Special Public Safety Meeting

By Kathleen Flynn

Tonight, I will be attending yet another meeting at City Hall which will focus on public safety and policing. After the meeting, I will write a follow up story to post the details of what happened. I hope those of you who support our men and women in blue and who have been victims of crime will join me. For more information on the meeting, go to the City of San Jose website and see the announcement at the top of the home page.

The Mayor and City Council have spent years now listening to a small but vocal minority claiming that SJPD has been engaged in racial profiling, and unfairly targeting minorities. This group has put so much pressure on the Council that laws that were designed to protect us from unlawful behaviors like being drunk in public have been watered down so much so that I hate to see what comes next.

Unless and until more people start speaking up for victims of crime, supporting SJPD, and demanding the hiring of more officers, the real issues of lawlessness that face our city will never be addressed. Victims of crime will continue to fall by the wayside and remain without a voice.

Our under-staffed and over-worked police will continue to feel unappreciated, and our citizens will continue to be affected by increases in crime while criminals walk free. The small, vocal minority that fights so hard for the rights of law breakers will continue to garner all the attention and City resources while deflecting the need for change in their direction, and the hiring of more police officers will be put off for yet another year.

Please tell your friends and neighbors about tonight’s meeting and join me. Or email the Mayor and Council to offer your support of our excellent SJPD and speak out in favor of putting victims’ rights first.

Thank you!

Kathleen Flynn is a professional mediator and community activist.

Beat Cop Responds

Thanks for all the great questions. Keep 'em coming...

Karen:

When should I call 911 vs 311?

Beat Cop:

Karen, you are not alone with this question. I get asked this all the time. The best advice I can give you is: if in doubt ,call 911. In many situations, a citizen might feel there is not an actual emergency, like a fist fight or theft occurring at a shopping center. The Police Department would like you to call 911 in cases of any crime in progress or any level of emergency.

Calling 911 with a preserved, low level of emergency is not going to prevent someone from getting through with a “real emergency”. Calling 911 early and getting the appropriate police or fire response can however, prevent a situation from escalating and becoming the “real emergency”. 311 can be used from home phones only and is available for calls like music complaints, parking violations and police questions.

911 calls using cell phones are slightly more complicated. (311 is not available on cell phones.) Recently, a 911 cell phone switching system has been implemented, routing your cell phone 911 call to the local police agency whose jurisdiction you are calling from. This system is not flawless and often will default to the California Highway Patrol. Getting connected to the CHP while in San Jose can happen when you are near a freeway but not on it or when the system is not sure where you are. If you are connected to the CHP, dispatchers will make the transfer back to San Jose Police.

A sure way to get San Jose Police from the start on a cell phone is by calling 277-8911. This number will connect you the same way as a 911 call made from your home. You may want to store this number in your phone and put it on speed dial.

Proudly serving you,
Your Beat Cop

Crime Doesn't Pay, But We Do

By Jim Cogan

The title of this blog is one of the mottos that we have used over the years. It speaks to the simplicity of the program and its power over crime. This was a quiet month for Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers. We have 14 current cases under investigation, but only one closed last month. The one that closed was a great example of how crime doesn’t pay, but we do.

We received a tip drugs were being sold out of a house in San José. Police set up surveillance at the home and witnessed the suspect leaving with an accomplice. The officers followed them and were able to stop them on a traffic violation. After they stopped the car, they observed the suspects tossing bags of what later turned out to be marijuana out of the car. Officers recovered approximately half a pound of marijuana valued at $1,000, drug paraphernalia, and $1,000 in cash. The suspects will face criminal charges and jail time while the tipster will receive a reward. Crime doesn’t pay, but we do.

At Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers, we are proud of our impressive record of success, but we are also proud of the exceptional work performed by the men and women of Santa Clara County’s law enforcement community. Every year, we recognize their service by hosting an awards dinner where every jurisdiction is offered the opportunity to nominate an officer or team of officers who have distinguished themselves in the line of duty. Over the years, we have recognized heroes who day in and day out put themselves in harm’s way to keep us safe. We have honored law enforcement professionals who go the extra mile to get the job done, and it is our privilege to thank them for making us all a little safer.

This year’s awards dinner will be held on November 13th at San José’s Forth Street Summit Center. For more information, please call Councilmember Pete Constant’s office at (408) 535-4901. This is a great event that will show you why we live in one of the safest regions in the Country. Together we will thank the men and women who protect San José and all of Silicon Valley.

Jim Cogan is President of Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers.

Beat Cop: A Dangerous Playground

We all are mindful of predators that may be lurking near a school or playground. However, the Internet is a place where our children are playing much more frequently, and it is becoming increasingly dangerous. Some studies show that one in seven children between the ages of 10 and 17 will be sexually solicited online. Hate groups use the Internet to recruit young, impressionable kids. Studies show that anywhere from 20-70% of online children have been victims of some form of cyber-bullying. Many recent juvenile acts of violence have been linked to a cultivation of hate and violence online.

Growing problems from cyber-bullying are showing up at our schools. Disputes originating at school are transferred online and are fueled by unsupervised public humiliation in the online world. Results of cyber-bullying can range from depression and poor academic performance to violence on campus and even suicide.

Some of the 64,000 sexual offender registrants in California that are child predators have turned to the Internet as a new playground to prey upon. Most parents of child victims solicited online did not even consider that there was a physical risk to their children being online. We, as beat cops, are seeing more and more cases of child victimization on the Internet. Many cases in which a child had been victimized online only got to that point after a long period of interaction between the predator and the child.

These cases could have been prevented with the use of some simple Internet safety tips, like placing computers centrally in the home and using available monitoring or filtering software. Most computers have built-in parental controls in their operating systems and Internet browsers with varying levels of control. Service providers like AOL also have parental controls.

Start by becoming familiar with these safety tools. Learn how to check your computer’s online browser history. Next, invest in “aftermarket” Internet content filters, blockers, and/or trackers. This simple type of software is available for sale online and at local electronic stores. Examples of some are Netnanny, kidsnet and Spector Pro. These programs can filter or block content on the web. Social networking sites — like MySpace — and chat rooms can be monitored, and total time online or on these sites can be limited. Content trackers like Spector Pro can log all the emails, web pages, chats, and MySpace activity on a computer in an easy-to-use program, giving you a quick overview of your child's Internet activity. Knowing what your child is doing online and who is interacting with them is the key to keeping them safe.

Next, you should become familiar with the dangers our children are exposed to online. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (www.missingkids.com) is the world’s leading organization and partner with law enforcement for the elimination of online sexual exploitation of children. NCMEC operates a phone and online system to report any form of child solicitation at 1-800-THELOST or www.cybertipline.com. Tips are forwarded to the appropriate federal, local, or task force law enforcement agency for investigation. NCMEC also offers free online safety training at www.netsmartz.org. Also available are a variety of learning games for children as well as resources, videos, free CD's and presentations for parents educators and law enforcement. There is even the opportunity for a local presentation to be made at your school or organization. If the whole online world is a mystery for you there is a parents’ resource to explain all this mumbo jumbo in plain English at www.netsmartz411.org. Online help as well as free phone advice is available.

Your San Jose Police Department is working hard to keep kids safe online. The San Jose Police Child Exploitation Detail is a member of the National Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force program. The lives our kids lead online deserve the same amount of attention and protection we give them in the rest of their lives. Providing that protection will take some catching up for most parents out there, but the resources and help are available to you. Please take some time to consider what a dangerous playground the Internet can be and report any attempts of online solicitation of a child to the police.

Proudly serving you,
Your Beat Cop

Another One Bites the Dust

Two weeks ago on this site, Officer James Gonzales voiced widespread concerns for the safety of nightlife in Downtown San Jose. He wrote about our city's 20th homicide of the year and the dangerous environment created by supporting certain types of entertainment downtown. Officer Gonzales recalled the Ambassador's Lounge, a now-defunct nightclub that was shut down over safety issues.

Sure enough, earlier this week, San Jose police revoked the license of another downtown nightclub. This time, the axe fell on the dance club Wet, which saw 49 calls for service over a five-month period earlier this year, most of them for violent offenses.

Obviously, this is a hot-button issue for all of our residents, particularly those living downtown. Now, you can tell us what you think needs to be done. Pretend you're on the City Council and let us know how you'd protect Downtown. We'll repost the best comments in a later blog.

Have a good weekend, and stay safe.

The Big One

We received some news yesterday that we wanted to pass along. As you may know, Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico is a candidate for California Attorney General in 2010. Assemblymember Torrico has long been a friend of SJPOA and received our wholehearted endorsement over the summer.

Now, he has been honored with the endorsement of PORAC, a statewide organization of public safety unions, of which SJPOA is a member. This is a huge step for Mr. Torrico's campaign. and it's clear from reading the email below — which he sent to supporters yesterday — that he appreciates the significance.

——

Dear Friend,

The 62,000-member strong Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) voted Saturday to endorse my campaign for Attorney General.

I’ve always made protecting the public my highest priority. Many of you know my brother is a veteran officer with the San Jose Police Department, so this powerful endorsement is more than a political victory. It is a very personal validation of years of work standing with law enforcement to make California safer.

PORAC President Ron Cottingham was very kind in his remarks:

“Alberto Torrico has made protecting the public his top priority. He is the best choice for California’s top law enforcement official.”

I want to personally thank the men and women of law enforcement for their confidence and for this endorsement.

This is just the most recent success for our campaign. We reported the strongest cash-on-hand position among Attorney General candidates in July. And we are back on the road today – spreading the word and gaining even greater momentum.

Please stay in touch as the campaign continues to grow. You can join me on Facebook, sign up on my website or follow me on my new Twitter account. And please help us maintain our strong financial position by making your donation here.

Respectfully,
Alberto Torrico

——

You can click here to read an article Mr. Torrico wrote for Protect San Jose back in June.

A Rose By Any Other Name

By Sgt. Jim Unland #2666

When I say, “vegetable peeler,” what do you see in your mind’s eye? I’ll wait a moment while you get the image. OK, do you see what I see — a curved kitchen implement a few inches in length used for peeling carrots and potatoes? How about if I were to ask you what you picture when I say, “machete,” “sword,” or “dagger”? Each of these words has a distinct connotation and brings to mind a different image. When the average person communicates, he or she attempts to use precisely the words needed to convey a particular (and accurate) meaning to the intended recipient. Apparently, our local newspaper writers are more interested in conveying scandal than accurate meaning.

Several years ago when a San Jose police officer was confronted by a volatile woman holding a “bladed weapon,” he ordered her to put it down. When she refused, advanced on him and raised it over her head, the officer, fearing for his life, fired his pistol at her to protect the lives of those around him as well as himself. This “bladed weapon” was approximately 10 inches in length and resembled a meat cleaver. Reporters for the local newspaper continue to refer to this bladed weapon as a “vegetable peeler,” which the officer “mistook” as a cleaver. In fact, they did it again in Sunday’s edition, six years after the incident occurred. In reality, what they call a “vegetable peeler” is a cleaver-like implement with a peeler apparatus built into the blade area. To clear up any confusion, I’m including a picture of it here.

There is a very simple point on this matter which I believe has been overlooked all these years: it doesn’t matter what we call this thing. When Bich Cau Thi Tran made the fatal decision to ignore the officer’s demands, when she decided to advance on the officer with the item in question raised above her head in a menacing and threatening manner, it was no longer a kitchen utensil of any kind — it was an instrument of death. It became the sort of deadly weapon that could prevent that officer from ever seeing his loved ones again.

I was the supervisor on the scene that night. I realize I’m probably not the most objective person when it comes to this issue. But let me tell you something: to do our jobs effectively, we rely on people obeying lawful orders. If they don’t, people can die, and no one wants that outcome. If a police officer is confronted by a person holding a bladed tool and orders that person to drop it, they should drop it. That’s what any law-abiding citizen would do because they understand the consequences at stake.

Here’s a question that no one has ever bothered to ask: Why did Tran ignore the officer’s commands and go to a drawer in her kitchen to grab this bladed instrument when the police came to her house on a child endangerment call for service? Why this particular device? What was her intent? What sort of message could she have been trying to convey to the officers? I don’t know about you, but “compliance” and “cooperation” certainly aren’t what I’m thinking. There is no other logical conclusion that can be drawn other than her obvious intent to cause or threaten to cause physical harm to the responding officers.

I’m not sure why reporters for the local paper want their readers to have an image of a harmless kitchen utensil when it comes to this tragic event. Instead of the phrasing “an Asian vegetable peeler that the officer mistook as a cleaver” how about, “an Asian vegetable peeler that looks like a double bladed meat cleaver?” If I were cynical, I might think they were trying to disparage the police department or worse, suggest the most vile use of unnecessary force.

I’m not saying that San Jose police officers are perfect and never make mistakes. But I know this for a fact: not one of the men and women I’ve worked with for the past 21 years desires to take a human life. We got into this profession to protect life. And for the local paper to suggest, imply, or infer otherwise is the only miscarriage of justice to have occurred in this whole tragic episode.

Sgt. Jim Unland is a 21-year veteran of the SJPD and a member of the Board of Directors of the San Jose Police Officers’ Association.

Gender Bias and the Judicial System

By Kathleen Flynn

Does the judicial system treat men differently than women when it comes to child custody and providing legal representation? A recent incident has made me wonder. My neighbor came home from work a month ago to find his live-in girl friend of three years gone. She had packed up all her things and left with their newborn son. He had no idea she was leaving. Being close to both of them and Godmother to their son, neither did I.

After trying to call her to no avail, he came to my door in tears asking me if I knew where she was. When she wouldn’t answer her cell phone for me, I advised him to call the Police. SJPD came out and tried calling her too but no luck. We suspected that she was at her mothers in Visalia. SJPD called the Visalia Police.

The Visalia Police finally reached the young woman who simply said, “I don’t want to live with him any more,” and the Visalia Police left it at that. SJPD let my neighbor know that it was now a civil matter, and after trying to console him a bit they left.

The next day, I made several calls and got advice on where to send him for legal assistance. Since he lost his job over this, he qualified for Legal Aid. He went down there but they refused to help him, citing not enough staff. An attorney I know who works in the Family Law Clinic had me send him to a free clinic in San Jose. After several hours wait, he had to fill out his own paperwork with very little guidance, take it down to the court, file it, and wait another ten days until the judge issued a court order.

I had him call the DA’s Office for help. Their office was very helpful and compassionate. The clerk had him come down immediately and fill out paperwork, so they could assist him. I asked the clerk why the Police didn’t put out an Amber Alert when the child was abducted. She said she didn’t know but that the mother could not leave the County with the infant without a court order. She advised that once the judge issued an order he was to bring it to them immediately so they could track her down and serve her.

Ten days later, the judge finally ordered the mother back to Santa Clara County and set a court date for September 18th. The judge knew the mother was unemployed, living with her mother — who is on drugs and on Welfare with three other children — and had abducted his child. Yet the judge refused to give him temporary custody, even though he lives with his fully-employed mother, and has the means and will to take care of his son. No visitation order before the court date was made either. The DA’s Office has spoken to the young woman to notify her that she must return immediately, but she has refused, so they are still working to locate her residence.

In the midst of all this, I have continually wondered: Would they have treated her the same way if the situation were reversed? Would Legal Aid, attorneys, authorities, the judge, and the judicial system have behaved with the same disinterest they have toward him? If he had taken the child, would they have asked her if she beat him, or beat her son, or cheated on him? I don’t believe anyone in authority would ask a woman those kinds of questions.

What do you think?

Kathleen Flynn is a professional mediator and community activist.

Open Forum Friday

Given the popularity of our last open forum experiment, we're more than happy to roll it out again.

It's been a busy week at City Hall...

• The City Council approved a funding plan for $5 million in cost overruns on the South San Jose police substation, cutting back on other planned public safety projects like the regional driver training center.

• The Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity was back before Council committees with a quarterly report as they look to begin their study of police practices in San Jose.

• And Protect San Jose's resident statistical guru Ed Rast and the rest of the Sunshine Reform Task Force that he chairs made their Phase II recommendations, albeit through the middle man of the Rules Committee.

Let us know what's on your mind.

Beat Cop: Tag, You're It...

Did any one notice massive amounts of graffiti on buildings as they drove to work today? I didn't either, probably because San Jose has long made reducing graffiti a priority. Travel to any major city in the country and you will very likely recall tagging spread throughout the city where you were vacationing or on a business trip. Some large cities like San Francisco, LA and New York have even become destinations for traveling vandals. People traveling to San Jose can feel our community pride and have a sense of security knowing that a city this free from graffiti makes crime a priority. A business looking to relocate to San Jose surely will be influenced by tagging in the area of their prospective business. There has been a long standing partnership between city leaders, city services, community members, business, probation, courts and the police department to keep San Jose free from graffiti. Unfortunately, like many crimes in our city, graffiti vandalism has risen in recent years. Two San Jose Police Detectives in the METRO unit are responsible for investigating thousands of graffiti and vandalism cases a year.

Now the citizens of San Jose have a new weapon to help keep their streets clean. A little more than two weeks ago, the San Jose Police Department launched a new online graffiti reporting system. The new system is accessed on the department’s website, SJPD.org, under the Report a Crime/Graffiti tab. It allows citizens to take digital photographs of graffiti and upload the pictures directly into a police database. The reported graffiti does not even need to be on your property. Graffiti detectives track the distinctive tags and locate the suspects responsible for them. Having a database of tags allows for effective prosecution of vandals in our community. Once a suspect is associated to a distinctive tag, detectives can then charge the suspect with past tags logged in the database. Victims of the vandalism are reconnected and have an opportunity to recover the cost of the vandalism through the court’s restitution process. All police agencies in the county have signed on to the San Jose police-initiated system. Other cities in the state like San Francisco are joining the shared network as well. Citizens who are in need of a crime report for insurance proposes or who have suspect information can still call 3-1-1; or file an online report using SJPD.org.

If you locate graffiti on city property, you can report it for clean up to the city of San Jose Anti graffiti hotline at (408) 277-2758. Remember, by immediately addressing new graffiti, we send a strong, zero-tolerance message to the perpetrators. If you want to get directly involved in keeping your community graffiti- and crime-free, you can become a volunteer. The City of San Jose has a program to assist residents and businesses that need to remove graffiti from their property. Free paint and graffiti solvent is available through the San Jose Anti-Graffiti program at 501 Vine St. To pick up your free Anti-Graffiti Tool Kit or to volunteer to clean up graffiti, call (408) 277-3208. Working together we can protect San Jose from the blight and crime associated with graffiti.

Proudly serving you,
Your Beat Cop

Right Goal, Wrong Measure

By Ed Rast

Did you know San Jose residents and business don’t have sufficient information to know if our city is safe?

San Jose frequently quotes CQ Press’s 2008 City Crime Rankings as an indicator of our city’s public safety. In 2008, we were ranked 4th on CQ’s list of “Safest Large Cities in America” (with populations over 500,000) based on the FBI’s “Crime in United States 2007“ data.

CQ Press’ methodology states:

The crimes tracked by the UCR Program include violent crimes of murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault and property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft, also called “Crime Index” offenses; the index is simply the total of the seven main offense categories. The FBI discontinued use of this measure in 2004 because its officials and advisory board of criminologists concluded that the index was no longer a true indicator of crime. ….. The consensus of the FBI and its advisory groups was that the Crime Index no longer served its purpose and that a more meaningful index should be developed.

Public safety is consistently ranked as the #1 city budget priority by San Jose’s residents. With that in mind, maintaining our status as the “Safest Big City in America” is still a good goal. But once you looked at why the FBI discontinued its use of the CQ methodology — because it was “no longer a true indicator of crime” — you begin to understand a new measurement is needed.

San Jose’s city administration should not rely on CQ Press’s City Crime Rankings to measure public safety, or set city budget priorities or police staffing levels.

Developing additional, detailed crime comparisons for San Jose and selected large cities in our county and state based on the FBI’s annual “Crime in the United States“ report will provide the Mayor, City Council, residents and businesses with additional information to measure public safety and set police staffing and budget levels.

In addition, there are two public reports that, if published monthly, could assist in police staff and budget allocations and educate everyone about crime and related social issues. The public could then use Community Policing to potentially prevent crimes and also address the social issues that contribute to crime.

Phoenix’s Monthly Count of Actual Offenses Known to Police uses the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) classifications and definitions and is a more comprehensive citywide crime report that what is available in San Jose.

The California Department of Justice’s Adult and Juvenile Criminal Report provides crime and demographic data that could alert city leaders, city administration and residents to potential social or criminal problems such as the drunk-in-public arrest rates. (See Page 2: Misdemeanors - Drunk; Page 4: Adult demographics; Page 6: Juvenile demographics.)

Unfortunately, due to budget shortages, the San Jose Police Department does not have the requested staff or improved technology systems needed to replace it’s decades-old, inefficient manual reports and retrieval system. Either of these would allow SJPD to produce the desired reports I have discussed previously.

A Four-Year-Old Mistake

By Ed Rast

Did you know that after police staffing reductions in 2005, San Jose’s property crime rate increased 25%, causing us to lose our “Safest Big City in the United States” ranking after six consecutive years at the top?

The San Jose Police Department in 2005 was required by city administration to reduce staffing because of budget cuts. This brought police staffing back to nearly 1998 levels — though the city’s population had grown 10% between 1998 and 2005 — and forced the department to appropriately prioritize violent crimes against people over property crimes.

The 2005 staffing and budget reductions resulted in many property crimes not being prevented, investigated or cleared due to officer and police staff shortages. Property crimes increased as well as misdemeanor and financial crimes.

If you go to City-Data.com’s San Jose page and scroll down to he chart labeled “Crime in San Jose by Year”, you can see the increase in crime after 2005 in the eight categories used by the FBI to determine the safest cities. (Click a category to compare San Jose’s crime rate to national crime rates in a bar graph.)

Many property crimes like burglaries and vehicle theft are committed by habitual criminals who will continue to commit increasingly more property crimes unless prevented by patrolling officers or arrested after their crimes are investigated. But due primarily to officer shortages, San Jose’s property crime rates are on the rise.

For example, San Jose’s car theft rate first exceeded the national vehicle thief average in 2004, when 4,517 vehicles were stolen here. The rate dramatically increased after 2005 staff cuts to reach 2006’s high of 7,139 stolen vehicles. That and the 6,413 vehicles stolen in 2007 were both almost double the national rate. 2008’s 5,229 stolen vehicles — while a substantially lower number — still exceeds the national average.

Reducing police staffing in 2005 as opposed to adding additional police staff proportional to San Jose’s increased population was not the only factor in the increase in overall and property crime rates, but it was likely a very significant factor. The FBI Crime Report cautions: “Valid assessments are possible only with careful study and analysis of the range of unique conditions affecting each local law enforcement jurisdiction. It is important to remember that crime is a social problem and, therefore, a concern of the entire community. The efforts of law enforcement are limited to factors within its control.”

Crime will predictably increase during recessions due to unemployment, underemployment, homelessness, and reductions in government and non-profit social services.

Further police staffing or budget cuts do not seem to be in the public interest for San Jose’s residents or businesses, especially during a recession. These cuts should not be imposed in the 2009-2010 budget without asking city administration to clearly answer two questions for the City Council and residents:

1. Why have San Jose’s overall and property crime rates increased since 2005 police staff and budget cuts?

2. If proposed reductions to police staffing occur in the next round of budget cuts, what effective actions will be taken during this recession to prevent potentially increased crime rates?

P.S. Thanks for your thoughtful questions on last week's open thread. I will look to answer many of them over the coming weeks.

Integrity

By Francisco J. Hernandez

How about truth, integrity and consistency in news reporting?

I’ve lived in San Jose for all 30 years of my life. Born, educated and employed in San Jose. I’ve enjoyed living here (with some ups and downs) and have no immediate plans to leave. In my 30 years, I’ve read thousands and thousands of San Jose Mercury News articles spanning the Knight-Ridder era to the brief McClatchy ownership to the current MediaNews (aka Bay Area News Group) ownership. There have been excellent news stories and stories about the news. Lately though I’ve noticed a lot more of the latter.

I don’t know what it is but over the last three years I’ve seen a rise in articles that are biased against San Jose police. While there have been officers “spotlighted” for their accomplishments on and off duty (one recent article was about two officers taking enforcement action 20,000 feet in the air), the majority of the stories have been negative (use of force, public intoxication, retirement benefits, etc). The overwhelming majority of negative stories are about racial profiling.

I find it insulting when people make racial accusations as soon as they are stopped. People never pause to think, “Why is this officer stopping me? Was I supposed to stop back there? Is my music too loud?” or maybe, “Is my tail light out… again? I thought I sent in my registration yesterday… Oh crap, here’s the envelope…” Nope, some people jump straight to the racial difference between us. I’ve heard the “You only stopped me ‘cause I’m (insert non-white race)!” rationale more than I care to say. (The fact that I’m Hispanic doesn’t seem to matter because, in their eyes, I’m no longer Hispanic once I put on the uniform.)

To those who have used that rationale or plan to continue using it, all I have to say is, “Oh really?” I guess it doesn’t matter that I was behind you when you ran that red light or rolled through that stop sign. Or that I could hear and feel your music from half a city block away. Or that I noticed your tail lights are out or your vehicle registration is expired. Or that I can see that you are driving an otherwise clean car that happens to have “limo-tint” on all windows. You insist that I stopped you only because you are (insert non-white race), even though I can’t see inside your car and was behind you the entire time. As I walk up to your car, I only know that there is one person (you, the driver) in the car. I don’t know who else is in there or if they have a gun pointed at my head since the windows are tinted.

I’ve been in law enforcement for seven and a half years with the first five and a half spent on patrol, and I can tell you that the San Jose Police Department employs a diverse group of officers. Our officers are Caucasian, Hispanic, Asian, Pacific Islander, African-American, Middle Eastern. You name it, we have it, from Sergeants to Lieutenants, Captains to former Chiefs of Police. To say that SJPD is plagued with officers who enforce the law based solely on a person’s real or perceived ethnicity, as the Mercury News seems to suggest, is a complete insult. In this case, the Mercury News is also neglecting to acknowledge its own past reports.

In February 2007, the Mercury News published a front-page article about the perceived racial profiling behavior of the SJPD. The article was seven months in the making. What was the Mercury News’ conclusion? Its own reporters found no evidence of racial profiling by SJPD. NONE!

Don’t believe me? Here’s a word-for-word excerpt from the article:

“To move beyond the rhetoric, Mercury News Reporters fanned out across downtown on selected weekends during a seven-month-period, delving into the city’s nightlife from the perspectives of the police, clubs, and customers. In more than 100 hours on the streets, they did not witness racial profiling.”

- James Hohmann, Rodney Foo, Marian Liu and Leslie Griffy
San Jose Mercury News, February 17, 2007

So, what gives? Why does the Mercury News continue to publish stories about racist cops intimidating the public (i.e. minorities)? Why do they continue to suggest that the high number of minorities arrested by SJPD is a problem of racial profiling?

Apparently, the Mercury News has forgotten what its own people have seen (or in this case, not seen) with regards to the current accusations against the San Jose Police Department.

Francisco J. Hernandez is a San Jose Police Officer.

Ask Ed

Anyone who follows Protect San Jose knows Ed Rast is good with numbers, especially when it comes to public safety. In his regular Tuesday column, he's examined staffing imbalances between local agencies, wasteful spending at City Hall, and methods for modernizing the San Jose Police Department to save money and ensure the safety of our streets and neighborhoods.

Now, Ed wants to open up a dialogue with you, the reader. This is your chance to ask him all those questions that have been nagging at you...

What's the most wasteful spending project in San Jose?

What are the factors that determine "America's Safest Big City"?

Where do all these taxes and fees end up?

These are just a few examples. We encourage to post your own questions in the comments below.

Stay safe.

Technology and Officer Reports

By Ed Rast

Did you know that today, just like in 1960-70’s, many San Jose Police officers still hand write their crime reports?

San Jose has about 520 patrol officers who complete 1 or more crime reports per shift with each report taking 1 to 2 hours to complete. Potentially 1 to 4 hours (10% - 40%) of an police officer’s 10-hour shift are not available for officers to spend on patrol, crime prevention and community policing.

A report for a single drunk driving incident can take up to 4 hours for a police officer to complete because they must complete both a drunk driving crime report and an accident report.

Some police officers use their own personal computers to fill out the San Jose Crime Report (Form 2) Word document template rather than write a hand-written report, and then they print out the crime or accident report(s) since the current systems does not accept electronically submitted reports.

When each shift ends, police officers turn in their manual or personal computer printed crime reports to shift supervisors. After being reviewed, the incident, arrest, crime and accident reports are sent to the police records section where staff manually inputs the crime reports data into the current police records system’s crime and accident templates. The manual or printed crime records are then manually filed in one of the police records warehouses by the records staff

A well designed, modern, comprehensive police records management system would retrieve already available police dispatch and records information to quickly fill in crime and accident report data fields so patrol officers could quickly go back to their patrol, community policing, and crime prevention duties.

Recent San Jose crime or incident data is not easily available for 1-2 days or more after a crime or series of crimes occurs. Access to recent computerized incident and crime records would allow patrol officers or detectives to quickly analyze recent crime reports to determine crime patterns and dispatch specialized or additional patrol units with the crime report’s suspect or suspicious vehicle descriptions to prevent or solve multiple crimes.

Since 2007, San Jose’s 50-officer traffic unit has successfully used hand-held computers to replace the previous paper-based traffic citation process and improve accuracy in issuing, collecting and recording citations for traffic violations, DUIs and other violations.

A modern police records management system could be used to easily prepare crime, routine police, and requested police statistical reports, retrieve police record requests, and redact victim and witness information which now takes many staff hours or is not available due to staff shortages. Significant police officer and staff time would then be available to focus on further reducing our city’s crime rates to make San Jose a safer city.

We need your help!

By Jim Unland

In case you missed it, San Jose suffered its 17th homicide of the year on Wednesday night. With four killings so far in July, we’re on pace to match if not exceed San Jose’s rising homicide rates of the past few years. As you can see from this interactive map, none of our neighborhoods are immune from this horrible crime:


View in a larger map

I can only hope that if our city leaders had followed through on the staffing increases they’ve been promising for as long as I can remember, we might have been able to prevent more of these tragic deaths. Unfortunately, due to budget cuts and attrition, the San Jose Police Department has returned to 1998 personnel levels. In the meantime, the city’s population has grown by more than 140,000.

Despite being overtasked and understaffed, the men and women of the SJPD work as hard as they can to keep our streets and neighborhoods safe. But we can’t do it alone. We rely on members of the community to help by providing us with tips and information that we can use to catch the criminals who prey upon our residents.

If you have information that could help us solve a crime, you don’t have to worry about retaliation from anyone involved. Just call the Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers anonymous tip line at (408) 947-STOP or submit an anonymous tip online by using this simple web form.

You can also visit the SJPD website for information on ongoing investigations and cold cases, many of which have been solved with help from the community.

Thanks for reading, and stay safe.

Sgt. Jim Unland is a 21-year veteran of the SJPD and a member of the Board of Directors of the San Jose Police Officers’ Association.

San Jose's Understaffed Police Department, Part 2

By Ed Rast

Did you know that the San Jose Police Department ranks sixth out of Santa Clara County’s 11 largest cities in the number of sworn officers and civilian staff per 1000 residents?

Here’s how we stack up against the top five:

Palo Alto 2.55
Sunnyvale 2.18
Gilroy 2.01
Mountain View 1.96
Los Gatos 1.95
San Jose 1.86

The City of Santa Clara comes in a close seventh at 1.85. Note that total police staffing includes both sworn officers and civilian staff. For example, San Jose has 1.46 sworn officers and 0.40 staff per 1000 residents. Each city uses different ratios of officers to staff depending on local crime and budget situations, training and technology usage.

SJPD civilian staff makes up about 21.5% of the total force while many other local and large California cities maintain a staff that’s 25-40% of the force. San Jose has the lowest ratio of police staff per officer of any of the county’s 11 largest cities.

Our staff numbers are lower for a variety of reasons: consistent budget cuts since 2001; the failure to add staff over the past ten years to keep up with growth; and the decision to retain sworn officers in staff positions rather than reduce the number of sworn officers. It costs about $250,000 just to recruit and train every new sworn officer.

It has become very difficult for SJPD to recruit new officers while competing with smaller local agencies, but the problem isn’t just local. There is a growing shortage of about 7,000 police officers in agencies statewide. In addition, many older officers are scheduled to retire within the next five years. Reducing newly-trained officers (last in, first out) would only make San Jose’s future police shortage worse, likely resulting in increased crime rates.

San Jose’s overall crime rate in 2007 was 256.9 crimes per 100,000 residents. While one of the best rates among large cities with populations 500,000, this ranks us 13th out of the 15 cities in Santa Cara County.

Let’s go back to our list of large local cities with the highest police staffing levels and compare 2007 crime rates:

Palo Alto 153.5
Sunnyvale 138.4
Gilroy’s 340.0
Mountain View 186.8
Los Gatos 145.7
San Jose 256.9

You’ll notice that Gilroy’s crime rate is above the U.S. average of 320.9 while San Jose and other big cities in Santa Clara County are well below that average. This goes to show that staffing, while important, is not the only factor in crime prevention.

Higher youth populations, lower median income levels, less jobs per employment age resident (or underemployed residents), large geographical areas, and other factors contribute to increased crime rates.

In San Jose, community policing — including Neighborhood Watch and Neighborhood Action — has been reduced or discontinued. Specialized mounted, traffic and investigative units have been reduced, and overall police staffing is currently at 1998 levels despite a population surge of over 140,000 residents since then.

For FY 2009-2010, city administration proposed reductions to police funding and staffing for the eighth year in a row despite projected higher crime rates. Thankfully, the City Council did not approve the proposed reductions except that a planned 25 new officers were not included in the final budget.

Of course, adding staff is just a part of the solution here. Increased community policing and officer training, more officers assigned to investigative and detective duties (see Beat Cop’s blog from last week), and new technology for patrol and analysis can help to lower crime rates — especially for property crimes — and help offset some staff shortages.

In future articles, I’ll look at rates of various types of crime in San Jose and how increasing police staffing, technology and funding can prevent crime and help protect our streets and neighborhoods.

San Jose's Understaffed Police Department

By Ed Rast

Did you know that San Jose in 2005 had the lowest ratios of sworn and civilian police per resident of the 23 U.S. cities with populations between 500,000 and 1 million?

At the time, San Jose had only 1.48 sworn officers and 0.40 civilian staff per 1,000 residents while the average of those 23 large cities was 2.64 sworn officers and 0.72 civilian staff per 1,000 residents.

Mayor Gonzales in his 2006-2007 budget message directed the San Jose Police Department to prepare a Five-Year Staffing Plan to close that gap and deliver to the community the high-quality, innovative, and efficient police services we have come to expect.

It was estimated in 2005 that 597.5 additional personnel were needed — including 332 sworn patrol officers, 146 sworn staff in investigative, preventative and administrative positions, and 119.5 civilian staff. But this would still not bring San Jose to the 23-city staffing average.

Unfortunately, San Jose’s sworn and civilian police ratios have only gotten worse. To date, the City has added only 40 new staff of the 597 proposed in the five-year plan. A proposed addition of 25 officers in FY 2009-10 went unfunded. Meanwhile, our population continues to grow, and the police workload right along with it.

SJPD’s understaffing problems began with an economic downturn in 2001 and continued through eight straight years of budget deficits. For four of those years, there were no staffing increases to offset increases in population, development, service calls and administrative workload.

Officers were shifted from proactive prevention activities and community policing to primarily reactive Patrol Division calls for service. Limited investigative personnel gave priority to crimes against persons.

This shift in priorities resulted in significant increases in auto theft (111%) and burglary ( 52%) from 2000-2005. Increasing property crimes — as predicted — jeopardized San Jose’s “Safest Big City in America” status.

Staffing reductions in 2005 nearly brought the SJPD back to 1998 levels (1,343). But between 1998 and 2005, San Jose’s population grew 10% to 910,528. That’s an increase equal to an entire council district.

As estimated by the California Department of Finance, San Jose’s population increased 10.6% (or 111,949 residents) from 894,943 in the 2000 census to 1,006,892 in January of 2008 — two years ahead of an estimate by the Association of Bay Area Governments.

The long and the short of the story is this: We need more police, and we need them now.

Many residents do not understand how adding new officers, staff and improved technology like a proposed computerized records system as well as increasing — not decreasing — community policing activities can help our understaffed police department prevent, investigate, and solve crimes.

If you’d like to get a better idea for yourself, have a look at SJPD’s proposed Five-Year Staffing Plan for 2007-12. Police and staff comparison charts can be found in graphics 9 and 10 (or pdf pages 16-17).

Next week, we’ll compare San Jose’s police staffing and crime rates to local cities. Enjoy the summer with your family and friends.

Crime Stoppers Builds Collateral

By Jim Cogan

In many cities, community policing begins and ends with Neighborhood Watch. That is not the case in San Jose. Whether it’s ego or staffing limitations, there are few departments that offer the same level of commitment as the San Jose Police Department.

As President of Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers, I can tell you we enjoy support from command staff in almost every jurisdiction in the county. But the SJPD has fully embraced our cause — all the way through to the beat officers.

I have had an opportunity to witness the dedication and professionalism of the San Jose Police Department in ways that very few people have. I have seen our Liaison Officer hop on a plane and fly to Missouri to detain and transport a bail-jumping child molester or jump on a tip to arrest drug dealers. Just this spring, San Jose police apprehended a top lieutenant in the Mexican mafia by acting quickly on a simple parole violation tip they received from Crime Stoppers.

The SJPD has worked diligently to develop credibility with the community. This credibility helps the department solve and prevent crimes. Their support of Crime Stoppers has built on that collateral.

Two years ago, we assisted in solving three homicides. One was a brutal rape and stabbing. SJPD officers encouraged potential witnesses at the scene to call Crime Stoppers with tips in order to remain anonymous. The tips came in, and the murderers were caught.

Last month, we received a tip that a juvenile gang member had brought a knife to school in order to seek retribution from rival gang members who had assaulted him the day before. Our Liaison Officer wasted no time in going to the school. The juvenile admitted to the officer that he had a knife on him, saying “I’m not going to lie to you...” That kind of rapport is invaluable, and in this case, the combination of a Crime Stopper tip and SJPD credibility probably saved lives.

Our police department may not be perfect. There is always room for improvement. But improvement can only come through open and honest dialogue. The San Jose Police Department has endured an assault of criticism in the past year. Unfortunately, the few constructive recommendations to emerge from the controversy have been lost in what can only be categorized as a witch hunt.

It is time we recognize that we have a professional and dedicated police department that works hard to serve our community. Eroding their credibility will not make us safer. It will only make it harder for the police to protect our great city and may compromise the continued success of programs like Crime Stoppers.

We like to say, “Crime Stoppers works because of you!” It is with all confidence that I say Crime Stoppers would not work without the San Jose Police Department.