OKC Police & Fire needs

[andy157]

I've not once said that I believe the fire department doesn't have enough employees. But, I also know that most departments have waste and inefficiency, have programs they think they have to have that on closer review are probably aren't accomplishing all that much. I honestly believe that very few ambulance calls for medical problems require more than 2 people, and that if you've got 2 firemen and 2 EMSA EMTs on all of them, it's overkill on many of them. Perhaps we need to get rid of EMSA, and only have 2 firemen going to all calls, giving the ambulances to the fire department, and increasing your departments' personnel commensurately. It's possible you had too many employees in the past. Departments never say "no" when they're offered money or positions, and they make the work accomodate them, so the money or positions aren't removed. Don't tell me that doesn't happen....I know too many people in the military. Perhaps you have too many people administrating, and not enough working. Don't know, and there's very little way I can know for sure.

I think that very few departments, if they feel they're stretched, actually look at how they can become more efficient, but always seem to think they need more employees. So, I recognize that the righteous indignation we're seeing here may be justified. But, as I've said, I have yet to see one side of a story and know absolutely that the other side doesn't have a point as well, and I suspect that's what's going on here. And, the bottom line is that I think that righteous indignation, even if justified, should have no bearing on MAPS. Take your battle to the city, don't casually let the fallout affect the people you say are your highest concern. People should be able to decide if they want MAPS based on it's pros and cons, not your pros and cons.

Betts, you may or may not recall. But up until the last 2 or 3 years, the Fire Department, City Councils, and the I.A.FF have discussed having the Fire Department take over the ambulance service off and on over a 10 year period. The Union aggressively lobbied for that responsibility, however we were never able to successfully accomplish that goal. EMSA is very powerful, and a lot of people make alot of money. I have to give them credit, they have defended and protected their kingdom quite well.

[iron76hd]

So your stance is "I can't be assed to see if there's a real qualm, so I'm going to act like it doesn't matter."

That's exactly right. That's how betts does it.

I've not once said that I believe the fire department doesn't have enough employees. But, I also know that most departments have waste and inefficiency, have programs they think they have to have that on closer review are probably aren't accomplishing all that much.

Inefficient. I don't think so. The bottom line is the Police Department is doing more with less. You argument is exactly the excuse the Mayor tried to insinuate when being explained the results of the Berkshire study we paid for.
The personnel from Berkshire quickly explained that actually our Police Department is operating more efficiently and "doing more with less people". That's when the Mayor got frustrated and left the presentation never to return. Your thought and opinion has been investigated and found to be false. I can assure you if the Berkshire study would have come up with numerous instances where they could be more efficient. The Chief of Police would have gladly listened and acted quickly to relieve some of the strain on his personnel. There were only a couple of programs that Berkshire said may not be getting a lot of bang for the buck. They were community programs like PAL etc... Those I hope will be cut, but the success stories from the officers working there are not easy to listen too as I take that stance.

Keep in mind, the Chief is recognized for "saving money" not wasting it. His job along with the job of his Management staff is to save where possible.

Keep in mind Betts, many of these "specialized units" were forced on the Department. Some are the counsel's pet projects and others were created to comply with getting an accreditation called CALEA. That's an entirely different thread.

So you can quit speculating that there is alot of waste and using Mismanagement to support your dismissal of MANPOWER shortages.
The bottom line is your going to vote for "luxury" items like parks, walking and biking trails. That's because you're not struggling. Your working and obviously your priorities are a lot different from most of the working or (now) non working class. You cannot and will not think of your fellow Oklahoman. It would be easy to forget about everyone else, I'm working.

I can assure you cuts are coming from your BROKE city. Revenues are shrinking with no end in sight. Your city services are going to be cut. I can assure you in some form or fashion those cuts you WILL be affected in some way or another. Then the Park you so eagerly feel is a NEED won't be quite as important as you once thought.

This crisis and public out cry you so eagerly ask for will follow.

[BOBTHEBUILDER]

Iron,

I have been keeping up with your postings when I can. You do make very valid points. Dont let some of these posters get under your skin. They will never know what it is like to walk a mile in your shoes. Keep that it mind, when posting. No personal attacks necessary. Friendly advice.

Its obvious, that some of these posters never get out of their chairs in their offices. So the concept of hard manual work and safety completely escapes them. They will never know what it is like to go work and risk or possibly lose their lives. I admire what you guys do, so keep up the good work.

Your obviously passionate about your beliefs, so keep on posting your thoughts. Just a little more advice, when your opposition comes back with spellchecks and grammatical corrections, this should indicate to you that they no longer have any valid arguments to send your way. Imagine that.....

[LakeEffect]

Iron,

I have been keeping up with your postings when I can. You do make very valid points. Dont let some of these posters get under your skin. They will never know what it is like to walk a mile in your shoes. Keep that it mind, when posting. No personal attacks necessary. Friendly advice.

Its obvious, that some of these posters never get out of their chairs in their offices. So the concept of hard manual work and safety completely escapes them. They will never know what it is like to go work and risk or possibly lose their lives. I admire what you guys do, so keep up the good work.

Your obviously passionate about your beliefs, so keep on posting your thoughts. Just a little more advice, when your opposition comes back with spellchecks and grammatical corrections, this should indicate to you that they no longer have any valid arguments to send your way. Imagine that.....

Get a room.

[SouthsideSooner]

Iron,

I have been keeping up with your postings when I can. You do make very valid points. Dont let some of these posters get under your skin. They will never know what it is like to walk a mile in your shoes. Keep that it mind, when posting. No personal attacks necessary. Friendly advice.

Its obvious, that some of these posters never get out of their chairs in their offices. So the concept of hard manual work and safety completely escapes them. They will never know what it is like to go work and risk or possibly lose their lives. I admire what you guys do, so keep up the good work.

Your obviously passionate about your beliefs, so keep on posting your thoughts. Just a little more advice, when your opposition comes back with spellchecks and grammatical corrections, this should indicate to you that they no longer have any valid arguments to send your way. Imagine that.....

How condecending of you, making generalizations about people you know nothing about. Nice job...

The caustic, extortionist approach the unions are taking is in complete conflict with what consultants that specialize in police union negotiations with cities advised them to do. Here are some excerpts from a piece titled PUBLIC RELATIONS AND THE POLICE UNION from POLICEPAY.NET...

Another characteristic of public relations is that it is always a positive message. You want your audience to “feel good” about, understanding of and sympathetic to your organization. You have to stick to who and what you are. Bringing to the attention of the public the egregious deficiencies of city officials is not public relations. That is “mud slinging”, another favorite tactic of Lanny Davis and his old buddy the “Ragin’ Cajun”. These two guys are pros at character assassinations. You had best leave such behavior to them.

What is the message? The message is the heart of public relations. Your message must always be the voice of reason. If you come off as being radical or unreasonable, not only will you not accomplish your goal, you will probably alienate your target group.

http://www.policepay.net/pdf/publicrelations.pdf

Count me as one who has been alienated...

[iron76hd]

The caustic, extortionist approach the unions are taking is in complete conflict with what consultants that specialize in police union negotiations with cities advised them to do.

I know you've misunderstood what and who the advice was intended for. The advice the way in interpret it is for Union Reps to keep in mind when negotiating with City Officials in contract negotiations. That's not what we are doing here.

We are giving two different perspectives on a future vote. Nothing more. I didn't think I'd change your vote. I only wanted to list the issues on the other side of the vote. I don't know what you want. If one would "ever so sweetly" Kiss kiss explained the other side you'd change your vote?

I've listened with an open mind to the "Yes" side. I've not understood that side right now, but I've listened.

If you've been alienated by another point of view or because the point wasn't made in a context that "you liked". I think the points have been made with facts. I think they've been made respectfully. There have been a couple of posts that strayed off the beaten path, but it's not been that bad. To me anyway. The worst thing used in any post i've read here is "sarcasm". And that's been in abundance on both sides. I've not been bothered by it.

I call it like I see it. I think I've used "kid gloves" in reference to some of the stuff. I've not meant to personally attack anyone. Here's what i've noticed though. That comment you just made.

How condecending of you, making generalizations about people you know nothing about. Nice job...

That would have been some kind of personal attack to some very, very thin skinned people.

Let's move on... Geez..

[BOBTHEBUILDER]

How condecending of you, making generalizations about people you know nothing about. Nice job...

The caustic, extortionist approach the unions are taking is in complete conflict with what consultants that specialize in police union negotiations with cities advised them to do. Here are some excerpts from a piece titled PUBLIC RELATIONS AND THE POLICE UNION from POLICEPAY.NET...





http://www.policepay.net/pdf/publicrelations.pdf

Count me as one who has been alienated...

SouthsideSooner,

I apologize if you are offended by my comments. They were not meant to be condecending. I am not affiliated with any union nor do I claim to know what its like to be a police officer.

I am merely stating that the those of us whom have a somewhat normal work schedule, M-F 8-5 or so, have no idea what these people face in their profession on a daily basis.

We have no idea what happens after 10 PM in this city. I would be willing to bet its not all parking tickets, traffic stops and roses after dark. I would also be willing to bet, very little or none of it makes the news or a newspaper for that matter.

So about the caustic, extortionist approach the unions are using. I would sure like to know how that applies to me.....

[iron76hd]

I am merely stating that the those of us whom have a somewhat normal work schedule, M-F 8-5 or so, have no idea what these people face in their profession on a daily basis.

We have no idea what happens after 10 PM in this city. I would be willing to bet its not all parking tickets, traffic stops and roses after dark. I would also be willing to bet, very little or none of it makes the news or a newspaper for that matter.

That's real talk Bob.

[SouthsideSooner]

I know you've misunderstood what and who the advice was intended for. The advice the way in interpret it is for Union Reps to keep in mind when negotiating with City Officials in contract negotiations. That's not what we are doing here.

I didn't misunderstand anything...perhaps you should go back and read the piece again. It's titled "PUBLIC RELATIONS AND THE POLICE UNION" and it relates to gaining public support for the unions cause in negotiating with cities.

So let me post those quotes again...

Another characteristic of public relations is that it is always a positive message. You want your audience to “feel good” about, understanding of and sympathetic to your organization. You have to stick to who and what you are. Bringing to the attention of the public the egregious deficiencies of city officials is not public relations. That is “mud slinging”, another favorite tactic of Lanny Davis and his old buddy the “Ragin’ Cajun”. These two guys are pros at character assassinations. You had best leave such behavior to them.

What is the message? The message is the heart of public relations. Your message must always be the voice of reason. If you come off as being radical or unreasonable, not only will you not accomplish your goal, you will probably alienate your target group.

Here's a hint...MAPS supporters are a large segment of your target group and campaigning to defeat MAPS because your demands aren't being met is going to be considered by many to be "radical and unreasonable"...

[MGE1977]

Here's a hint...MAPS supporters are a large segment of your target group and campaigning to defeat MAPS because your demands aren't being met is going to be considered by many to be "radical and unreasonable"...[/QUOTE]

Southside

I am very comfortable saying that public opinion of the guys and gals that OKC trusts implicitly with such minor things as their lives, will not feel alienated by our collective No vote.

As for yourself, you are entitled to your opinion, but at the end of the day, we in PS are citizens, our vote matters equally wether in favor or oppostition to your stance. Had our stance not been publicized, we still would have voted, (that's what good citizens do). On December 9 the results will be in, no matter the outcome, opposition will be heard.

[betts]

This is the Friday newspaper, not exactly a bastion of journalistic expertise, but there's some information in here I'd not read anywhere else.

Union bosses challenged on MAPS 3 stand

By J. LELAND GOURLEY, Editor
The CEO of the Greater Oklahoma City Cham-ber has challenged the credibility of the heads of the two unions who are opposing citizen approval of MAPs 3, which will be voted on in two weeks. Roy Williams, CEO of the Chamber, which is backing the continuance of MAPs, said leaders of the city’s police and fire unions, at their press conference opposing the approval of MAPS 3, repeatedly “pointed out that their only concern was public safety -- no other issues.”

Williams added that “Recently both unions submitted their best and final offer to the city for the arbitration hearings relative to failed contract negotiations.”
And “not a single one of these issues addresses public safety. In fact the opposite.” One of the police union demands was to add a full-time city-paid police officer to the payroll to spend full-time doing work for the union. Two other demands were for a paid day off during each 28-day work period, and agree to the “me too” clause that would give pay raises to any other city employee group.

The Fire union final demands were sick leave, holidays, vacations, overtime, wages, pay matrix, longevity schedule and drug and alcohol policy. “None of these issues addresses public safety. Each one is about additional benefits and compensation and pay for existing employees.” Williams said. “And the head of the Police union lives in Newcastle and the Fire union head lives in Norman.

MAPS 3 is an Oklahoma City issue only. It would not raise sales taxes above the existing level

http://www.okcfriday.com/default.asp...friday&he=.com

[Wambo36]

This is the Friday newspaper, not exactly a bastion of journalistic expertise, but there's some information in here I'd not read anywhere else.

Union bosses challenged on MAPS 3 stand

By J. LELAND GOURLEY, Editor
The CEO of the Greater Oklahoma City Cham-ber has challenged the credibility of the heads of the two unions who are opposing citizen approval of MAPs 3, which will be voted on in two weeks. Roy Williams, CEO of the Chamber, which is backing the continuance of MAPs, said leaders of the city’s police and fire unions, at their press conference opposing the approval of MAPS 3, repeatedly “pointed out that their only concern was public safety -- no other issues.”

Williams added that “Recently both unions submitted their best and final offer to the city for the arbitration hearings relative to failed contract negotiations.”
And “not a single one of these issues addresses public safety. In fact the opposite.” One of the police union demands was to add a full-time city-paid police officer to the payroll to spend full-time doing work for the union. Two other demands were for a paid day off during each 28-day work period, and agree to the “me too” clause that would give pay raises to any other city employee group.

The Fire union final demands were sick leave, holidays, vacations, overtime, wages, pay matrix, longevity schedule and drug and alcohol policy. “None of these issues addresses public safety. Each one is about additional benefits and compensation and pay for existing employees.” Williams said. “And the head of the Police union lives in Newcastle and the Fire union head lives in Norman.

MAPS 3 is an Oklahoma City issue only. It would not raise sales taxes above the existing level

http://www.okcfriday.com/default.asp...friday&he=.com

Did I miss the part where they went to the police or fire union leaders for their side of the story? Oh that's right, they don't want to confuse you with the facts. Besides the fact that head of the chamber is, oh yeah, publisher of the Joklahoman.
I love how the unions are accused of having all of these nefarious reasons behind their stance and using all these dirty tactics. We can only hope to ascend to the level of dirty tactics that these people employ on a daily basis.

[betts]

There's plenty of misinformation being promulgated by the "no" side and the people they're feeding this misinformation have no more ability to verify the validity than we do the above information. Is it any more "right" to lie about who owns land or where the convention center will be built, when the tax will start, how much it will cost people,etc? I don't see any evidence of ethical behavior on the "no" side either.

[kevinpate]

Did I miss the part where they went to the police or fire union leaders for their side of the story? Oh that's right, they don't want to confuse you with the facts. Besides the fact that head of the chamber is, oh yeah, publisher of the Joklahoman.
I love how the unions are accused of having all of these nefarious reasons behind their stance and using all these dirty tactics. We can only hope to ascend to the level of dirty tactics that these people employ on a daily basis.

For my own education, which of the items noted by Williams were not part of the requests submitted in the negotiations? Neither side should misrepresent the other's position.

[iron76hd]

Betts,

We've got it. Your gonna VOTE YES. You're on the wrong side of this one. Good luck. How do you feel about trusting a City Manager that threatened a store owner downtown after walking in and seeing a NO sticker inside the business.

He causes a scene and he and two or three of the people with him leave and refuse to eat at the business because of the NO sticker.

If that's not vindictive? Now that's a shame. No matter the side of the isle your on in reference to this issue. Now we are threatening small businesses?

There are plenty of businesses on the NO side of this vote.

[Wambo36]

There's plenty of misinformation being promulgated by the "no" side and the people they're feeding this misinformation have no more ability to verify the validity than we do the above information. Is it any more "right" to lie about who owns land or where the convention center will be built, when the tax will start, how much it will cost people,etc? I don't see any evidence of ethical behavior on the "no" side either.

One big difference. We don't control the media in this area. So your saying it's okay to lie to advance your agenda as long as you can point to someone else as your role model. I don't know who is spreading the talking points you seem to feel are lies, but I know it's not police or fire. The only place I've seen them is on this board. The leader of the chamber is using his paper to spread half-truths and outright lies. Interesting you seem okay with that.

By the way, I assume that since your posting tonight, it wasn't you at the Thunder game spreading misinformation about the FD. The lady was telling people that FF's earn $1000 per shift in OT.(I wish) That they sleep all night more often than not and get paid for it.(Wrong again) And the same old tired lie that this is about us not getting a raise this year. Imagine how suprised she was to find out one of the people she was telling this to was a FF who knew how full of it she was. But I guess you don't have a problem with that either. Win at all costs. Truth be damned.

[Wambo36]

For my own education, which of the items noted by Williams were not part of the requests submitted in the negotiations? Neither side should misrepresent the other's position.

For starters I don't have any idea when recently was. Was it last week? Last month? Two months ago when we beat them in arbitration? The alchohol and drug policy is something we submitted to last year. We agreed to this for nothing. That wasn't even on the radar in this years negotiations. Settled last year. I'm not directly involved in negotiations but most of what he said is news me. I'll make a call and ask tomorrow.
It is telling that he didn't even mention our offer to give up our raise to get more manning. Like I said, they employ a win at all costs, truth be damned strategy and we get accused of a "scorched earth policy". Makes for funny reading though.

[kevinpate]

For starters I don't have any idea when recently was. Was it last week? Last month? Two months ago when we beat them in arbitration? The alchohol and drug policy is something we submitted to last year. We agreed to this for nothing. That wasn't even on the radar in this years negotiations. Settled last year. I'm not directly involved in negotiations but most of what he said is news me. I'll make a call and ask tomorrow.
It is telling that he didn't even mention our offer to give up our raise to get more manning. Like I said, they employ a win at all costs, truth be damned strategy and we get accused of a "scorched earth policy". Makes for funny reading though.

From what that article stated, I presumed there was a recent set of 'final demands'. The article doesn't specify if that is in the last week, month, six months, etc. Tis one of the reasons I asked.

[Wambo36]

From what that article stated, I presumed there was a recent set of 'final demands'. The article doesn't specify if that is in the last week, month, six months, etc. Tis one of the reasons I asked.

Those types of "last best offers" are submitted in advance of arbitration so that the arbitrator has something to look at to make his decision. Since the arbitration was decided several months ago it only makes since that it happened before then. But some of the things he listed weren't part of that offer. Alchohol and Drug policy for example. So I really don't have any idea what he is talking about. I really don't think he does either. But it does make for good union bashing doesn't it. Seems to me that might be his real purpose. But I will ask and let you know.

[betts]

I have no idea who is spreading half truths and lies on the opposition side, but every single person I've talked to who's in the "no" camp has parrotted them, and since the only organized opposition I've heard of is the police and firemen, I would have no way to know who else it would be. I don't think it's right for either side to do so. I'm just saying that if the "yes" group isn't lily white in your eyes, well they're in good company.

[Wambo36]

I have no idea who is spreading half truths and lies on the opposition side, but every single person I've talked to who's in the "no" camp has parrotted them, and since the only organized opposition I've heard of is the police and firemen, I would have no way to know who else it would be. I don't think it's right for either side to do so. I'm just saying that if the "yes" group isn't lily white in your eyes, well they're in good company.

Really? Every single one? Because I have to tell you, I'm pretty sure that I talk to many more people from the NO camp than you ever will, and the only place I've heard the issues you raised even talked about, is here on this message board. I can assure you that in all my dealings with FF's and PO's on an almost daily basis that not one of them has brought those issues to the conversation. So for you to hear them "parroted" by every single one is nothing short of amazing. I know for a fact that you've never heard me raise them. I think you need to stick with the first 15 words of your post because that's closer to the truth.
As for who is spreading lies and half-truths on the YES side, that's easy. They do it on the news and in the paper.

[betts]

Really? Well, clearly you've talked to more "no" people than I have. I'm only relating my experiences. I suppose it could be Mark Shannon and his ilk, but regardless, misinformation abounds.

[Wambo36]

Really? Well, clearly you've talked to more "no" people than I have. I'm only relating my experiences. I suppose it could be Mark Shannon and his ilk, but regardless, misinformation abounds.

I agree that misinformation abounds. I just think it's important to assign it to the proper source. You see when this thing is over it's very important to some of us that we conducted ourselves in a manner that we can be proud of. Win or lose I think it's important to have accomplished it without the lying or deception. Our position should stand on its merits and if it can't then we don't deserve to win. Like I said, it's easy to see where it's coming from on the YES side. They own the media. They get to say whatever they want without a serious investigative query from any reporter.

[betts]

I agree that misinformation abounds. I just think it's important to assign it to the proper source. You see when this thing is over it's very important to some of us that we conducted ourselves in a manner that we can be proud of. Win or lose I think it's important to have accomplished it without the lying or deception. Our position should stand on its merits and if it can't then we don't deserve to win. Like I said, it's easy to see where it's coming from on the YES side. They own the media. They get to say whatever they want without a serious investigative query from any reporter.

Wambo, while I see that you all have told us that the facts we are being given about the police and firemen's unions' negotiations by the city and the media are incorrect, are you suggesting that the information they are giving us about MAPS itself is incorrect? If so, precisely what incorrect information has been given?

Because I continue to see these as two different issues. I see no evidence that the MAPs campaign has been untruthful, and we're not voting on whether money should go to policemen or firemen. So, while, in the event of a vote by the public on funding for your departments, accurate information about the negotiations would be critical, this particular vote has no bearing on your issues. I don't see MAPS failing as you "winning". Au contraire.

[betts]

Betts,

We've got it. Your gonna VOTE YES. You're on the wrong side of this one. Good luck.

Of course I'm going to vote yes. I love Oklahoma City, and I honestly believe that MAPS 3 will do great things for it. Whereas, I'm completely confused as to what, if anything, voting NO is going to FOR Oklahoma City. We won't get a streetcar system, we won't get our new park, we won't get bike trails, sidewalks or river improvments. We won't get the development that all of those projects would have created. We won't get the jobs that construction of those projects would have created. We won't get any increase in sales tax revenue, as most of the new development will go to Edmond, Norman and the other suburbs. So, you're thinking that voting No will do precisely what FOR Oklahoma City, because I'm having trouble figuring it out. I would really like to see an outline from anyone here who's opposing MAPS outlining all the good things that will happen if it doesn't pass. Anyone?