HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-80-0458Joseph R. Grassie
City Manager
iNT'i!v c`��ICC MEMOPNNOUM
June 11, 1980
y-3
Manpower Needs of Police Department
act tititiv�
Kenneth I. Harms
Chief of Police Two
During the City Commission meeting of May 8, 1980, certain questions regarding
the staffing levels and service deliveries of the Police Department were posed
by members of the City Commission.
Determining appropriate personnel resources for a police agency encumbers a
combine of both tangible and intangible processes. While formulas for such
evaluations have been created, the major considerations are founded on the
historical relationship between a police department and the community it serves.
Unfulfilled expectations for service deliveries to the degree and quality. to
which a community has become accustomed serve to erode the sense of security
and confidence held by citizens. The fear of crime tends to increase as commu-
nity concerns regarding police omnipresence and responsiveness become a promi-
nent issue.
While I feel that the Department is currently meeting its priorities, I have
serious concerns about our capacity to withstand the increasing demands for
police service at a time when the public is equally and rightfully interested
in the quality and degree of such service. In the perception of the community,
the economic condition of the nation, though impacting on citizens and govern-
ment alike, is not a valid or understandable excuse for service reductions. In
fact, many citizens who prior to our current economic problems were disinter-
ested in the quality of governmental response, have, through frustration and
disgust, become more conscious of their rights to quality service and have
placed greater demands on the system as a whole. Whether it is delayed response
time, an absence of follow-up investigations, or waiting for a phone to be
answered, it has become apparent to me that the residents.of this community
expect a more comprehensive and responsive police department to be at their
disposal.
There are three major areas which should be evaluated in berms of determining
adjustments in the staffing level of the Police Department.
rN
Joseph R. Grassie
City Manager
Page 2
Manpower Needs of Police Department
The.first area, response time, measures the time frame between the time the radio
dispatcher receives the call and the time it takes for a police unit to arrive on
the scene. For 1980 to date, the average total response time for all calls is
just under 20 minutes. Additionally, we project that for 1980 37.9% of all
priority "three" calls, which are incidences of serious or imminently serious
injury will be delayed in dispatch. These are the most urgent service requests
and are the only dispatches authorizing the use of blue lights and siren. In
April of 1980, nearly 45% of all priority "three" calls were delayed. In practi-
cal terms, these delays are caused by our inability to adequately staff our
patrol zones resulting in the unavailability of patrol units to be dispatched.
We have observed there to be a relationship between total response time increases
and actual manpower decreases. For example, in 1977 there were 736 actual sworn
personnel on board. Average total response time was 12 minutes•. Currently,
there are 660 sworn personnel and an average response time of 20 minutes. Res-
toring our manpower to 1977 strengths would not totally remedy the response time
problem since during this period the calls for service will have increased 12•
to an all time high of 247,000.
It is difficult to make exact determinations as to the number of additional
personnel required to reduce the average total response time. Numerous variables
such as crime trends, population changes and service demands associated with
current and proposed commercial and recreational facilities will constantly alter
the personnel needs of the Police Department. However, the Radio.Patrol Section
alone would require 107 additional sworn personnel to fully staff all zones at
all times.
Shortages in manpower,.however, are not limited to Radio Patrol alone. The
Criminal Investigation Section is currently being staffed by 77 sworn personnel,
down from 101 in 1976. This has seriously impacted on the limit and degree to
which we can commit resources to "follow-up" investigations of criminal offenses.
Consequently, it would be unrealistic to assume that the allocation of additional
resources would be exclusively dedicated to the staffing of'all patrol zones.
The second area deals with the quality or depth of police service delivery.
Specialized functions such as crime scene search, community interaction, tactical
deployment, accident investigation and crime prevention have either been curtailed
or greatly diminished in an attempt to accommodate basic street needs. These
functions have traditionally represented the types of servfces which bring the
Police Department and community closer together because of the personal nature of
their delivery mode. The public has consistently indicated a preference for these
types of units, and many of the problems in this community warrant their existence.
Joseph R. Grassie
City Manager
Page 3
Manpower Needs of Police Department
The -third criteria for evaluating staffing is comparative figures for selected
U.S. cities. According to the 1978 U.C.R. report, the average number of police
officers for each 1,000 population for all U.S, cities was 2.5. Of the six
larger agencies in the Dade County area, the City of Miami ranks fifth with a
2.0 average; just above the 1.8 figure for Hialeah. The Dade County Public
Safety Department, with its announced intention of hiring 200 additional officers
will have 2.5 officers for each 1,000 population. To be on a par with the
Public Safety Deparment would require the hiring of 236 additional officers for
a total of 950 sworn personnel.
The resource shortages in the Police Department are not limited to sworn person-
nel. For FY 79-80, the Department has been budgeted for 247 civilian positions
of which there are currenity 35 vacancies. Since 1975-76, when the organization
was at its highest sworn strength of 807, we have simultaneously, decreased our
civilian positions by 24.7%. This has occurred at a time when we have increased
calls for service and a physical plant with computer technology second to none.
To optimally realize our technical capabilities in areas of records, computers,
communications, crime scene search and associated functions would require 65
additional personnel above our current civilian budgeted strength. This figure
would still be below the 1975 allotment but could be compensated by the fluctua-
ting number of C.E.T.A. personnel whose numbers are not included therein.
The 1973 Stanford Research Institute analysis of social, economic and demographic
indicators projected that to adequately police this community in'1980 would re-
quire 1,090 total sworn and civilian personnel. We are presently functioning
with 877 employees (excluding C.E.T.A.) or 20% less personnel than the level
recommended by the Stanford Research Institute.
The Rand Corporation devised a formula which incorporates several variables to
predict the number of sworn officers in any given city. The applied results of
this formula reveal that according to national trends, we would be expected to
have 813 sworn officers alone.
Based upon my assessment of both the measurable and intangible considerations in
this issue, I must recommend that at least 100 additional police officers and 50
additional civilians be added to our current budgeted strengths. We must also
assure that the hiring and processing functions of the Police Department and
other city agencies establish those procedures which permit, us to systematically
compensate for attrition losses and other unforseen circumstances.
I have attached for your perusal an addendum which more specifically outlines the
statistical and historical data relevant to this issue.
KIII : vs
8 0 - 158.
N
fA
'80-458
m
1w
1"
Vf
--1
n
N
J
CALLS FOR SERVICE INPORMATTON
of CALLS FOR SERVICE - This measures the number of incoming calls to the Communications Unit that actually result in a police unit
being dispatched.
p �a
CALLS DELAYED - Number and percentage of calls for service that M
n+
are delayed in dispatch. This is the time it takes the dispatcher :0,
to find an available unit. A dispatch is considered delayed if it
.— I
is not dispatched within the time limits for the corresponding
priorities.
BREAKDOWN
BY PRIORITY
CALLS FOR
CALLS DELAYED
o DELAYED
FOR DISPATCH
YEAR
SERVICE
FOR DISPATCH_
_3 ` _4 !
5
6
1977
221,024
23,351 (10.601
25.7 12.1
10.8
6.1
1978
2310 259
290, 961 (13.010)
24.4 13.1
14.0
7. 9
1979
237,706
39,354 [16.b0)
30.2 15.9
18:5
9.7
thnu 5/11/80
88,409
22, 010 ( 24. 9%)
37.9 23.4
28. 2
1 1 . 8
Projected'
1980
247, 002
61 , 494 (24.900)
37. 9 23. 4
28.2
1 1 . 8
A66uming
accu,tacy o6
r•tojection - 6.1uin
1977 thhu 1980.:
CALLS HANDLED INCREASED
- 11.80
DISPATCH
DELAYS INCREASED
- 163.30.
DESCRIPTION OF PRIORITY CALLS FOI.LO'.-1S:
f
Page 1 of 4
Calls for Service Information (continued)
PRIORITY 3 - One (1) minute dispatch limit. All calls where
serious injury has occurred or is imminent, is prefaced by a
"3" signal. c
r
•v
PRIORITY 4 - Five (5) minutes dispatch limit. All calls:
- reporting a felony in progress. �~
- where a felony suspect has been apprehended.
- reporting a felony which has recently occurred
and instant response may be an issue in apprehending
fleeing suspects or the preservation Rif a crime
scene.
- where a misdemeanor suspect (excluding shoplifters)
has been apprehended. o
- alarms (burlgary/holdup) H
-+
- misdemeanors in progress. Disturbances, fights
where assaults have occurred, or are likely to occur.
- bomb threats.
- D.O.A. - primary consideration given to requests when
cause of death is not known.
- possible injury accidents or accidents otherwise
creating hazardous conditions.
Park 2 of 4
Calls for Service Information (continued)
t
PRIORITY 5 - Ten (10) minutes dispatch limit. All calls:
- non -injury accident (blocking traffic).
- reporting a major offense (burglary, grand larceny,
etc.) which occurred sometime in the past and
•�
evidence of the crime has just been discovered.
- reporting a minor offense (petty larceny, vandalism,
rM
W
�~
etc.). Callers will be advised that as a convenience
to them, this type report can be prepared by telephone.
- transportation calls (shoplifters, etc.).
= missing persons reports.
- accident (private proprty/no injuries -but vehicle
with excessive damage (over $500) and/or blocking
vehicular traffic).
h
M
s
m
PRIORITY 6 - Thirty (30) minutes dispatch limit. All calls reporting
C, 1
-+
a'
disturbances, domestic/no assault, neighbor, landlord/tenant, loud
H
'
music, etc., with no apparent danger of assault.
f
INCOMING CALLS TO MPD COMMUNICATIONS UNIT
Calls that are dispatched only show a small portion*of the total calls
we receive each year. Each one of these calls has'to be answered and
dealt with according to our written guidelines.
Page 3 of 4
Calls
for Service
information
(continued)
1978
- 674,520
1979
- 804,203
+ 16.1%
*1980
- 820,000
+ 2.0%
Projected
based on
first quarter figures of 1980 for
total
incoming calls.
.A possible explanation for this is that people are calling the police
more often due to easy access as a result of 911 implementation in
February 1979.
f,
5/80
�, Page 4 of 4
PRIORITY CRITERIA
Priority 3 -
Dispatch within
1
minute
Priority 4 -
Dispatch within
5
minutes
Priority 5 -
Dispatch within
10
minutes
Priority 6 -
Dispatch within
30
minutes
1979
PRIORITY
NUMBER HELD
PERCENTAGE
OF TOTAL
CALLS
FOR SERVICE
3
513
0..2
%
4
11,021
4.6
%
5
24,445
10.3
%
1.4
6
31375
%
39,354
16.6
%
I.
RESPONSE TIME ANALYSIS
YEAR 1977
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
PRIORITY
DISPATCH TIME
ARRIVAL TIME
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
J
3
4
2.7
5.7
8.4
5
3.8
9.2-
13.0
6
6.8
11.7
18.5
AVERAGE
3.9
8.5
12.4
ALL CALLS
AVERAGE DISPATCii TIME - This measures the time frame between the
Dispatcher receiving the call and finding an available unit to
handle the call.
AVERAGE ARRIVAL TIME - This measures the time it•takes a unit
to get to the scene after the Dispatcher gives the call out
over the air.
AVERAGE TOTAL RESPONSE TIME - This measurement combines Average
Dispatch Time and Average Arrival Time to give an Average
Total Reponse Time.
1
0
RESPONSE TIME ANALYSIS
YEAR 1978
PRIORITY
AVERAGE
DISPATCH TIME
AVERAGE
ARRIVAL TIME
AVERAGE
TOTAL RESPONSE TIJME
3
'
4
3.2
7.1
10.3
5
4.9
9.9
14.8
6
8.4
12.8
21.2
AVERAGE
ALL CALLS
5.0
9.2
14.2
AVERAGE DISPATCH TIME - This measures the time frame between the
Dispatcher receiving the call and finding an available unit to
handle the call. "
AVERAGE ARRIVAL TIME - This measures the time it -takes a unit
to get to the scene after the Dispatcher gives the call out
over the air.
AVERAGE TOTAL RESPONSE TIME - This measurement combines Average
Dispatch Time and Average Arrival Time to give an Average
Total Reponse Time.
90
RESPONSE 'TIME ANALYSIS
YEAR 1979
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
PRIORITY-
DISPATCH TIME
ARRIVAL TIME
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
3
4
3.5
7.0
10.5
5-
6.7
10.3
17.0
6
10.9
11.9
22.8
AVERAGE
6.9
9.4
16.3
ALL CALLS
AVERAGE DISPATCH TIME - This measures the time frame between the
Dispatcher receiving the call and finding an available unit to
handle the call.
AVERAGE ARRIVAI. TIME - This measures the time it takes a unit
to get to the scene after the Dispatcher gives the call out
over the air.
AVERAGE TOTAL RESPONSE TIME. - This measurement combines Average
Dispatch Time and Average Arrival Time to give an Average
Total Reponse Time.
�gp
c�
t
rn
RESPONSE TIME ANALYSIS
YEAR 1980 - -
PRIORITY.
AVERAGE
DISPATCH TIME
AVERAGE
ARRIVAL TIME
AVERAGE
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
3
4
4.8
8.1
12.9
5
10.1
12.7
22.8
6
8.1
11.5
19.6
AVERAGE
ALL CALLS
9.1
10.8
19.9
-
AVERAGE DISPATCH TIME - This measures the time frame between the
Dispatcher receiving the call and finding an available unit to
handle the call.
AVERAGE ARRIVAL TI14E - This measures the time it'takes a unit
to get to the scene after the Dispatcher gives the call out
over the air.
AVERAGE TOTAL RESPONSE TIME - This measurement combines Average
Dispatch Time and Average Arrival Time to give an Average
Total Reponse Time.
no
m
EXHIBIT I
A dramatic indicator of the Police Department's
inability to meet the needs of our citizens is
reflected in our 1980 figures for Priority 3 calls.
A Priority 3 call (as previously noted) is one in
which serious injury has occured or is imminent.
In these cases, the unit is authorized to use
emergency lights and siren. We use a one minute
time frame as the maximum allowable time limit for
the Dispatcher to find an available unit to handle
a Priority 3 call. As the below chart wil'I indicate,
during the first four months of 1980, we failed to
meet this one minute deadline 38% of the time.
MONTH
January 1980
February 1980
March 1980
April 1980
TOTALS
NO. PRIORITY 3
CALLS
70
85
97
74
326
NO. DELAYED
DISPATCH
23
27
41
33
124 '
PERCENTAGE
DELAYED
33.0
31.0
42.0
45.0
q-M
EXTRAPOLATED TOTAL ARRIVAL TIME BASED ON 1% SAMPLE
HISTORICAL DATA - HOLD TIME PLUS DRIVING TIME:
22
260
PATROL
OFFICERS
21
265
PATROL
OFFICERS CURRENTLY HERE
20
270
PATROL
OFF ICE:RS
19
275
"
"
18
281
"
"
17
288
"
"
16
300
"
"
•
15
316
"
14
334
"
13
356
"
"
396
"
"
12
11
460
"
"
16 /80
p.POLICE PER 1.000
W I CRI'1E STATS.
i
I 1 A ' • �
_
'--............. � . /:J.:--
EXPUNNATION OF PATROL OFFICERS NEEDED FOR INDTCATED
t�
ri,'28/8U
RESPONSE TIME
Arrival and travel times are dependent on distance
of unit from call, the number of calls per hour and
average of number of available units per hour. The
number of units per hour is dependent on distribution
of handling times of calls for service.
Calls per service are random and independent over
any one hour. Handling times have been shown to'
follow a Poisson distribution* Therefore, the
expected time it takes an officer to arrive at a
call after the call has waited in a queue can be
shown to have a negative exponential curve.
The data presented is an extrapolation of such
a curve fitted to historical data which disregards
differences in historical call volume. -The curve
is consistent with a multichannel queuing dispatch
model.
The curve cannot be extrapolated beyond 22 minutes
or under 11 minutes without a significant loss of
data validity.
'Poisson distribution: a probability distribution used
Lo describe the occurrence of unlikely events in a
large nu:.ber of indercndent trials.
IE sjAJs.
v
CITY OF MIAMI POLICE PFR 1,000 POPUI.A-rION
As a base for our present population, we are using a conservative
estimate of 350,000. This figure was obtained from the City ofMiami
Planning Department and is based on a count of available housing units.
The last full study they did was in July 1978 and the figure at that
time was 348,700. The police per thousand rate will be determined by
suing the number of actual sworn positions. This figure was 660 as of
•;'May 28, 1980. This 660 figure includes the 46 recruits who are presently
in training at the Institute.
1.•.PRESENT RATE per 1,000 - How additional police officers would
affect this rate.
ACTUAL May 28, 1980
BUDGETED FY 79-80
+50 POSTIONS
+100 POSITIONS
+150 POSITIONS
+200 POSITIONS
TOTAL POSITIONS POLICE/1,000
660 1.9
s
714 2. Oct
a
764 2.2
814 2.3
864 2.5
914 2.6
2. REFUGEE IMPACT - From Mid -April to May 28, 1980,*87,429 Cubans
have arrived in the United States. About 19,Od0 of these have
already resettled -in Dade County. The Federal Emergency Manage-
ment. Agency is the source of this information. Of course, we
have no idea what the final total will be but for the purposes
of this report, we will use a conservative estimate of 20,000
i�.7t;� • 1 of 2
i
additional people within the City of Miami by the end of 1:1,R0.
U. S. Ii7migration states that at the present time, there are
about 15,000 Haitian refugees in the Miami area with the vast
majority of these people settling within our City. This figure,
also is rapidly increasing. Again using a conservative estimate,
we will assume that the Haitian population within the City of
Miami will be 10,000 by the end of 1980.
The chart below reflects what the 30,000 total refugee population
will do to our police per 1,000 ratio. These figures are now
based on a total City population of 380,000.
t
ACTUAL May 28, 1980
BUDGETED FY 79 - 80
+50 POSITIONS
+100 POSITIONS
+150 POSITIONS
+200 POSITIONS
28/80
TOTAL POSITIONS
660
714
764
814
864
914
Page 2 ,-!f
POLICE./1,000
1.8
1.9
:.c
m
2.0
a
N
•
.
2.1
2.3
2.4
4
CIVILIAN POSITIONS
For FY 79-80, the Miami Police Department is budgeted
247 civilian positions. As of May 28, 1980, we had 35
vacancies for a total on board strength of 212. This
figures does not include CF.TA positions which fluctuate
on a Dearly basis.
We have broken this study into two categories and the
below information was obtained from individual Section
Commanders' evaluations.
I. Assuming that all vacancies are filled, how many
additional civilian positions would you require
for optimal staffing?
65 additional Civilian positions
+ 247 present budgeted Civilian positions
312 TOTAL CIVILIAN POSITIONS.
•
s
m
Cn
—1
N
II. Assuming that conditions are favorable•for the civil-
ianization of a maximum number of sworn administrative
positions, how many additional civilian positions would
you require and how many sworn personnel would this re-
lease for street duty?
53 additional Civilian positions I
i
25 Police Officers Released to street
20 Sergeants released to street
3 Lieutenants released to street
2 Captains released to street
/80
CITY OF MIAMI POPULATION FIGURE OF 350,000 DOES No,r INCLUDE:
1 - 150,000 persons downtown (according to S.R.I. 1973) peak
DAYTIME POPULATION is 34% over census count. D.D.A. 1975
estimates 200,000 daytime population in Miami
2 - 5,000 new jobs per year in Miami by 1985 (Gladstone
Study 1979).
3 - 8,000 persons staying in hotels and motels downtown
(5,000 hotel rooms times 2 persons per room.@80$
occupancy).
k4 - 1,000,000 cruise passengers/year through Port of Miami
s
m
which has major expansion planned.
• a
N
It is estimated that the daytime population in downtown Miami MOP:
will increase 40% in next 5 years (M.P.D. Staff Study: Increased
Police Services, 1980) --
200,000 x 40% = 80,000
1980 daytime population downtown = 200,000
1985 daytime population downtown = 280,000-
Annual increase is 16,000 daytime persons downtown.
Ok
J, /80
SL•;.MARY DATA OF SELECTED U. S. CITIES
This data is based on inforriation obtained via t-elelnone
calls during the week of May 1.2 - 16, 1990. 'fof.al ri.ti.es
in survey is 36. Total Florida cities in survey is 12. '
USING BUDGETED FIGURES:
Average Police/1,000 Population - All Cities - 2.3
Average Police/1,000 Population Florida Cities - 2.3
MIAMI Police/1,000 Population* - 2.0
:z
m
Ln
a
To bring hfiami to average level of cities surveyed •(2.3/1,000) H
we would need 805 budgeted positions: !'
805 - Projected.Need
714 - Currently budgeted
91 - Additional budgeted positions.
*We are again using a conservative population figure
Ok of 350,000 as a b3..c. k
r
POLICE
}DER 1 ,000 D7,TA
AGENCY OR AREA
SOURCE
1-,nl,ICE/1,000 •,
MIA"fI
FY 1979-80 BUDGETED
2.0
POSITIONS
PUBLIC SAFETY
FY 1979-80 BUDGETED
2.2 ,
DFPAP,T;•;E`*'T
POSITIONS
ALL U. S. CITIES
1978 U.C.R. REPORT
2.5
• U. S. CITIES OVER
1978 U.C.R. REPORT
3.4
250,000
ALL CITIES -
1978 U.C.R. REPORT
3.3
SOUTH ATLANTIC
REGION OVER
250,000
7
cl
:z
m
CA
D
Vf
,
5/16/80
E
h '
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF POLTCE STRENGTH
.r
OK
6/6/80
Determining the overall manpower level required has
been a major problem for any police agency. The following
formula was obtained from a Rand Corporation Study and is
based on actual data gathered in thirty cities nationwide
by the Fansas City Police Department in their annual survey.
The formula predicts the number of police officers in a
city based on a number of demographic characteristics.
The variables used in this particular formula are: popula-
tion, area in square miles, Part I Crime Index, and b of
population under the proverty level.
Police =
-40.98
estimate)
+2.565
(Population
1000
-7.442
(area in square miles)
+.0095
(# Index Crimes)
-24.22
(% Poor)
Police =
-40.98
a:
=40.98
+2.565
(360,000) _
+923.4
1000
-.7442
(34) _
-25.30
+.0095
(37.180) _
+353.21
-24.22
(16.4%) _
-397.208
s
813.12
a
N
The bottom line on what this means is that given Mianfi's
area, population,
percentage poor, and Part I
Crimes, we
would be expected
to have
813 police officers
based on
national trends.
This formula is based on a permanent population of 360,000
and does not take into account daily downtown influx,
tourists, and the refugee impact. 360,OOOA's a very con-
servative figure.
If we were to use this same formula and inflate the popu-
lation variable, it works out that we would need 2.5 police
officers for'every 1000 additional persons over the 360,000
figure.
64
Olk
a
j m
---1
�n
LA N
OK
• t-
Ok
k,
Ok
CITY OF MIAMI CRIME STATISTICS
Based on the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Reports 1979 Annual Report, the
City of Miami experienced the lowest percentage increase -of
reported crime compared to 1978 yrarly totals for all cities over
1-00,000 in the State of Florida.
Miami
- + 6.6
Reported
Increase
Hollywood
- + 7.7
Reported
Increase
Orlando
- + 7.9
Reported
Increase
Jacksonville
- + 8.5
Reported
Increase
St. Petersburg
- +10.7
Reported
Increase
Ft. Lauderdale
- +15.4
Reported
Increase
Tampa
- +17.3
Reported
Increase
Hialeah
- +22.6
Reported
Increase
Nationwide,
the City of Miami
with an estimated population
of
360,000 has
experienced a
lower percentage
of 'reported
crime than
the national
average of cities
of similar population.
Comparison
of the City
of Miami with
other U.S. cities
reveals the
following:
NAT'L.
AVERAGE
NAT'L.
TYPE OF
CRIME
CITY OF MIAMI
FOR CITIES
OF AVERAGE OF
CRIME
YEAR INDEX
% OF CHANCE
SIMILAR SIZE ALL CITIES
1978 6,272
Violent 1979 6,825 + 8.81%
1978 28,588
Property 1979 30,355
TOTAL 1978 34,860
1979 37,180
4/80
+ 6.18%
+ 6.65%
+ 157. + 11!
+ 8% + 8%
+ "97. + 8
CPIME STA':I5TICS
Cormarison
of number of
crimes per 1,000 and Crime
Index
percentage
change 1979
over 1978 for similar size
cities.
CITY
POPULATION
NUMBER OF CRIf:ES
CRIME INDEX
PER 1000 POPULA-
%� CRANGE 1979
TION
OVER 1978
CiiARLOTTE
325,000
70
- 1.0
CINCINNATI
412,000
80
+ 9.32
DAYTON
205,000
122
+ 5.14
EL PASO
382,000
69
+11.98
KANSAS CITY
460,000
91
+11.49
LOUISVILLE
326,000
57
- 1.87
MIAMI
355,000
105 �
+ 6.65
MINNEAPOLIS
361,000
88
+ 6.10
NASHVILLE
486,000
58
+ 8.19
OAKLAND
328,000
125
+ 6.21
OKLAHOMA CITY
382,000
88
+21.4
OMAHA
382,000
64
+13.48
PITTSBURG
45.8,000
61
+ 4.41
PORTLAND
384,000
93
+ 1.30
TAMPA
273,000
116
17.3
TOLEDO
365,000
89
10.85
TUSCON
305,000
106
+5.79
TULSA
352,000
77.
+10.86
Page 1 of 2
0
MISCEI,L'- .1EOUS
CITIES
t�
LOS ANGELES
2,700,000
95
+10.83
HOUS'TON
1, 398,000
101
+ 7.38
i�EW YORK
7,400,000
83
+ 8.89
OTHER FLORIDA
CITIES
FT. LAUDERDALE
155,000
124
+15.6
HIALEAH
118,000
65
+22.6
HOLL11100D
120,000
96
+ 7.7
JACY.SOWILLE
590,000
73
+ 8.5
ORLANDO
124,000
113
+ 7.9
ST. PETERSBURG
237,000
76
+10.7
Source: 1979 F.B.I. U.C.R. Preliminary
Annual Release
May '80
Page 2 of 2
5-YEAR MANPOWER STATS.
. .„
i
MIAMI POLICE DEPAR'r%,IENT PERSONNEL S11OR'r GE AND SERVICE DF_._ %NDS
The issue of Miami Police Department Personnel is once again
becoming the subject of much discussion due to the number of
factory which include:
I - Expiration of the present register as of
September 21, 1980.
2 - Inability to meet demands in new hiring caused
by attrition.
3 - Increased demands for police services.
4 - Influx of Haitiian and Cuban -exiles.
5 - Rapid expansion of the Downtown Area and the,
problems which accompany such expansion.
According to a 1972 Stanford Research Institute Community Survey
of Police Services:
"...the quality of life (and economic dymanism) in
various and dissimilar sections of Miami could not
be raised (and,' in fact, would further deteriorate)
unless walking police patrols —were substantially
increased."
This admonition is as true today as it was in 1972, licwever, existing
personnel levels are forcing us to continue to cutbAck on basic police
services. The walking police patrol, as a basic Miami Police Depart-
ment service, is incompatible with tod i%'s !e,nands and re-tricted
resources.
Pages 1 ,
As a result of a 1973 analysis of social, economic and dr;norraphic
indicators, the S.R.L. hrojoct.ed that in 1930 the Miami Police De-
partment :could require a minimum of 1,090 total personnel to ade-
quately police the Miami coroiunity. We presently have 877 employees
(excluding C.E.T.A.) or 20% less personnel than projected by S.R.I.
as neded for 1980.
Interpretation of these statistics (see att•-iched report) would
indicate that we are having a difficult time meeting the basic
needs of our citizens. We have made (and will continue to make)
tremendousstrides in the area of community involvement. However,
we must realize that along with increased community involvement
comes an increased demand for police service. This fact is reflected
in the figures which indicate an increase in the number of people
calling the police. I am concerned chat while we are asking for
community participation, we might not be able to meet the obligations
that come with increased Participation.
It is imperative that•a new register be created as soon as possible.
This urgency also carries over to the recruitment program for
Public Service Aides. Human Resources and the hJiami Police Depart-
ment must work togeth•�r to improve our proc(!ssinq efficiency.
This brings us to an area that is of utmost concerti to the community the recruitment of quality minority pers,-)nnnl. Tno often the concern
is with putting boriics into thy.: program an.3 rocrui zinc has been
r
limited to within the Cit., o: Miami. It iL strcnr;l! urn; 2d that
}tutn,in Resources and t},,, Police Deuar1r:".ent combine re sOUrc•.s and
P j 1,, 2 o` 3
C campaign statewide for duality police applicants. it is-inticipat-ad
��� i ter
that 100 new police officers will be hired from the new r by ._
April 1981. These new officers should be the best we can gnt as
they will be police leaders in twenty years. By expanding the
recruiting area, efforts can be focused on locales such as college
cai;lpuses where qualified minorities are seeking careers. itie should
have the ability to compete with other private and public employers
r. for qualified minorities wherever they may be.
C
Attachment: City of Miami Police Manpower
5/7/80 '
cn,y OP
MIAMI Yoi,icr. MANPOVER
I.
PLRSONNEL
STRENGTH FOR PAST FIVE YEARS
--
-
-- --
t DECREASE
-
75-76
76-77 77-78 78-79
79-80
SINCE 75-76
SWORN
BUDGETED
807
7.K Ili 736 705
714
- 11. 5
ACTUAL
788
736 700 680
660
- 16.5
CIVILIAN
BUDGETED
328
;%1$ 3zz 238 224
247
- 24.7
•
ACTUAL
255
255 211 211
212
- 16.9
TOTAL
BUDGETED
1,135 i
e." It ILI 974 924
961
- 15.3
ACTUAL
1,043
991 911 891
872
- 16.4
'II.
SWORN ATTRITION RATE
- FIRST (7) MONTHS FY
79-80
October
- 4
February -
10
November
- 7
March -
6
December
- 14
April -
7
•
January
- 15
Average attrition
rate for past five years
is'six per
month.
Average FY
79-80 (through April) is nine per month.
c
Average civilian
attrition rate is. 3.7,per
.
month.
III. SWORN VACANCIES - FIRST (8) MONTHS FY 79-80
October
- 40
February
- 65•
November
- 47
March
- 70
December
- 60
April
- 77
January
- 55
May 28th
- 50 '
SWORN VACANCIES - FIRST (8) MONTHS FY 75-76
October - 42 February - 9
November - 6 March - 11
December - 1 April - 10
January - 10 May - 10
' *The 'f.i,gure of 54 vacancies does not include the 46 recruits
we presently have in the Academy. Fifteen of these recruits
will grauuate in June 1980. Thirty-one of these recruits
will graduate in October 1980. Taking into account the fact
that these recruits are not answering calls, we have an actual
vacancy number of 100. This figure leaves us with only 614
actual sworn officers, on board as of May 28, 1980.
Page 1 of 2
Police Manao•.:Ar (continued)
(e
cr
IV. TOTAL MI14ORITY R}PRrSENTATION (SWORN)
1975 - 21.1%
1976 - 24.2%
1977 - 30.1%
1978 - 30.61
1979 - 32.21
1980 - 38.1%
Since 1975, the Miami Police Department has increased
minority representation by 17t while suffering personnel
reduction of 15%.
V. FEDERAL PROGRAMS
5/28 /80
C.E.T.A. - As of May 28, 1980, we have 69 C.E.T.A.
employees assigned to the Police Department. All
.of these personnel are under either Title IID or
Title VI. The latest figures from Washington
indicate that Title IID will be cut by 23% and
Title VI by 90%. Cuts of the magnitude would have
a drastic impact on many of our a'dmtnistrative
functions.
L.E.A.A'. - Another factor that will impact on the
Miami Police Department is the recent move in
Washington to eliminate L.E.A.A. funding. Ih
Federal Fiscal Year 1980, we have a commitment of
$577,686 from L.E.A.A. These monies are used for,
many of our innovative projects. If these funds
are eliminated or severely cutback, the negative
impact would be substantial.
Page 2 of
(V
• RACE
W/M
W/F
B/M
B/F
S/M
S/F
Other
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
Police Department Sworn Personnel by Race/Sex
JAN.
JAN.
JAN.
JAN.
JAN.
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
586
564
536
494
468
27
31
34
32
34
73
80
78
70
68
10
12
11
11
11
80
106
104
101
105
1
3
3
3
3
0
0
1
1
1
777
797
767
712
690
TOTAL MINORITY REPRESENTATION (SWORN
1975
- 21.1Z
1976
- 29.2Z
1977
- 30.1Z
1978
- 30.6Z
1979
- 32.2Z
1980
- 38.1Z
JAN.
TOTAL
1980
Change
409
(-177)
31
(+ 4)
69
(- 4)
19
(+ 9 )
126
(+ 46)
5
(+ 4 )
1
(+ 1
660
(-117)
Since January of 1975 the Miami Police Department bas increased its
minority representation by 17%. (from 21.1% to 38.12) while suffering
personnel reductions of more than 15%.
Source: 1975-1980 COINS Reports
4/80
FEDERAL GRANTS
1.
Automated color photograph laboratory
$ 20,000
2.
Accurate Informative Message System (A.S.M.)
$ 65,811
3.
Data Access Radio Network (D.A.R.N)
$255,151
4.
Juvenile Offender Diversionary Project (III year)
$237,762
5.
Video staffing - related equipment
$ 22.897
�•
6.
Strategic Anti -Fencing Enforcement
$ 81,600
7.
Juvenile Runaway Project
$106,520
8.
Area Wide Crime'Prevention Project
$300,000
•
9.
Miami Police Health Maintenance Project
$ 73,089
10.
Systems Evaluation -Management Support
$ 76,104
11.
Miami Police Performance Project
$ 50,000
12.
Voice Protection Project
$ 50,000
13.
Comprehensive Traffic Safety Planning Project
$ 33,600
1r,
4/80
DISCHARGE.
OF FIREARMS BY MIAMI POLICE
DEPARTMENT OiF1(:=:RS
YEAR
NO. DISCHARGE INCIDENTS
% CHANGE
FROM
PREVIOUS
YEAR
1979
25
-30.5
4
1978
36
-25.0
%
1977
45
- 6.2
$
1976
48
-14.2
8
1975
r
56
+24.4
%
.1974
45
-25.0
1
1973
60
-11.7
1972
68
-11.6
t
1971
77
- 7.2
$
1970
83
Source: Discharge of firearm/deadly force report 12-12-79
4 /80