An Indiscreet Dog
How much police protection can Santa Barbara afford and what do we need to be protected from?
Thursday, April 28, 2011
LOCK ’EM UP: Just last week I called the Santa Barbara Police Department’s point man with the media, Lt. Paul McCaffrey, offering to conjure up a new crime wave or two. It would be one hand scratching the other, I tried to explain. We could sell more papers, I argued — even though they’re given away for free. And with city budget battle lines now drawn, the PD could use a fresh new crime wave to scare otherwise recalcitrant councilmembers — worried about a $2.7-million budget shortfall — into writing the department the blank check. Specifically, I was asking McCaffrey — a frustrated Russian novelist trapped in the body of a career public servant — for actual facts around which I could plausibly report the emergence of a new geriatric reign of terror. I envisioned headlines like “Grandpa’s Got a Gat!” or “Packing Heat with Pops.” Similarly, I was hoping he could provide at least one documented anecdote to support my intuitive conviction that Santa Barbara has become the birthplace of a “green-collar” crime spree, in which the well-intentioned are separated from their trust funds by a rash of get-rich-quick-and-save-the-planet investment schemes. Normally, McCaffrey is among the most obliging public-info officers on the planet, but he was unusually nonresponsive. As I would discover at this Tuesday’s City Council meeting, the fix was already in. The cops didn’t need any gimmicky crime waves I might invent; they were sticking with the tried-and-true.
Angry Poodle
At the behest of councilmembers Randy Rowse and Frank Hotchkiss, the council spent three hours hashing out various city laws routinely flouted by Santa Barbara’s swelling ranks of urban zombies, the transients and the homeless. While I’ve been busy not paying attention, it turns out, Santa Barbara has become the Black Hole of Calcutta. The barbarians are no longer at the gates; they’re already in our swimming pools. They’re drunk, they’re obnoxious, and most importantly, they’re chasing our tourists away. Fortunately, no one told the passengers on the cruise ship that docked here twice in the past two weeks. The answer, of course, is more cops. At least that’s what Jim Westby said, and he’s the most politically influential guy you probably never heard of. He played a major role orchestrating the recent conservative takeover of the City Council — normally a hotbed of rumpled Unitarianism — and will be running the election campaigns of councilmembers Dale Francisco, Michael Self, and Rowse this November. Francisco said the same thing — more cops. And to put a bow on it, Rowse termed the situation “a call to action,” adding, “The status quo is no longer acceptable.”
Obviously, there are a lot more street people on the streets. The vast majority just want to be left alone. Some are aggressive jerks. I’m not saying there’s no issue. But I am saying you can’t fix hay fever by acting like it’s pneumonia. That’s especially true given the city’s current budget predicament. At a cost of $100,000 a head per year, cops are really expensive. The only way to hire more — and that’s even more than the more cops that are already on order — is by slashing other city programs. It is doubtlessly true, as Francisco argued, that crime rates go down where cops patrol. But then what? When 86 percent of the inmates in county jail are awaiting trial on felony charges, there’s simply no room at the inn for public-nuisance offenders. You can’t lock ’em up. You can’t fine them, because they have no money. And they know it. In large numbers, they don’t bother showing up for court. And as City Attorney Steve Wiley repeatedly told the council, there’s not much anyone can do about it. In this context, what’s the point in issuing one new citation to someone who’s already been given 243?
Clearly, this will be one of the major lines in the sand during budget deliberations and this November’s elections. The homeless hawks on the council have repeatedly demanded to know why Santa Barbara can’t be more like Santa Monica, which has six full-time cops assigned to enforcing a tough-love approach toward street people. Santa Monica may be one-eighth our size, but it has a much bigger tax base and a much higher sales-tax rate. And its success at chasing away the “service resistant” has come at the expense of neighboring communities like Venice. It’s worth noting that the Police Department is already in the process of bringing seven new cops on this summer, and that they received no less than 1,700 applications. Council liberals — like Grant House, Bendy White, and Mayor Helene Schneider — have suggested there may be cheaper ways to skin this particular cat than with sworn police officers trained to carry guns. I myself have wondered if two black-and-whites were really needed to extricate a drunk from a bush or to handle a panhandler. And they jumped all over the new restorative court program, now in its first month of operation, as a hopeful way to get repeat offenders off the streets and into treatment. Aside from the council libs, City Administrator Jim Armstrong is clearly worried about having to hire so many new cops. In introducing the proposed city budget last week, he twice described the amount of general fund money going to public safety as “disproportionate.” He proposed hiring one new part-time cop (in addition to the seven on the way) and two street outreach workers to hook the homeless up with the appropriate social services. To pay for this, Armstrong proposed raiding $135,000 from a City Hall cookie jar that’s never been used this way before.
I have yet to hear anything from McCaffrey about either of my proposed crime waves, the gray or the green. I did manage to ask Hotchkiss whether he was raising the issue of the unenforced transient as part of a well-orchestrated game of political patty-cake. As always, he was brief and exceedingly to the point. “I’m not that smart,” he protested. Some people might tell you otherwise, Frank, but I’m not that dumb. At least not yet.
Related Links
Comments
At least Hotchkiss admits he's a stooge, but Westby already has three for clients.
EZK (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 8:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
But what, Nick, would YOU do about the homeless problem? Or do you think there isn't one? And then I'd ask what alternate reality you live in?
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Full of trite republican "tough love" jargon. Randy Rowse only brought this to the council to allow the chamber yet another opportunity to bully and beat up on those that simply cannot make it in their tiny little world of imperfect capitalism.
Vagrant O.C. council member Dale Francisco in his overt sect of conservatism repeated his disdain for process and our courts that result in constitutional civil liberties or otherwise known as freedom. And worse SNMP chat host and expert council member Dale Francisco has advocated for electroshock therapy. Self assured Dale Francisco is obviously the sickest of all these four conservatives. I don't even think he is American at this point.
Council member and car-hoarder Michael Self again suggested trying her mothering techniques on these adult homeless. Self has requested that those receiving services give something "inspirational back." These techniques she has repeatedly reported worked so well on her daughters. I don't know what would suffice Ms. Self but perhaps forced church attendance, reciting bible versus, a performance of song and dance? And I can' help but wonder about this nuttier than Sarah Palin mothers' techniques. I suspect her children may have suffered.
And thanks to real estate pimp Hollywood Hotchkiss, another B- performance, allowing himself yet another opportunity out of several in the last year, keeping this dire issue in the limelight. He proved once again that he has no answers, to anything. Worse with all the real estate he is pimping he has 'conflicts of interests everywhere and should recuse himself from just about every land-use hearing.
The chamber is sponsoring this bullying campaign and admit that they are "leading the talks." http://sbchamber.org/
The business community is seemingly purchasing a public relations "This Is My Town" campaign. The Police Department through the revealing and popular TV drama called "On Patrol" is commercialized and has narrowed it's focus on chamber issues, beating up on the homeless is now their campaign. That is what the spin-off MCA is about. This last Tuesday nights episode is part of that campaign. Again, the chamber is "leading the talks."
Perhaps the progressive political activist was correct in her hyperbole earlier this year that these conservatives would really rather just line up the homeless and shoot them.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
A new cop on the job really would cost the city General Fund way more at closer to $130 thousand a year for salary, benefits, pensions, overtime pay, equipment, and pensions.
Now that we know so well that cops issuing tickets for bad behavior is the only tool the cops legally have, and we know that the transients do not care if they get such tickets and flagrantly ignore them, then to enact a police presence with a cop on the street beat, that would be about a cop every four blocks or so, constantly, somehow to discourage the transients from sneaking in an aggressive panhandling incident, pissing on the sidewalk, or diving in the garbage cans.
So if that means ten new cops as Frank Hotchkiss has proposed, the city General Fund will need to find $1.3 million in new money, every year, forever. Maybe as Francisco and his little echo Lanny Ebenstein have argued, the city could eliminate all the city planners to find that money in the budget (because raising revenue would be a crime like in Santa Monica). As a result, with no planning and development standards enforced, Santa Barbara will indeed become Bakersfield-by-the-Sea, the tourist economy would dry up and the quality of life degrade, so all those panhandling transients no longer would have an incentive to be here. Nice plan.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So, is Rowse in fact going to be running for election? If he's not, Sharon Byrne is standing not so patiently in the wings, with upper Riviera, big bucks Westby strongly behind her, using the MCA as her election vehicle. It was odd to hear her talking about the lower east side, using the pronoun "we" -- she does live west of State Street.
Fwiw, DonMcDermott is increasingly boring with his repetitive personal attacks on Francisco. As for Self, she makes good points, tediously made, to be sure, about the value of giving back to the community for the help that's received. Not all are able to do so, of course, but it would be good for the community, as well as for the participants, I think, if there were a program in place of community service, litter pickup, graffiti wash off and so forth.
And I second John_Locke's question: what would you have be done, Nick, about the homeless/transient problem?
at_large (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 9:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We do not need more officers. What Santa Barbara and the Police Department need is proper leadership. Scam Sanchez cannot provide that.
sbsailor (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Fwiw at_large; In a dictatorship there would be obvious solutions and I think that is what the conservative block of Francisco, Self, Hotchkiss and Rowse are advocating for. But I would not be so harsh on certain council members except for their own hyperbolic personal criticisms at the podium. That is how they got elected after all.
And forgive me for forgetting to ask: Does anyone know how it is that Dale Francisco, who hardly worked in his lifetime, supports himself and is reportedly retired at such an early age?
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 12:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If that's an early age the years have not been kind.
EZK (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 3:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Isn't he in his mid-50's? This insistence on Francisco's demographics sounds a bit like the birthers' fixation. As for early age of retirement, wouldn't know --- except, of course, retirement comes earlier and earlier, with police officers at 50, various software types even earlier.
at_large (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 4:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Pretty clever of Westby ... he went up during the public comment portion of the meeting saying how unsafe the city is and how we need to hire more cops.
I suspect Westby's just trying to fans the flames of an issue for his candidates to run on.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2011 at 10:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I couldn't help notice, JohnLocke, that YOU didn't present any solution. Unless you think cops solve the homeless problem, in which case I'd have to ask, "...what alternate reality you live in?"
SezMe (anonymous profile)
April 29, 2011 at 1:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The nuance here is that Dale Francisco is pontificating about humans, many unemployable by our employment standards, with problems, without homes, limited sources of income. The vast majority are not causing problems, just want assistance or just want their constitutional right to be left alone and a little free speech. Many are possibly much nicer and perhaps even more deserving than Dale Francisco, yet he lords over them and even stands in the way of those more generous and trying to provide assistance.
Every breath that Dale Francisco exhales seems to be filled with political opportunistic hyperbole and disdain for certain humans not like himself (I presume a trust fund baby.) Dale Francisco seems a bit sketchy about his working years and does NOT appear to have worked for any length of time. I would probably be more forgiving of Dale Francisco except of all of the lording. Dale Francisco lives in a single family residence that is taxed at just a few hundred dollars a years and designed by Prop 13 to protect little old ladies from being thrown out of their homes. Dale Francisco home is the problem as it does not provide the tax revenues to support the services Francisco requires. His landlord reaps a profit while the community suffers under Francisco's supposed tenancy.
fyi at_large; Police officers that retire at age 50 have worked for 30 years or longer, donate personal time to their communities and maybe even served our country in the military prior.
Again I think it is important for Franciscos' constituency to question and critique all council members and especially these Dale Francisco, Hothckiss, Self, and Rowse types that lord over us.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
April 30, 2011 at 8:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Don, is Dale your stepdad?
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
April 30, 2011 at 9:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Interesting perspective from someone who actually lives downtown:
http://craigsmithsblog.blogspot.com/2...
Until recently, I too spent lots of time downtown as I worked one block from Paseo Nuevo (boy, do I miss the Greek Deli!). And as a kid, I used to work down by the Morton Bay Fig tree (a hotspot for the homeless back in the day). So I've probably passed by more transients/homeless than most in SB.
All I can say is I've never felt threatened by any of these people. Sometimes its a little annoying to be asked for change at the end of a long day, but sheesh, there are bigger fish to fry in this town!
That's why I see this as so much political theater.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2011 at 2:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The obvious answer is to cut police pay to reasonable levels. more cops same budget. The airlines went to a two tier system that never slowed down the applicant pool. Now they work for ten years at sub average
(less than 45K) pay before the get the big money, after investing tens of thousands just to be qualified.
Long past time we slayed that sacred pig...oh and commercial pilots are at the top of the most dangerous jobs list. Cops and fireman don't even make the top ten! Where's the justice?
sa1 (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2011 at 4:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The obvious answer is to cut police pay to reasonable levels."
-- sa1
A thoroughly meaningless statement. Define "reasonable". Reasonable to whom? How many stakeholders sit at the table? Who decides who is and who is not at the table?
SezMe (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2011 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Reasonable to whom?"
I dunno, reasonable to the average 45K a year county worker who probably won't get squat from the feds if they're ever able to really retire with little healthcare benifits cuz the pols and CEOs sold out they're jobs and tax base.
I dunno, reasonable to the un- and underemployed looking at the cost of their scam degrees while the H1B workers drive wage scales to the bottom.
I dunno, Reasonable in comparson to police pay in the rest of the US ~$55K
I dunno, reasonable in comparison to the cost of housing which has now degaded to 2000 levels. Back them down to there at least. That was the big boohoo the unions always used right? That's why UCSB has defiled the open space around my neighborhood...Been by there lately? Ugly and obscene and they've just started...
Here's an idea, how about we don't hire anymore police and instead outsource street patrol to some H1B Mexican and Chinese police.
sa1 (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2011 at 3:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Really, EastBeach? I am shocked, SHOCKED this is just fanning the flames of political theater!
sa1 is playing into that as well, advocating from Goleta that Santa Barbara should hire more police but cut their salaries and benefits to pay for those more police employees.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2011 at 8:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)