Priorities and Objectives

By Ed Rast

Did you know that 4376 criminal cases in San Jose were not investigated in FY 2007-2008 due to a lack of police officers and resources, up 70% from 2,574 uninvestigated cases the previous fiscal year?

It is estimated that 5,800 cases — or almost 10% of all cases received — were not investigated in FY 2008-2009. This would mean an increase of over 125% in uninvestigated crimes in just two years.

Estimates predict that 4,500 criminal cases will not be investigated in FY 2009-2010... even if the eight new police officers approved in 2008-2009 budget for Investigative Services are hired to improve case investigations and clearances in burglary and auto thief.

The 2009-2010 proposed operating budget (p. VII 282) states that these eight investigative officers could instead be assigned to “service demand increases related to annexation of County pockets within San Jose, normal population growth and the impact of proposed reductions to other police services.”

The State of California plans to take $75 million from San Jose’s Redevelopment Agency and borrow $20 million of San Jose's property and sales tax revenues to balance the state’s $24.1 billion budget deficit, which means that previously eliminated public safety staff and budget cuts are back on the table.

So how can San Jose city administration year after year propose cuts to police staffing and funding if public safety is the No.1 budget priority of residents, neighborhood leaders, and most of the City Council?

Because our city administration:

1. Does not have a clear definition of “essential city services” — which always includes police, fire and emergency medical services — to be used to prioritize budget cuts;

2. Does not link city budget items to clear performance service objectives* (see below);

3. Does very few city service and cost comparisons to other large California cities or local cites using national performance measures; and

4. Does not link staff compensation to the achievement of department-specific service objectives in the budget, which are linked to long-term city goals.

We will continue to see police staff and budget cuts until our city administration defines their budget priorities and expenditures are linked to clear performance objectives and measurable standards.

* A performance service objective is defined in a budget document from nearby Sunnyvale as “generally a two-part sentence, describing both the service to be provided and the measurable standard with which it’s results will be compared.” For example, here’s the police service objective from Sunnyvale’s budget: “a) Provide quality investigations to aid the District Attorney in the prosecution of criminal cases in order that criminal charges are files on 90% of the cases submitted for review; b) promote the safety of the community and an atmosphere of security, primarily through the deterrence and prevention of crime and the apprehension of offenders in order that the city remains within the lowest 25% of Part 1 crimes for cities of comparable size at a cost of $103.82 per capita.” Now that's specific!