|
<br />#
<br />
<br />'"
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />The surge of momentum to reform and im-
<br />prove policing has been pretty well spent.
<br />Crime is still one of the nation's three or
<br />four gravest problems, but no longer a
<br />seductive political issue.
<br />
<br />and error, pulice tlepartnlcnts arc innovating in L1w
<br />cunservatillIl and deploynH-,nt uf resources. For ex-
<br />ample, questioning traditilmal strategil:s such as
<br />Hmtine preventive patrol, sunH-' departrnents arc
<br />experimellting with new patrol approacJws such as
<br />/l)arn policing and cOlTlrnunity.oriented policing. The
<br />goal of these departm~,nts is tu bring the polin' closer
<br />to the conlll1lulity so the COllllllllllity has greater
<br />cunfidence and rapport with the police and,inci-
<br />tlent<l!lv, can contribute usdul infunnation the police
<br />need I()r keeping on.kr and controlling crime.
<br />
<br />Many police depart/nents arc ath.'rllPting to train
<br />their otticers tu be sensitive and cfr..:ctive in dealing
<br />with family lights and neighborhuud disputes, com-
<br />mun occurrences which challenge the skills of police
<br />ollicers. For exanlple, an arrest as the means of break.
<br />ing up a family fight may be the least skillful ur
<br />helpful way of dealing with the incident. In sume
<br />instances it may be more ctfectivc for the police
<br />olhcer to seck conununity social services as a way
<br />of resolving a family dispute.
<br />
<br />As we seek to discern the uutline of what policing
<br />will be in the next decade or so, onc thing is certain:
<br />police will need better management, more n~sear(;h,
<br />and a cuntinued dedication to improving police-
<br />cumlllunity relations, particularly with minorities.
<br />The police must become even mOI'C productive anti
<br />learn to do more with relatively less because of three
<br />principal factors increasingly .itfecting the course of
<br />policing.
<br />
<br />The first factor is that the surge of momentum to
<br />reform and improve policing has b~'en pretty well
<br />spent. Crime is still one 01 the nation's three or fOUl-
<br />gravest problems, but I detect that it is no longer a
<br />seductive political issue. Unlike the 1960s, when
<br />crime first bccame a national issue, few pulitical
<br />leaders or appointed officials at the nationallevd
<br />are speaking out un the need to continue to wage a
<br />federally led and financed clfort to bring crime under
<br />control and improve the criminal justice syst('rn.
<br />Evidence 01 this is the vastly reduced budget fur
<br />LEAA. In the rnid-1970s, LEAA received about $880
<br />million annually; its budget for fiscal 1980 is below
<br />$500 million-dollars whose buying power has been
<br />eroded further by inllation. Symptomatic of public
<br />waning 01 interest in i1nproving policing and other
<br />areas 01 the crirninal justice syslcrn is that liule out-
<br />ery is evident about the serious drop in federal fund-
<br />ing of LEAA at a time, ironically, when LEAA has
<br />begun to achieve an inlTeased level of effectiveness.
<br />
<br />Other evidence that the momentum is gone from the
<br />IllO\'l'ment to reform and improve policing is avail-
<br />able at thc locallcvcL The poliet: budget is no longer
<br />saerr:d and, in fact, has r.lOt bcen so for thc p<lst sev-
<br />eral years. This is nut altogether a dcletrious situa-
<br />tion. Communities should not giv~' the police evcry-
<br />thing they want; rathtr, the poliec shuuld be llIade
<br />to be as productive as possiblc. Still, the fact th<lt
<br />police budgets nu lunger whiz through municipal
<br />
<br />4
<br />
<br />budget hearings does indicate that the surge of
<br />support for police change is over.
<br />
<br />The second factor, which affects policing now and
<br />seemingly will aflect it even more during the next ten
<br />ycars, is the need that most local governments feel
<br />for liscal austerity. Like other public services, the
<br />police will be forced not only to eliminate unproduc-
<br />tive practices, but also to cut back on some services
<br />that clearly benefit the community. If a police depart-
<br />ment has had a tradition of deploying two officers in
<br />a patrol car, that department may have to settle for
<br />only one oflicer as an econumy measure. (Police
<br />Foundation-sponsored research in San Diego shows
<br />that one officer in a patrul car is more efficient, safer.
<br />and at least as clfective as two officers, in most
<br />instances.)
<br />
<br />Police departments which routinely respond to every
<br />call for service mayhave to respond to minor com-
<br />plaints by mailing citizens forms to be completed or
<br />thmugh telephone cunversations. Fiscal austerity
<br />lllay mcan that many police departments may not be
<br />able to have as many sworn officers as they now do.
<br />Already, thmugh attrition and staff layoffs, some
<br />American police departments arc smaller than they
<br />wcre five years ago.
<br />
<br />The final factor of great importance to the decade
<br />ahead is the rapid growth of police unionism which
<br />began in the 1970s and which is almost certain to
<br />continue during the 1980s. Fifteen years ago, for the
<br />must part, only big cities had police unions and most
<br />uf them were fairly tame. No longer. Hundreds of
<br />cummunities throughout the nation are having to
<br />deal with newly formed, truly militant unions which
<br />arc making not only money demands. but are seeking,
<br />in some cases, what should be management pre-
<br />rogatives. The police should have the right to form
<br />unions and bargain collectively in order to obtain
<br />decent levels of pay and working conditions. Low pay
<br />and poor working conditions in the past were among
<br />the factors inhibiting the practice of effective polic-
<br />ing. But some police unions are going overboard in
<br />their demands and their tactics. For example, there
<br />are a few dismaying recent instances where once
<br />docile police unions in suburban counties have
<br />thruwn political support to candidates for office on
<br />the quid pro quo that, if elected, those officials would
<br />fire the pulice chief, or give the rank and file certain
<br />management prerogatives. Another tactic used to
<br />savage police management is a rank-and-Iile vote of
<br />no confidence in the police chief. The purpose is to
<br />create citizen dissatisfaction with the police chief.
<br />This tactic has failed in some communities, but,
<br />unfortunately, it has been successful in others,
<br />
<br />The challenge of the 1980s for those of us in policing
<br />and for city managers and other lucal othcials
<br />accountable for policing appears to be threefold.
<br />One, we must consolidate the gains of the past
<br />15 years of reform and improvement and make
<br />certain that there be no backsliding to the bad old
<br />days of policing. Two, the fiscal austerity that local
<br />governments apparently will face in the 1980s
<br />should be a prod to make policing more productive
<br />thruugh such tools as better management and
<br />more research, but shuuld not, obviously, result
<br />in crippling the basic police functions of keeping
<br />order and controlling crime. Three, unions should be
<br />accommodated, but they should not be allowed to
<br />usurp the functions of elected and appointed officials
<br />respunsible for policing.
<br />
<br />PubEc Manageml'nt/December 1979
<br />
|