CMPD Restructuring Report Due Today
WAITING FOR THE REPORT
Sometime this afternoon Costa Mesa Chief Executive Officer Tom Hatch will release the results and recommendations of the consultants evaluating the Costa Mesa Police Department. Word has it that the results are going to be brutal, with very significant cuts in staffing levels and very significant organizational changes - all of which will cause much angst among the rank and file of the CMPD and other city units.
A SNEAK PEEK
I've had the opportunity to get a little sneak peek at the final report to Hatch from
Management Partners, the consulting firm given the assignment earlier this year to assess the Costa Mesa Police Department and come up with recommendations for a trimmer, more efficient organization. This report, and Hatch's adjustment of the recommendations, will be presented formally to the City Council at the extended Study Session on Tuesday, June 14th.
MANAGEMENT PARTNERS REPORT
Their report produced eight (8) recommendations, listed below:
1 - Implement a regional SWAT team with neighboring jurisdictions.
2 - Increase the ratio of non-sworn to sworn personnel to reduce expenditures and maintain a high level of customer service.
3 - Analyze the K-9 calls for service data to determine if staffing changes can be made to include these positions as part of a regular patrol beat.
4 - Identify a provider and contract animal control services.
5 - Develop and implement a succession plan in the Police Department.
6 - Implement both an internal and external training program for the Police Department Staff.
7 - Eliminate one commander position, three lieutenant positions, one sergeant position and three officer positions.
8 - Add one non-sworn logistical support manager position and one non-sworn special events coordinator position.
Theoretically, these changes would result in around $1.2 million in annual savings and would reduce the head count in the department to 136.
HATCH & CONSULTANTS MET WITH CMPD
Wednesday Hatch and the consultants met with members of the CMPD to give them a preview of the recommendations and Hatch's massaging of the numbers. It is my understanding that during this 2-hour meeting several things were said by Hatch and the consultants that might be considered incendiary. Mention has been made of those comments as part of a comment thread on the Daily Pilot blog attached to their article on the restructuring.
Here's part of what I know of that meeting.
STEP-BY-STEP
Hatch went through the recommendations provided by Management Partners one-by-one, commenting editorially with some background on each. You've already read those recommendations, above, so you might imagine how this news was received.
HATCH WANTS BIGGER CUTS
However, the news immediately got worse as Hatch provided HIS massaged version that he'll be presenting to the City Council today. In it the head count is dropped to 125, with 5 added via a recently-received COPS grant. That covers 5 officers for 3 years, with the city required to pick up the costs in the 4th year. The attendees, I'm told, were already reeling from the 136 number - this one was a gut-punch. This reduces the head count to mid-1980s levels. In recent years the CMPD had a high staffing number of 164.
PHASING - IF COUNCIL PERMITS
To soften the impact of his changes Hatch said it was his plan to phase them in, with none taking place until October 1st this year. He then said he wasn't sure that the City Council would go for that plan - that they might simply require the changes effective July 1st, the beginning of the new fiscal year.
ABLE & HUNTINGTON BEACH
Hatch talked about the demise of ABLE, but told the group the council had approved $150,000 to be used for the remainder of the calendar year for contract helicopter assistance by Huntington Beach.
JAIL OUTSOURCING CONTROVERSY
When as
ked about the RFP for the outsourcing of the Jail functions - why was it not part of this study BEFORE the decision was made to produce the RFP - he had no answer except that the council felt that was the way to go.
COUNCIL MIGHT DO SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT
About a half hour into the presentation he cautioned the audience to not assume the City Council will go along with the report. They might just decide to do something entirely different.
DISTRUST AND ANGER!
Hatch was asked why police management was not consulted FIRST about
possible restructuring instead of choosing to use expensive outside consultants. His response was, "Because there is distrust. There is distrust about us. There is anger about public employees." He went on to say that the council apparently didn't trust the staff to generate RFPs that would fairly provide an opportunity for others to bid on potential outsourced operations. At one point he specifically mentioned that he thought the City Council didn't fully trust him. This is an astounding admission, and a very troubling one.
ABOUT THAT "125" NUMBER...
During the co
nversation Hatch told the officers that his goal was to reach 132 staffing level by October 1st. (He later said his number was actually 131) One of the officers challenged Hatch about the 125 staffing number, which to him seemed arbitrary. Hatch said something about it being a number that had been out in the community when Interim Chief Steve Staveley interrupted him and said, "I can tell you exactly where that number came from."
PULLED OUT OF THE AIR BY COUNCILMEN
Staveley told the group that, on his very first day on the job this time around, he was invited to coffee by "two city council members" - he didn't name them - and during that coffee they told him in no uncertain terms that they wanted to see a police force of 125 sworn members, period. He asked them where they got that number and they pointed to a formula in a book that was clearly NOT intended to be used arbitrarily for staffing purposes bec
ause it didn't take into consideration special circumstances and demographic information on reporting cities.
MIXED FRUIT=WRONG NUMBERS
The council members were trying to compare Irvine and Costa Mesa, which Staveley said was like trying to compare a tangerine and a watermelon. He then said, "There is no scientific data in the staffing of a police department that justifies that number." In my opinion, that's information that every resident of this city should know because that capricious, arbitrary number now forms the cornerstone of the future of the CMPD.
MORE ANGST ABOUT DISTRUST
During this discussion Hatch, several times, mentioned that he wasn't sure the City Council fully trusted him, and also mentioned that he wasn't sure they trusted Staveley, either.
WHAT ABOUT DRUG FUNDS?
Attendees asked about the use of the Narcotics Seizure fun
ds and were told that those dollars were strictly controlled by the Federal Government rules. Staveley did say, pointing to himself, that the only person who controls those funds is the person wearing this badge. He was adamant about it. He also said there's a long lead time before those funds actually reach our city.
RESERVE OFFICERS VS. FULL TIME?
The plan involved greater use of Reserve officers, but also includes layoffs for full time officers. When told by one officer that it was their understanding that full time officers would only be laid off AFTER all Reserve officers were terminated, Hatch didn't have an answer to that issue. This was one of several questions Hatch couldn't - or wouldn't - answer. I found myself thinking that if he had a permanent Administrative Services Director instead of an Interim person in that slot the answers might have been available to him.
HATCH'S CANDOR
More than once Hatch referred to the challenging "political environment", and how it stifles trust and good communications. My jaw dropped at the candor he expressed to these officers because his bosses, the city council, include at least a couple of men who have demonstrated a very vindictive streak. I feared that Hatch was potentially placing his job in jeopardy by simply acknowledging what EVERY observer of local politics has seen over the past few months.
EX-CHIEF DEFINED THE ATMOSPHERE
Management Partners staffer, Mike Messina - former Police Chief in Brea with more than four decades of law enforcement experience - told the group that "You guys have a really tough political environment here - it's brutal!" He went on to acknowledge what a great heritage and reputation the CMPD has in the law enforcement community and commended them for retaining at least a semblance of community-oriented policing.
CHAMNESS ASKED THE TOUGH QUESTION
Police association President Jason Chamness closed the meeting with a few questions. His final one really defined the message that was delivered over the previous two hours. He asked Hatch, "Do you think the politics are detrimental to public safety in Costa Mesa?" Hatch replied, "I think the politics are the reality that we have to deal with."
I'M WORRIED FOR THE CMPD - AND THE CITY
Quite honestly, I'm very concerned about how this city council might react to Hatch's proposal for the restructuring of the CMPD. I suspect they might simply ignore the recommendations of the consultants and Hatch's adjustments and demand even more draconian, immediate cuts. Clearly, as articulated earlier by Messina, they are not about to let the facts get in the way of their plans.
Sometime this afternoon Costa Mesa Chief Executive Officer Tom Hatch will release the results and recommendations of the consultants evaluating the Costa Mesa Police Department. Word has it that the results are going to be brutal, with very significant cuts in staffing levels and very significant organizational changes - all of which will cause much angst among the rank and file of the CMPD and other city units.A SNEAK PEEK
I've had the opportunity to get a little sneak peek at the final report to Hatch from
Management Partners, the consulting firm given the assignment earlier this year to assess the Costa Mesa Police Department and come up with recommendations for a trimmer, more efficient organization. This report, and Hatch's adjustment of the recommendations, will be presented formally to the City Council at the extended Study Session on Tuesday, June 14th.MANAGEMENT PARTNERS REPORT
Their report produced eight (8) recommendations, listed below:
1 - Implement a regional SWAT team with neighboring jurisdictions.
2 - Increase the ratio of non-sworn to sworn personnel to reduce expenditures and maintain a high level of customer service.
3 - Analyze the K-9 calls for service data to determine if staffing changes can be made to include these positions as part of a regular patrol beat.
4 - Identify a provider and contract animal control services.
5 - Develop and implement a succession plan in the Police Department.
6 - Implement both an internal and external training program for the Police Department Staff.
7 - Eliminate one commander position, three lieutenant positions, one sergeant position and three officer positions.
8 - Add one non-sworn logistical support manager position and one non-sworn special events coordinator position.
Theoretically, these changes would result in around $1.2 million in annual savings and would reduce the head count in the department to 136.
HATCH & CONSULTANTS MET WITH CMPD
Wednesday Hatch and the consultants met with members of the CMPD to give them a preview of the recommendations and Hatch's massaging of the numbers. It is my understanding that during this 2-hour meeting several things were said by Hatch and the consultants that might be considered incendiary. Mention has been made of those comments as part of a comment thread on the Daily Pilot blog attached to their article on the restructuring.
Here's part of what I know of that meeting.
STEP-BY-STEP
Hatch went through the recommendations provided by Management Partners one-by-one, commenting editorially with some background on each. You've already read those recommendations, above, so you might imagine how this news was received.
HATCH WANTS BIGGER CUTS
However, the news immediately got worse as Hatch provided HIS massaged version that he'll be presenting to the City Council today. In it the head count is dropped to 125, with 5 added via a recently-received COPS grant. That covers 5 officers for 3 years, with the city required to pick up the costs in the 4th year. The attendees, I'm told, were already reeling from the 136 number - this one was a gut-punch. This reduces the head count to mid-1980s levels. In recent years the CMPD had a high staffing number of 164.PHASING - IF COUNCIL PERMITS
To soften the impact of his changes Hatch said it was his plan to phase them in, with none taking place until October 1st this year. He then said he wasn't sure that the City Council would go for that plan - that they might simply require the changes effective July 1st, the beginning of the new fiscal year.
ABLE & HUNTINGTON BEACH
Hatch talked about the demise of ABLE, but told the group the council had approved $150,000 to be used for the remainder of the calendar year for contract helicopter assistance by Huntington Beach.
JAIL OUTSOURCING CONTROVERSY
When as
ked about the RFP for the outsourcing of the Jail functions - why was it not part of this study BEFORE the decision was made to produce the RFP - he had no answer except that the council felt that was the way to go.COUNCIL MIGHT DO SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT
About a half hour into the presentation he cautioned the audience to not assume the City Council will go along with the report. They might just decide to do something entirely different.
DISTRUST AND ANGER!
Hatch was asked why police management was not consulted FIRST about
possible restructuring instead of choosing to use expensive outside consultants. His response was, "Because there is distrust. There is distrust about us. There is anger about public employees." He went on to say that the council apparently didn't trust the staff to generate RFPs that would fairly provide an opportunity for others to bid on potential outsourced operations. At one point he specifically mentioned that he thought the City Council didn't fully trust him. This is an astounding admission, and a very troubling one.ABOUT THAT "125" NUMBER...
During the co
nversation Hatch told the officers that his goal was to reach 132 staffing level by October 1st. (He later said his number was actually 131) One of the officers challenged Hatch about the 125 staffing number, which to him seemed arbitrary. Hatch said something about it being a number that had been out in the community when Interim Chief Steve Staveley interrupted him and said, "I can tell you exactly where that number came from."PULLED OUT OF THE AIR BY COUNCILMEN
Staveley told the group that, on his very first day on the job this time around, he was invited to coffee by "two city council members" - he didn't name them - and during that coffee they told him in no uncertain terms that they wanted to see a police force of 125 sworn members, period. He asked them where they got that number and they pointed to a formula in a book that was clearly NOT intended to be used arbitrarily for staffing purposes bec
ause it didn't take into consideration special circumstances and demographic information on reporting cities.MIXED FRUIT=WRONG NUMBERS
The council members were trying to compare Irvine and Costa Mesa, which Staveley said was like trying to compare a tangerine and a watermelon. He then said, "There is no scientific data in the staffing of a police department that justifies that number." In my opinion, that's information that every resident of this city should know because that capricious, arbitrary number now forms the cornerstone of the future of the CMPD.
MORE ANGST ABOUT DISTRUST
During this discussion Hatch, several times, mentioned that he wasn't sure the City Council fully trusted him, and also mentioned that he wasn't sure they trusted Staveley, either.WHAT ABOUT DRUG FUNDS?
Attendees asked about the use of the Narcotics Seizure fun
ds and were told that those dollars were strictly controlled by the Federal Government rules. Staveley did say, pointing to himself, that the only person who controls those funds is the person wearing this badge. He was adamant about it. He also said there's a long lead time before those funds actually reach our city.RESERVE OFFICERS VS. FULL TIME?
The plan involved greater use of Reserve officers, but also includes layoffs for full time officers. When told by one officer that it was their understanding that full time officers would only be laid off AFTER all Reserve officers were terminated, Hatch didn't have an answer to that issue. This was one of several questions Hatch couldn't - or wouldn't - answer. I found myself thinking that if he had a permanent Administrative Services Director instead of an Interim person in that slot the answers might have been available to him.HATCH'S CANDOR
More than once Hatch referred to the challenging "political environment", and how it stifles trust and good communications. My jaw dropped at the candor he expressed to these officers because his bosses, the city council, include at least a couple of men who have demonstrated a very vindictive streak. I feared that Hatch was potentially placing his job in jeopardy by simply acknowledging what EVERY observer of local politics has seen over the past few months.
EX-CHIEF DEFINED THE ATMOSPHERE
Management Partners staffer, Mike Messina - former Police Chief in Brea with more than four decades of law enforcement experience - told the group that "You guys have a really tough political environment here - it's brutal!" He went on to acknowledge what a great heritage and reputation the CMPD has in the law enforcement community and commended them for retaining at least a semblance of community-oriented policing.CHAMNESS ASKED THE TOUGH QUESTION
Police association President Jason Chamness closed the meeting with a few questions. His final one really defined the message that was delivered over the previous two hours. He asked Hatch, "Do you think the politics are detrimental to public safety in Costa Mesa?" Hatch replied, "I think the politics are the reality that we have to deal with."
I'M WORRIED FOR THE CMPD - AND THE CITY
Quite honestly, I'm very concerned about how this city council might react to Hatch's proposal for the restructuring of the CMPD. I suspect they might simply ignore the recommendations of the consultants and Hatch's adjustments and demand even more draconian, immediate cuts. Clearly, as articulated earlier by Messina, they are not about to let the facts get in the way of their plans.Labels: CMPD, Management Partners, Steve Staveley, Tom Hatch
posted by The Pot Stirrer at 6/10/2011 02:24:00 AM
33 Comments:
I wonder what the final straw will be, when will the rest of this city wake up and fight back ?
In my opinion what you are seeing is just the tip of the iceberg.
When the PD is reduce to below minimum levels and the moral and performance capabilities are on the bottom, going to the Sheriffs dept won't be such a big deal. By then the officers will probably welcome it. At that time it won't be such a trade off and who's going to object. Not the cops that are left.
It's pretty clear that Riggy wants to punish them for opposing him like they did and stomping them into something that will welcome the move to county is part of what we're seeing.
On the ABLE front... this move to use HB is just the cover that will allow them to pull the plug all together when the short contract is up. If they allow ABLE to continue to exist with the private/public option, then a real program would exist and it will be much more difficult to pull the plug on that. With ABLE completely out of existance they'll just flip the switch on HB next year and that will be that.
So they want to add "one non-sworn special events coordinator position."
This looks like another back-door addition to the Ministry of Truth. I'll bet this person works closely with the existing Ministry of Truth propagandists, Dan Joyce and Bill Lobdell.
Costa Mesa Uber Alles!
So why pay for all these consultants if the city council is just going to do what they want in the end? I like how a bunch of failed business men who know nothing about law enforcement are now micromanaging the police department.
Good lord, where to start..? Lets dissect the Management Partners report a little...
1. SWAT will not realize a $300k savings by going regional. That number was based solely on the required amount of training hours per ofcr, per year and their cost. The reality is that a large portion of those officers SWAT training is is lieu of their assigned regular shift. Those in details have to flex and there is no backfill. That number is considerably off.
2. It says to identify and contract out Animal Control services without any proposal or analysis of cost/benefit. Sounds like an automatic assumption of savings, or at least a realization the decision was made long ago, even though nothing yet on the RFP.
3. Hire a non-sworn logistical support manager. We had that, he retired and Council did away with the position.
4. Hire a non-sworn special events coordinator...aka: the Dan Joyce hire. Joyce has been running roughshod over the Special Events guys and steering those contract dealings his way for months. This has been in the works (back door anyway) a long time. Maybe this is why the council keeps putting off reducing the special events rates? They charge astronomical fees because they want to recoup double time, a portion of benefits, retirement (even though those items are covered already in a 40 hour work week) and Bobby Young has even got it down to the cost of replacing 1/8th an inch of tread on the tires of the police motorcycle.
Did Scott Baugh's OC Marathon pay the Speical Event rates or did the city reduce them or just eat it for him? I hope the people at OC Fair are watching this closely.
So is Dan Joyce (or whomever..as if) going to set up cones and flare patterns. Is he going to set up and take down DUI checkpoints in the middle of the night? Is he going to supervise officers in doing so? Is he going to direct traffic, address emergencies? Or is he just going to handle the contracts and maybe, not likely scheduling? The current sworn special events coordinator does all that and more. You still have to have appropriate supervision & span of control (sworn Sgts) running the operation...boots on the ground. So why are we hiring this person? BAD IDEA, extra money and position going to yet another once part time, no background passing crony.
5. MP recommends hiring more non-sworn personnel to free up sworn officers. Gee we had that...City Council got rid of them, including those that GENERATED REVENUE.
6. MP report states you should not do the _ ofcrs per 1,000 residents analogy because there leaves too much unaccounted for. Instead they and IACP say staffing levels should be such that a patrol ofcrs time is split into 3rds, 1/3 handling calls for service, 1/3 free patrol time and 1/3 adminstrative duties (report writing). Admin duties are generally considered equal to taking as much time as calls for service. Costa Mesa's calls for service = 58% of officers time. If admin should take about the same, where is your visibility, your crime deterring free patrol time?
MP recommended hiring non-sworn, increasing sworn patrol staff to 70(currently at 52) and not responding to some calls for service or combinations thereof.
Is it any wonder Hatch/Council dont want to bother with this report? If it came back to their advantage, anyone doubt for a second they would be jamming down our throats?
Wow I nearly forgot...where does the 125 officers come from? Straight from the council,Riggy, et al...remember the daily pilot article where Monahan had diarrhea of the mouth? This was the sounding of the horn that led to numerous officers to start testing elsewhere..
125 puts them at the 1-1.1 officers per 1,000 residents...a truly faulty system which does not take into account our communities issues, needs, culture, and service demands. It does not account for a huge daily business population boom, a huge illegal,undocumented resident population, the large transient population, the substantial hotel dweller population (that would include your sex registrants, parolees, probationers, dopers, the almost 100 half way houses (with more of the above and addicts as well) and well over 300 alcohol serving establishments inside of 16 square miles.
Finally and probably most importantly, going to 125 eliminates the vast majority of officers with less than 5 years on. Why is that important? Because they are not yet VESTED in PERS and would be cashed out, thus no long term liability.
People wake up! Public safety is being compromised for ideaology! They refuse to acknowledge in house experts, interim experts brought in (Chief Staveley) and now even their own carefully selected consultants.
Crime is and will continue to go up. Citizens are being victimized, quality of life is going down, officers are going to be hurt. City Council had better stand by for medical retirements for injured officers and lawsuits from families of dead crooks because of their staffing levels. When officers no longer readily have help available, you have created a license to kill.
If the council does not trust the employees, their own ceo and Police Chief, then really what's the point? Just get rid of the last remaining director (Naghavi)end Hatch's contract and give him his 9 month severance pay, hand pick their own police chief,ceo,fire chief,development services director and whomever else and there you have it...A city of over 100k fully controlled by 2 councilmen. A bigger version of the city of Bell
It is understandable where the 136 sworn officers number came from. Management Partners did an analysis of the department based on calls for service, population, type of crimes, and numerous other factors. They concluded that in order to maintain a high level of service while still being able to cut costs the department could reduce the sworn number of officers to as low as 136. Hatch was asked if the the report recommending the "125" number was put together by him. He said it was. He was then asked where he got "125" from. Hatch stumbled over his words and was then muttered that it wasn't his number. When pressed again about where the number came from Hatch eventually said it came from "the community." Hatch, unable to back himself out of a corner, was asked who in the community. Hatch eventually gave in and said the the 125 number came from members of the council. So an arbitrary multiplier was used by Righeimer to come up with 125 sworn officers who then told Hatch to set the number of sworn officers at that number. Hatch proved that he is not his own man and is merely a pawn in a game of politics. Very disappointing...
Furthermore, it is also apparent, based on the fact that Hatch obviously took orders from Righeimer on what his [Hatch's] restructuring plan for the PD should say, that Righeimer & Co. are using Hatch as their fall guy. Hatch is being made out to be the bad guy in this situation because he is the one who put the 125 number as his recommendation in his report. Righeimer & Co. will point the finger at Hatch and say he [Hatch] was the one who had a consultant's report done and recommended the 125 number. That way if this goes south on the council, then Hatch will be the one who is taking the heat and the fall. Word is Righeimer & Co. are going to force Hatch out. Then guess who will take his spot? Mensinger. I guess that explains why the title of City Manager was changed to City CEO...because Mensinger doesn't have the credentials to be a city manager but he does have the credentials to be a CEO. Talk about dirty...
North of Victoria Rick- isn't transparency great? These clowns have never been more transparent...I think you're absolutely right, Mensinger will again be appointed to CEO when his (Foley's) term ends, hope Hatch is planning ahead...
I also think Monahan has had about enough of being their punching bag, wont be too long til he's stepping down as mayor and Riggy steps in...Gary won't leave completely tho, the full pop benefits are too much for him to walk away from...
Colon will get appointed as well when Riggy gets propped up to the big leagues...than Riggy can move somewhere else he'd rather be and get lost in the Sacramento crowd...
In the meantime he will completely have ruined our city and left devastation in his wake.
Jimmy will continue to be the minor league player/fluffer he is...
This is all about GOP votes, union busting, and back scratching by putting friends/cronies into pivotal positions and money to be made...
Final prediction: Riggy and pals are developers and all about money. Anyone think he's not benefitting somehow by the development in the area of Harbor and Gisler? My bet: he's gonna try and force businesses out (ie: Vagabond Inn/Motel 6 specifically)under the guise of drugs and prostitution. Hope he's ready to take on the Hilton on Bristol and all the others too...talk to any of the cops, specifically those who work any vice, and they'll tell you the vast majority of prostitution is out call (backpage,craigslist)and arrests have been made at all CM hotels...not just those he wants to bring buddies in to develop the property of...
union is still running videos claiming city is spending 7 million for city hall upgrades. How can you trust them when they actually spend money on outright lies? Also, any quilters out there, we have an opening, another one left (one retired last month after hitting 50 and is now quilting in a new circle while collecting from us)for another circle offering a less hostile glare of light in workshop
I'm glad they were able to put Hatch on the spot and get an honest answer. Figures Righeimer would be behind cutting the number of officers to 1980s levels. There is no person more responsible for upsetting the balance of our council and making such horrible decisions for Costa Mesa than that guy.
I'm proud to say I live in Costa Mesa and that it's not an outsourced city like Stanton. What happened to city council men and women that were proud of our city and the fact we have our own police department and fire department and city employees?
That's how our council used to be until he came along. We used to have the In n Out Burger of city government (high quality, high moral, very little outsourcing and conservative). Now we are going to have some cheap generic and corporate sad excuse for city government (low quality, low moral, everything outsourced, and neo-conservative).
If Riggy was running a corporation, he would make sure they outsourced to China and India and hired illegal immigrants and claim he was America's savior and a model for neo-conservative ideology everywhere.
How smart do you have to be to figure out that 1980's income calls for 1980's expenses?
The answer: Apparently smarter than those leaving comments on this blog today.
Hatch failed miserably at the meeting. He made proposals and didn't have a clue why. He had no answers to his OWN ideas. I actually felt kind of sorry for him. He will be replaced by Mensy as soon as the term is up.
I probably have the best budget fixer ever....Bring in the producers of the OC Housewives and sell them THIS fiasco.
It has all the makings of a hit. Action, drugs, comedy, backdoor deals, and deception all taking place in a City with little or no law enforcement presence. The cops will end up taking reports that the recently fired civilians once took!
Brilliant! I can't wait to watch it...
Oooops, my bad....It's already on CMTV for free every Tuesday!
Rumor has it that Rig is very unhappy Hatch released the report to the officers before it was released to the council. Further, Rig has made it very clear to some he wants the PD to be at 125 officers. I guess we will see. My question is will anyone seriously question why the city paid for a consultants report ($35,000-$50,000) and then ignore the conclusions? Even Hatch ignored the conclusions and is recommending 131 officers instead of 136. Remember, Management Partners included a retired police chief with over 3 decades experience in law enforcement. The only answer can be politics.
The following is fact, not rumor. Interim Chief of Police Staveley was asked and/or told to leave the oral interview panel for the next chief for CMPD. Could it be they are intent on ignoring another person they hired for advice? Common sense seems to point to this being the case. Unbelievable.
In response to Max:
Actually Riggy would be the manager at Walmart who hires new employees at minimum wage and hands them a packet with information on how to collect food stamps and other government aid. And we should be giving tax breaks to those corporate clowns?
I would like to know where I can bet on when the first big negligence lawsuit will occur. Has anyone set up the pool in their garage?
In case you've wondered just what a "spinmeister" does to earn his wages, take a look at the first paragraph from the city’s “INTERIM DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS,” Bill Lobdell, about the restructuring of the Police Department.
When I first read it – scanned it actually, not studied it – I thought they were claiming to maintain “comparable levels of service” in spite of the large cuts to the PD. This is crazy talk, I thought, since you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Here’s the paragraph:
"City Chief Executive Officer Tom Hatch released today a preliminary organizational restructuring plan for the Costa Mesa Police Department to City Council members for their review. The plan would save the City $1.35 million annually while maintaining comparable levels of service hours."
Closer inspection reveals that all he’s claiming is comparable service hours not service levels.
I don’t know enough about Police operations to go through the proposed restructuring to ascertain whether or not IDOC Lobdell is trying to snow us. But one thing I know is that press releases are carefully sculpted to create a favorable effect for the issuing agency. Think of the years of Enron and Bernie Madoff press releases that painted pleasant and reassuring pictures before the roofs fell in.
What I need to know as a resident and homeowner is what the level of service is going to be. Levels of "hours" doesn’t mean squat to me.
(BTW, extra credit for you if you detected that I slanted this comment to cast a negative light on Mr. Lobdell's creative product.)
the major point that has been lost in all these comments is that the union negotiated unsustainable pay and benefits and we have had no money to pay for other things in the community. Also, other OC cities are making cuts and revising pensions as well as cities throughout CA. What makes Rigde, Genis, Leffler, et al think we are immune to this? The outright lies spun by the union? Time to renegotiate folks, without demanding recision of pink slips. Two months and no one at the table? Where is Nick B? City employees: do what you can to get rid of this guy, he is doing nothing to save your jobs and is instead spending time trying to alienate the council with his campaign of lies. This is not a good negotiating tactic. It's worse than the police campaigning against Righeimer knowing he would win but willing to smear him anyway. Not a good move. Read some books on negotiations fellas. It was easy in the past but times have changed and it is time to step your game up. Seems the council started the negotiations with pink slips. Now it is time for your response (other than videos full of lies featuring the same old six or so people who agree with you). Offer a five percent pay cut, see what happens. Maybe settle on 7 per cent. It is better than being unemployed as many in the private sector are. It's rough out here, you got it good but don't know it apparently.
Tom, you are right on when you talk of Lobdell spinning the truth. If you look at the 2nd paragraph of the press release you read the following: In exchange, position for 12 sworn officers and one non sworn commander would be eliminated likely through attrition. That is only partly true. The commander is retiring in Oct. The others I would guess are gone as soon as they can get the 30day notices out to them. This CC isn't going to wait until Oct. And I would also say that we are going down to 125 not 130-131. They have cut open the PD and will not stop until they haven gutted it. They are not listening to anyone, the management company, Chief Staveley report, all for show. I am sure that Hatch didn't kick Staveley off the hiring board on his own. There will be all kinds of police services that are going to be cut. Not by the PD choice.
Rumor has it that Naghavi days are numbered. He is really not needed since there are already competent managers in the three divisions he oversees. It would save the City over $200,000 if he was let go.
unionquiltersforleece, I love it when you post as I get to roll out the true facts. Fact, only Brea PD and the OC Sheriff's have agreed to pension reform in the way of a tiered retirement plan for new hires only. Fact, CMPD officers proposed the tiered retirement to the city in June of 2010. The city ignored it, then flat out refused it. Not the cops fault as they can't force it on the city. Fact, CMPD officers are paying 5% of the cost while Brea only recently agreed to 2.25% of the cost this year and 5% next year. Fact, this means CMPD officers are one of only 3 agencies in the county with pension reform. Instead of demonizing them you should be applauding them. Fact, 3 out of the 5 council persons agreed to the contract last year, this includes Gary Monahan. Fact, the agreed to contract was a counterproposal from the city meaning the city took the presented contract to the officers, the officers agreed, the council voted for it and the rest is history. Bottom line is you get what you pay for. Don't expect a Ferrari if you only have money for a Hyundai.
Doomsday, Naghavi's department is the one that so thoroughly screwed up the street striping in the 1000 block of El Camino Drive in Mesa Del Mar. If you want to see the work of our unskilled, grossly overpaid city employees, go visit that block! I guarantee you it's an eye opener. The old striping is painted over, but still visible.
Even though residents complained like crazy, they still can't back out of their parking places without potentially hitting a passing car.
Wyatt Earp! You are my hero! Thank you for sharing the facts. Too many of these posts are filled with lies generated by the GOP, or CC wantabe's (you know who you are)...
i have never demonized the employees, I like them! I am just pointing out some facts. i guess you are a cop so you think it is all about you. i posted about negotiations for all employees, not just you and your gang. You confirm my statement that other cities are doing this yet council is demonized here for doing the same thing. i love it when you and your ilk claim the employees are being demonized when no one ever has done such a thing. it has always been stated it is not their fault, it is a revenue and spending problem. the demonization of people and lies come from union side.
Wyatt left out the part where Brea PD officers got a raise in salary during this last negotiations process where they agreed to pay a small percentage of their pension contribution. And their 2% at 50 only applies to future new hires, with the officers in backgrounds now being grandfathered in to 3% at 50.
Unionquilters...the cmcea represented employees are ALREADY ON A TWO TIER PENSION PLAN !
you have your head so far up the collective asses of the council and GOP masters you can't even hear the truth can you?
unionquiltersforleece...nice try. You and your folks have been blaming public employees for everything from the national budget crisis to global warming. Be careful you don't fall over as you backpedal from your first statement. You are darn right I confirmed it with fact. Your general statement in your first post gives the false impression every city is doing this and that is absolutely not true. Including CMPD, only 3 agencies in the county have done this so the correct characterization is that CMPD is at the forefront of pension reform in this county and would have already had the tiered retirement system is your council had chosen not ignore the proposal from the officers. That is the truth.
Again, you are thinking it is all about you and the cops. that is not what i wrote. i said all employees need to get negotiating NOW to save their jobs. we have never demonized employees, we have said it is a spending and revenue problem.open your eyes and read this before you post: my suggestion is about ALL employees, not just cops. I don't need to hear about the cops deal in Brea again. I am talking about ALL employees. You are alienating many people in this city with your stubborness and even though I am for the employees keeping their jobs I am getting tired of the name calling and lies from union side and almost ready to just say forget about saving jobs , this is an entrenched bunch of malcontents that have to go. Then I realize it is just about six or seven of you causing this battle to continue for some unknown reason. Just get to the bargaining table. As time goes on your position weakens. Good Luck to all employees and may the malcontents leave for all the other jobs that are out there with great wages and benefits.
unionquiltersforleece...so you acknowledge it is as much a revenue problem as a spending problem. Then why have you not been on here criticizing the council for refusing $1.3 million from the redevelopment agency? That money alone matches what Hatch's proposed changes to the PD would save. Further, stubborn? Every employee group has met every single concession demand made by the city going back to 2008. Let me repeat that, every single demand has been met.
Since we are on the subject of stubborn, let me give some facts since your posts are always devoid of any. Fact, the aforementioned failure to take the redevelopment agency money. That certainly can be considered stubborn. Fact, your city has ignored at least a 26 point proposal last year from the cops that would have saved more money than what the city countered with. That can be considered stubborn. Fact, the general employees have given over 100 suggestions for savings and revenue enhancements, all ignored. That can be considered stubborn. Fact, the city paid $35,000 to $50,000 for an outside firm to evaluate the PD. Hatch, while he used the study, came up with his own number of officers. Word has it Rig it not happy with either and he will demand a PD of 125 cops because he saw the number god knows where. This is stubborn on the part of Hatch and Rig.
You say folks are fed up with the employees...fact is the employees have been there every step of the way since at least 2008 to help resolve these issues. I know facts are inconvenient for you guys, but they are what they are.
it was a good move to not take the rda funds. they pay good interest to the city, why cash in? To "kick the can" down the road for four months and then that money is gone too.
unionquiltersforleece....there you go again with no facts and nothing but a Republican catch phrase. Interest you say? Exactly how much is that $10,000 a year? $20,000? Wow, stops the presses.
I am full of Republican catch phrases since I am a proud member of the OCGOP and believe in their platform. What is more disturbing to you, my lack of facts or the unions made up "facts"?
unionquiltersforleece...since you are so certain the unions make up facts, how do you feel about your boy Righeimer's made up and completely false PERS numbers (you remember, the numbers that he said were from PERS, then had to admit he made them up himself, the same ones Bobby Young had to admit in an open City Council meeting were just as likely to go down as go up)? How do you feel about Righeimer's made up budget deficit of $10-$15 million for next fiscal year (you remember it was not too long ago he was attempting to scare the public again with bogus numbers)? Consistency has not been one of the OCGOP's better traits.
As for the union, I have told them many times I believed their strategy was doomed to failure, but they chose to not listen. I also don't think the OCGOP strategy is a winner either. Everyone wants reform and their is nothing wrong with that. But the manner in which this council, clearly driven by the OCGOP agenda, is ramming this stuff down everyone's throats does not reflect well on them.
Post a Comment
<< Home