sr-092474-11c C!TY OF S?,PJTA MO;~liCA ~ J~
DATE: August 19, 1974
TO: James Williarns, City Manager -
,
'..~ FROM: George Tielsch, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Civilian Communication and Jail Personnel Study
Crime in the United States continues to increase. T1'ie greater
Los Angeles area and the City of Santa ~~ionica are no exception.
Police Department statistics show a 22a increase in crime
since 1966. (1)
For the year of 1973, the City of Santa ;donica recorded 6,631
Part 1 crimes and a stolen property value of $1, 446,452. The
monthly Crime and Clearance Report indicates that 1974 is ahead
of 1973 crime figures for this period of the year.
1974 {July figures)
Part 1 crimes 4,260
Property value $715,140
,973 (July figures)
Part 1 crimes 3,854
Property value $676,112
Figures are up even though 784 offenses were cleared by arrest
this :year compared with 7.31 for tfie_same period last year.
$1"39,958 in property value has been recovered this year compared
with $7b,873 for the .1973 period. (2)
Patrol officer logs recorded a total of 7.10,158 activities for
1972, 117,892 activities far 1973 arad 64,472 activities to
July 1974. {3)
Statistics reveal that crime is increasing evert though the
Police Department has an increase in offenses o7_eared by arrest
and an increase in stolen property recovery for 1974. The
increase ir. patrol activity, crime, and aa7.led for service
places a severe strain upon the Police Department to maintain.
its effectiveness at current manpower strength.
In order to utilize t_he full potential of all sworn po7.ice officers,
station duty positions were exarnined. In relationship wi_t.h this
study, 11 other police departments were contacted for infarmat.:ion.
Those agencies were Garden Grove, Downey, 'I`orr~:,noe, Inglewood,
Pasadena, Los Angeles, Burbank, Gardena, f7unti_=ic~ton Beach,
Culver C:.ty and Glendale. (4)
It was learned that all 11 of the agencies used civilian personnel
as communication operators, 8 used civilian personnel as jailors
aril 4 used civilian personnel in a front desk position. (4}
The reasons given for the use of civilian personnel in those
positions Caere: (1) Better utilization of police officers and
their specialized, formal training in relationship to their peace
officer status. (2) Civilian personnel requirements were not as
stringent. (3) Civilian personnel could be hired and trained
for a specific function and gather expertise within that
assignment. (4) Cost effectiveness.
All agencies stressed that this exchange of duties should not
result in civilians replacing police officers from the department
but rather as a supplement to the authorized strength.
Information suggests that civilian personnel could be effective
as radio communication operators and jailors. Police officers
should continue to be assigned to front desk positions. Police
officers can utilize their expertise in palice related matters
to answer questions from the public.. They would a7.so provide a
measure of security for the palice facility.
Within the area of communications, it is suggested that 7 civilian
communication operators be hired. This would free 7 police
officers for patrol duties. Within the area of the jail, it is
suggested that 5 civil.i_an jailors be hired. This would free
5 •,<,lice ^f `; f^ =t°^1 d• 12 ^1' ^ff' ^d
to patro7.Vduties would increaseythe~effectiveness ofLthe
Operations Bureau allowing for additional preventive patrol and
aid in quicker response time.
It is suggested that the civilian personnel not be hired for. a
simultaneous employment date. As the training of new personnel
would be "on the job trai.ning," it shou7.d be on a one to one basis.
In this manner the new personnel could receive the benefit of
proper and careful training. This process was utilized in the
establishment of our "matron" program and was most satisfactory.
Salary scales were gathered in the test cities and it was found
that the. average caas $706 -- 858 for communication operators.
The City of Santa 24onica has an established position of
communications operator II. This position is within the Fire
Department and its salary scale is $764 - 943. As the police
department`s communication personnel would have as much, if
not more, responsibility than the Fire Department, it is
suggested that the salary be comparable. It was on this figure
that the cost study for 7 positions were made.
Salary scales were gathered in the 8 test cities which use
civilian jail personnel and it caas found that the average was
$790 - 943. The City of Santa Monica, Police Department, .already
utilizes female jail personnel. Their salary range is $807-996.
As the male jailors would have sirnilar responsibilities, it is
suggested that the salary be comparable. It was on this figure
that the cost study for 5 positions Baas made.
The cost study figures .for police cfficer were based upon the
salary of $1101 - 1359. Total cost based upon 58% fringe benefit
package which included a?1 known casts. A total fringe benefit
cost for civilian personnel was established with the Finance
Department as 28%.
Cost figures for a one to one ratio of police officer to
communications operator for yearly salary was $13,212 - 16,308
and $9,168 - 11,316. A salary-cost saving of $4,044 - 4,992.
Cost figures which included a 58% and 28% fringe benefit cost
were $20,874 - 25,766 and $11,735 - 14,484. A total cost
saving of $9,139 - 11,282. Based upon these figures the city
would realize a savings of $63,973 78,974 by hiring 7
communication operatars rather than 7 police officers.
Cost figures for a one to one ratio of police officer to jailor
for yearly salary was $13,212 - 16,308 and $9,684 - 11,952.
A salary cost savings of $3,528 - 4,356. .Cost figures which '
included a 58% and 28% fringe benefit cost were $20,874 - 25,766_
and $12,396 - 15,299. A total cost saving of $8,478 10,467..
Based upon these figures the city would realize a savings of
$42,390 - 52,335 by hiring 5 jailors rather than 5 police officers.
Total yearly cost:
7 Communication Operators $ 82,145 - 101,388
5 Jailors $ 61,980 - 76,495
12 Civilian Positions $144,125 - 177,883
12 Police Officers $250,488 - 309,192
A total police officer yearly cost of $20,874 x 6.90 equals
$144,030. This figure would represent the cost of approximately
7 police officers or 12 civilian personnel. By hiring civilians
rather than police officers, the city acquires 5 additional
people at- the same cost..
The police department has identified 13 positions which could
be filled by civilian personnel to release officers for field
duty. Z position, parking supervisor, has been filled.
Consideration of tkae new positions should be based upon:
{1} The knowledge that crime has increased.
(a) 22b increase in cri?ne since 1966. (1)
(b) Projected increase of 47.5& from 1971 - 1976. (S)
(e) 11% increase since a.ast year. (2)
{2} Police Department activities.
(a1 Clearance by arrest, up from last year.
(b) Value of property recovered, up from last year.
(c} Revised Investigative Bureau for better efficiency.
(d} Speoial enforcement in the area of Narcotics
and Burglary crimes.
(e) Redevelopment of the Operations Bureau manpower
allocation.
' (f} Increased beach area patrol.
(g) Patrol units operate as 1 officer units for
maximum deployment.
(h} Community Relations unit (1 officer) and.
'"Ride-along" progra..~ initiated far more and
better citizen involvement and education.
(3) How much se-svice desired for oost to the city.
In summary, I would recommend the increase to the police department
by the hiring of 7 civilian communication operators and 5 civilian
Tailors. I would recommend that this hiring be on a gradual: basis.
In this manner the new personnel would receive tlae benefit of proper
and careful training. The transition of personnel would also be
made Laith a minimum of disruption from normal operations.
Finally, maximum benefit Would be gained to the city in the use of
its police officers and their training by this program. This is
evident in that the additional officers assigned to patrol would
increase the field officer patrol strength by 25.53x.
FOOTNOTES
1) Yearly - Statistical: Graph 196b-1974, by statistical officer.
2) Month_Ty Crime & Clearance Report - July 1974.
3) SMPD Wort: Measurement Log Recap Totals.
4') Comparison Cities Study Sheet.
S) Los Angeles Regional Criminal Planning Board, 1973-1974 edition.
i
TOPIC POL. Orr^F. CONLNI. OPR. JAILOR
SALARY -MONTH 1101 - 1359 764 - 943 807 996
SALARY - YEAR 13,212 - 16,308 9,168 - 11,316 9,684 - 11,952
FRINGE o 580 28~ 28~
FRINGE AMOUNT. 7,662 - 9,458 2,567 - 3,168 2,712 - 3,347
TOTAL YEAR 20,874 - 25,766 11,735 - 14,484 12,396 - 15,299
SAVINGS TOTP.L YEAR 9,139 - 11,282 8,478 - 10,467
12 POL. OFF. POSITIONS 250,488 - 309,192
7 COMMUNICATION OFF. 82,145 - 101,388
5 JAILORS _ 61,980 - 76,495
12 CIVILIAN POSITIONS 144,125 - 177,883
SAVINGS TOTAL - YEAR 106,363 - 131,309
o n n w ~, o cv r ro H y G c~ ~ G
H wG m G a G ~ a ~ O O a a m
m rs• w a~ rs n ro m w n E n a ro
~ k c a ri• o~ rr G a }•-• K ~ w rr a
ai m x a• m a w m a ro m w n
~ rs w w x ~ o ~ ~
n ~ ~
~ o N• rt
C n
m a
N - ro
0
W W iA ,R O O H tD W l0 N O G
.P tG
•. W ~.1 O:> O N
e O l9 N W l() }-+
O
O
O
O
O
O
lT1
O
O a
O
N
O a
(t
O O O O O O O O O O O O Q '..
_~ CA ~~
E I
J O
K '
N N N W N H N N F-" N ~'
'
6l Ol V ~ .A In O Ql N O W W .
p
W N O F°' W W iA l3l O N O N~ ro!
m '
h{ '.
~ !,
o O",
N CP
~ W H N N N N N N !-+ }+ a~
Ol l0 - W 6 lJi O tD W V N ~I O }-+
V• N ~ V ~ O O N 1D O -~]
f ~ ,
_ ~ ~
I ... ~
N .,.! O I
~ Tr
mm }a•
~N O
~ 5'~ p ~"
~ -a I
~ i
~ 'J 1 .., Y
rn~
w~
N K
io 73
~o ~
a oN• O
' O
'
~ O
' ww ~ro w
~ H N zJ G C9 G Z9 G o O t O
~ .rte C o . o . ~o . 1 ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ u, ro ~o o
1 1 a,o a Kw• Kr• Kr• a a> v~
0 0 1 I n t o a,rr a n a n a o I rt w a
~,ro ~ro o ~ ro I ~n fia ma rra n r~
vm om wrn wm am vim' to rr I O cr o ct ~o~' a ',
~ tq w K O rh ,p K cn ri co m 1'4 r• ty r• 1 H r• co m rf
. 1-~ . H x s/ . a, K a o o .p K ~
6l N ,7.i Ul ,7 '.3 ,`3
N Ul L7
G
N~ ~ ro
ro ro ~ N
ro ro ro w~ ~ ro no ~~ ro ro ro x I
o
0 0 0 1 }t rs o m ~• n w o 0 o cn
. n n mo n m !"
~ m ~
,~ }J ~ a
w m m N K ',
n Y ~
7
.'
O ~
v w (n v rt J rt O N K m a
''.
v4 t•~4 ~ocn d(D coa -.:a ai4 ~rnm Za o~ r•
aia ~a Nm a~rq rn. rn. da ro MK ro O ~ d a t-• !.
w r• ~K wC c~r• 1wC Gw 1 M
I N I 1~ C I N t O h' O O W O m m ~b K ta I
O O ! 1 m M 1 0 m 0 ~ O a ~'.
io r{ ~ K O ~ t7 o rn K t4 m f7 a~ G r~ '.
N d O hii O Yn N In N (t }q
N 1'+f lP . V 4f ~ !.
_.- O
't~
O O l0 l9 5--~ O lU lp O O O 4-' Y-
ss Ut F-' O ro O t-+ l0 Oi !-•' W O {' ',..
O ,F 61 N W O N !b N W W H nj
}t
1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 '.
zn i
}-' 5--+ F' F-' i-' N N N I-' N H W a
N GJ N !-•• ,P W F•• W N N N W N ',.:
-
O N O O' O CA U Ol J N V CO tq '..
Page 1 - 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
CONTENTS
Cost Study Report
Footnotes
Cost Figures
12 City Comparison