of the remaining 7 gets hurt (breaks a leg) in a fire and will be off work 4 months. One of the 2 Firefighters who have family vactions planned for June 1st will be told, sorry your leave has been cancelled.

There is a simple solution which is call someone back in to fill in for the injured Firefighter so both employees can have the opportunity to utilize the leave time the City has by contract agreed to. But they refuse to do that.

So at the end of the day the issue has come down to this. The City has agreed to give a benefit, and the Council had to approve that benefit. But the City is unwilling to provide ample opportunity for the use of that benefit.


That is where the Council can, and should step in to fix the problem. But they won't, or a least to this point, they haven't. This problem has been an ongoing problem for many years, and it's been getting worse, not better. Now it has come to a head. Sorry it took so long to explain the issue.

I'll bet if you, or anyone else here, were in this position, it would be an issue as well.

[zulu5bravo]

Haha, Midtowner you make me laugh. I read several of your posts. You want hard facts and methodology but then MANY of your posts contain broad statements including such phrases as, "I don't imagine..." and "I doubt the picture has changed..." without any supported reasoning. That's funny!!! Has anyone else noticed that?

[andy157]

1. 2% budget cuts are better than what we're seeing in the corporate world.

2. Even so, we're still above the national average. And all citizen surveys show nothing but praise for our fire and police services.

5. IMHO, police officers shouldn't be responding to non-injury accidents anyways. Complete waste of time and money.

6. I agree.

7. MAPS for Kids is still in progress and will be for many more years. Have you looked at the MAPS for Kids Master Plan?

8. Don't really think it's necessary. Police and fire services aren't a main complaint in citizen surveys, quite the opposite actually. Main complaints are roads.

9. I agree, but it's a budget problem, not anything to do with MAPS. And due to the economy, everyone is cutting back.

10. If citizens are happy with our fire and police services, than no need to make changes.



There will always be those that say there are problems. Just look at education. Problems with education are ongoing, and will always be a topic of discussion. So, if we wait for these problems to be addressed, we'll never do anything about quality of life in this city.




That's because for the most part our citizens haven't expressed any complaints with fire or police services. Instead, he's choosing to address those issues that citizens have expressed that they want addressed, namely, roads and quality of life.



The citizens haven't expressed any problems with safety. Citizen surveys show citizens are satisfied with city services. The mayor is trying to address the concerns of our citizens as a whole, which is his job, I thought. Main concerns addressed incitizen surveys are roads and quality of life. Sure, citizens state that city services are important, but there haven't been huge complaints made about the quality of our city services. In regards to the problems citizens have brought up, streets are being fixed by the 2007 bond issue. Haven't you seen all of the street construction projects around town lately? There are so many of them, I'm having a hard time getting around. Quality of life issues are addressed in the MAPS programs.



Part of being a big league city is responding to your citizens. Citizens in OKC aren't crying about the quality of our fire and police services. What they are crying about are roads and quality of life. Thus, the city is responding.

Patrick lets look at #8. Does it really matter what you or I think, or can justify to ourselves regarding the 200 additional Police Officers, and Firefighters? The Citizens voted for a MINIMUM of 200 ADDITIONAL. They are paying for a minimum of 200 additional. They didn't vote to pay for 200, and only get 170. On top of that this City has grown to the point 200 isn't even enough.

We recently voted in 2007 to add 3 new Fire Stations, those alone will require 50 or 60 more, and thats over and above the 200. I understand that because of todays economy those 50 or 60 may be out of the question. Thats probably why the City is in no big rush to get them built. Here we are almost in 2010, and they haven't even built the 2 stations the 2000 bond vote called for. At that rate we won't need the 50 or 60 until sometime after 2017. No problem.

But I along with many others voted to pay for, and the City is collecting for, an additional 200. If they don't want to hire them, and keep them, then stop charging the taxpayers for them. But you don't have to worry the City through its Municipal Counsel Kenny Jordon has the problem solved. His solution is really crafty and possibly quite legal, of course to my way of thinking his interpretation is very dishonest, and seems highly unethical but hey he's the Lawyer

Here's how it works. The City keeps collecting for the 200 then they can show on paper they're paying them so they can keep the tax that way. Then all they have to do is make their Personel cuts in the General Fund. See how slick that is. You pay for an extra 200 but you don't really get an extra 200. Like I said very crafty yet highly unethical, IMHO.

[Patrick]

Patrick. I know you are a physician, however, I will address this. The fire department often arrives ahead of EMSA. If it is a full arrest, for example, they can start treatment and can save a life. EMSA only has about 12 ambulances on call at one time. They can be anywhere. It is realistically possible the EMSA unit can be several miles away, versus the fire department maybe a mile or two. Think of the "golden hour." I would much rather see a fire department paramedic respond in addition to EMSA. Who knows. The life they save could be yours... Or mine. I will also add. The fire department can assist with lifting heavy patients. EMSA has several paramedic teams that are small women who can not lift a heavy person alone.

If EMSA arrives first and they have the scene under control, they will cancel the fire department and return them to service. Same in return.

That sounds reasonable and very well thought out. I concur with your assessments.

[Mikemarsh51]

There was a study done for the fire dept. also that adjusted for growth. As far as I know nothing has been done to implement any of it. Of course unless you consider that rigs were moved out from Sta. 7 due to it being condemned (that would be one of the ones falling down). Heres the link if you have time to read it, its 159 pages.

http://okc.gov/fire/fire_report.pdf

[Patrick]

Well... one "argument" that comes to mind is if the city passes a new sales tax in 2009... how can it expect to get a possible second sales tax to pass a vote of the people to fund city workers?

As of now, I think the citizens respect and value the fire and police departments enough that they'd be willing to pass, for example, an additional 25 cent on the dollar increase in sales tax above the current rate. That would still only put our sales tax rate at 8.6%, still in line with that of other cities.

The unions have only asked to be included in the proposed funding. I'm certain it is difficult to muster up morale to go "above and beyond" when the city council and city doesn't support them (while pushing the Heart of the City campaign to get city employees to give so the council can get their city goals).

I don't think the city and council don't support the fire and police services. I think they're just facing the reality of an already strained budget. If we had huge surpluses, I bet this wouldn't be as big of an issue.

As a friend of mine said on his Facebook status... remodeled seats at the Ford center in the suites and they got rid of the worthless low couch... I'm glad he can see the game better and enjoys the new big screens while people put their lives on the line answering fire calls short-handed and PD answers your prowler calls alone. How many times have I had to explain WHY I couldn't be there sooner, wasn't there to stop it, etc... I wanted to be there but couldn't.

Other cities are having the same problem. It's just a reality in this economy. Instead of opposing MAPS 3, why not lobby for an additional $0.25 increase in sales tax for more manpower? Why can't we both have our cake and eat it too? Personally, I bet a small increase in sales taxes for more firefighters and police officers would be an easier sale than even MAPS 3. People around here really support our fire dept and police dept.

I'm certain that makes those workers families feel real great to know the seats are comfortable...

MAPS 3 has nothing to do with funding city employees' salaries and everything to do with capital projects.

[Patrick]

Have you heard???? A "raise" isn't even proposed in the current contract... soooo how is that the issue at all? Oh, and we've heard the "increase the tax base" argument before... with the prior MAPS... Well, why if that's the case are all city workers shorthanded to begin with?

Shortsighted indeed.

Oh, it did increase the tax base. I think Steve listed all of the private investment that resulted from MAPS 1. I think the problem now lies more with the sour economy. Prior to that, the city had a few surpluses.