Testimony by: Manuel M. Vilar Vice President Chief Administrative Officer Founding President 2010 -2015 Chairman Legislative Committee PCNY District 5 Delegate PCNY Legislative Committee Suffolk County Police Conference Delegate
Testimony before: 2018 Joint Legislative Hearing Committee on Public Protection
Date: January 30, 2018
Good afternoon Chairwoman Senator Young and esteemed members of the joint committee. My name is Manuel Vilar, and I am the Founding President and Current Vice President of the Police Benevolent Association of New York State and a 34 year veteran Sergeant of the New York State Park Police. With me today is PBA State Park Police Director Troy Caupain. Troy is a 17 year veteran State Park Police Officer.
The PBA represents the State Police Officers working for the New York State Park Police, New York State University Police, New York State Environmental Conservation Police, and the New York State Forest Rangers.
Our testimony today will focus on issues involving inadequate staffing of State Park Police Officers and the risk to public safety and the protection of over 70 million visitors each year at NYS 180 state parks and 35 historic sites.
Since Governor Cuomo took office annual park system attendance has climbed 21 percent from the 57.2 million visits recorded in 2011 to over 70 million in 2017. In a recent 2016 study titled “Economic Benefits of the New York State Parks System”, Prepared for Parks & Trails New York by Political Economy Research Institute states "that in addition to the many non-economic benefits, NYS Parks were responsible for total spending by local and non-local visitors to the tune of $4 billion, supported the creation of 54,000 jobs and
{WD041366.1} added $2.9 billion in state GDP."1 In fact, State spending of $543 million plus visitor spending resulted in total spending of about $5 billion which translates to each dollar spent associated with New York State Parks spending led to about 9 dollars in sales statewide.
The heart and soul of the NYS Parks is the NY State Park Police which keep the economic engine churning. The NYS Park Police are more than your run of the mill police force. Our members, because of the uniqueness of their duties, are highly trained, experienced police professionals. Every member in their respective commands must not only be a traditional Police Officer but must be a specialist in unique skill sets that will enable them to provide police services that save lives and property in some of the harshest of conditions.
At any one time, State Park Police Officers will be on patrol at state parks, state forests, state waterways, remote snowmobile and hiking trails and are our first responders to all crimes on a vast and diverse State Park System that serve rural upstate, suburban Long Island and bustling NYC.
Our members’ daily patrol includes providing services that range from snowmobile and marine patrols, responding to environmental disasters, cliff, gorge, high angle and wilderness rescues, potential threats of active shooters and terrorism in highly populated events and concert venues.
Despite the massive economic benefits I have detailed, the State Park Police are in a retention and attrition crises. Currently, there is an annual attrition rate of about 40%. Despite continuous and ongoing recruitment and yearly State Park Police academies, we continue to lose our highly trained skilled members to Municipal Police Departments and the State Troopers. Substandard Pension and Low Pay remain the two most significant causes of attrition. The loss of personnel is so severe that since 2000 State Park Police have hired over 600 Police Officers to maintain an understaffed Police Force of 250. In short, since 2000 NYS has hired more Police Officers that have left for other Police Positions than they employ. This is a whopping 100% turn over in less than 10 years. The average cost to train a State Park Police Officer can exceed $100,000 with a typical State Park Police academy costing over 3 million dollars yearly.
To stop this colossal waste of taxpayers’ money we submitted legislation (Assembly Bill A06968 Senate Bill S05267) to merge the State Park Police into the NYS Troopers. We believe that the State Park Police Force has been neglected for so long and attrition is terrible. For the reasons detailed a merger is the only viable option. Despite the high degree of training and dedication of our members it is not enough to make up for years of neglect, and we no longer have confidence in NYS Parks’ ability to maintain a Police Force capable of
1 https://www.ptny.org/application/files/6515/0903/5031/Economic-benefits-of-NYS-parks.pdf
{WD041366.1} providing adequate Police Protection. A merger will result in cost savings for the academy and training for both forces. Additionally, the merger will address the high rate of attrition faced by the State Park Police while eliminating duplication of services and equipment. It will also reduce overtime costs incurred by the State Park Police as a stand-alone unit.
We need your help and support to help us protect the communities that we serve. We appreciate the tremendous support we have received in the legislature in the past and cannot thank you enough.
{WD041366.1}
2018 Joint Legislative Public Protection Hearing Testimony
Submitted on behalf of the Police Benevolent Association of New York State
By: Peter Barry, PBA President & University Police Officers Director
January 30, 2018
Suite 1200 11 North Pearl Street, Albany New York 12207 (518) 433-5472 www.pbanys.org / [email protected]
Introduction
Good afternoon respected members of the joint committee. My name is Peter Barry, and I am the Director of the University Police Officers and the current President of the Police Benevolent Association of New York State (“PBA of NYS”).
The PBA of NYS was established in 2011, and is the law enforcement labor union representing the interests of approximately 1,200 members of the New York State Agency Police Services Unit (“APSU”). The PBA of New York State is the exclusive bargaining agent for the New York State University Police, the Environmental Conservation Police (“EnCon”), the State Park Police, and the Forest Rangers. Our members patrol and protect New York State’s public universities and colleges, state parks and historic sites, enforce state laws and protect our lands, forests and wilderness areas to ensure environmental safety and quality.
The four (4) units of the PBA of NYS comprise the second, third, fourth and fifth largest units of police officers employed by the State of New York. These officers live and work in your districts. We are keeping you and New York State’s natural resources safe. We have the specialized skill set necessary to respond to a crisis anywhere in the State of New York.
The testimony today will specifically address the budget priorities of the PBA of New York State. In addition, my testimony will touch upon specific issues related to the University Police Officers. The budget priorities of the PBA of NYS are reasonable requests that are designed to provide our units with parity and properly address staffing that we can continue to keep the public safe and continue to fulfill our basic job responsibilities. The PBA of New York State is well aware of the budget deficit facing New York State of approximately $4.5 billion dollars, and of the uncertainty from the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.
However, it is our respectful position, that the PBA of NYS budget requests, such as three-quarter disability legislation, increased Forest Ranger staffing, and University Police “heart presumption” legislation have small fiscal impacts yet provide strong protection and benefits that all New Yorkers can enjoy.
Accidental Three-Quarter Disability Legislation S.5594B Golden Same as A.7600B Abbate
A top budget priority of the PBA of NYS is the enactment of three-quarter disability legislation. Three- quarter disability is a benefit that is enjoyed by almost every other branch of law enforcement. Parity is desperately needed for the PBA of NYS membership. The job responsibilities are equally dangerous and present identical risk of injuries due to the wide range of incidents they respond too. These risks and dangers are completely out of our members’ control which is no different from other branches of law enforcement.
Currently, three-quarter disability legislation is not codified for University Police Officers or New York State Forest Rangers. Environmental Conservation Officers and Park Police Officers are simply not entitled to three-quarter disability benefits whatsoever. This must be changed. The legislature should immediately include three-quarter disability benefits in the one house budget proposals and ensure it is included in the final budget due April 1, 2018.
1
There is no better justification than the recent shooting tragedy of New York State Environmental Conservation Officer James Davey who sustained a gunshot while investigating a call for "shots fired" in rural Columbia County, which was ultimately two men attempting to poach deer in a field at night. These types of terrible incidents demonstrate the risks that Environmental Conservation Officers, Forest Rangers, Regional Park Police and State University Police encounter on a day-to-day basis in performance of their job duties. They should receive the same accidental disability benefits as other law enforcement members.
There is ‘same as’ standalone legislation in both houses that grants members of the PBA of NYS with three-quarter disability legislation. S.5594B sponsored by Senator Golden same as A.7600B sponsored by Assemblyman Abbate. Last session, the Senate passed S.5594A. The Assembly failed to bring this legislation to the floor.
However, we remain confident that both houses will include three-quarter disability legislation in their one house budget proposals. The fiscal impact of the legislation there would be an immediate past service cost of $2.78 million and an annual cost to New York State of $450,000. The fiscal note’s estimated costs are based on 724 members having an annual salary for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017 of approximately $60 million.
Granting all members of the PBA of NYS three-quarter disability benefits will also help lower the attrition rates because we will have parity with other branches of law enforcement. For these reasons, Three-Quarter Disability legislation for the PBA of New York State should be included as part of the final 2018-2019 State Budget due April 1, 2018.
Forest Ranger Staffing Needs S.3987 Funke Same As A.1459 Jenne
Today there are 137 Forest Rangers in New York State who help protect nearly 5 million acres of DEC administered lands. By comparison, in 1970, there were 140 Forest Rangers and only 3.5 million total acres of DEC administered land. This is evidence that over the past half century the number of Forest Rangers has remained stagnant while DEC has acquired roughly 30 percent more landmass. The Legislature and Governor’s efforts to drive tourism have been successful in increasing usage of DEC administered land. One unavoidable result of the positive increase of state land use has been an increase in the number of search and rescue missions undertaken by New York State Forest Rangers.
The PBA of NYS respectfully submits that a more appropriate number of New York State Forest Rangers is 175 and not the current 137 force size. Increasing the number of Forest Rangers to 175 is justified by weighing public safety, outsourcing Forest Rangers to emergency response needs outside of New York State, and examining the historical amount of acreage that a Forest Ranger has been accustomed to patrolling. Since DEC administered landmass is equal to approximately 5 million acres, and assuming the state had 175 Forest Rangers, each Forest Ranger would be responsible for approximately 28,500 acres. The reduced size of the territory for each Forest Ranger will lead to faster response times to search and rescue missions and help curtail overtime costs for New York State. In addition, a force of 175 will give the Forest Rangers more flexibility and a work force to respond to out of state needs which generates revenue for New York State since the costs are reimbursed by the other state and/or federal government.
2
During the current legislative session, the PBA of NYS will advocate for A.1459 (Jenne) / S.3987 (Funke) entitled “An act to amend the environmental conservation law, in relation to protecting newly acquired state land”. The proposed legislation is attempting to reduce the amount of acreage that each Forest Ranger is responsible for patrolling. In addition, the PBA of New York State respectfully requests that the 2018-2019 State Budget include an increase in funding for the Department of Environmental Conservation to increase the staffing levels of Forest Rangers to approximately 175 members.
Heart Presumption
An equally important budget priority for the PBA of NYS is “heart presumption” coverage legislation. This will create a presumption that any condition of impairment of health caused by diseases of the heart, resulting in disability or death to police officers and certain other first responders shall be presumptive evidence that it was incurred in the performance and discharge of duty. Almost all New York State Police Officers are afforded the protections of the “heart bill” provisions in the retirement and social security law. The fiscal note of this legislation states that the fiscal impact of this legislation is “negligible”.
Under current law, University Police Officers are excluded in the categories of police officers that are protected by this statute. University Police Offers work in dangerous, physically demanding, and stressful jobs. This inequity is unfair and disrespectful to the police officers who put their lives on the line protecting our institutions, faculty, staff, students and the public. This bill will provide University Police Officers with the same benefit as it pertains to a heart presumption as is provided other state police officers.
There is also ‘same as’ standalone legislation in both houses that grants University Police Officers with heart presumption. S.4634A sponsored by Senator Golden same as A.6413A sponsored by Assemblyman Abbate. The Senate passed S.4634 last year on May 2, 2017. This year, we ask the legislature to include this legislation in the one house budget proposals and enact it in the final Budget due April 1, 2018.
University Police Officers Active Shooter Response
Since the tragic event of the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, a shooting which left 32 innocent people dead, college campuses across the country have made great efforts to better prepare their police departments against such threats. And though State University of New York Police Departments are no exception to this trend there is still much work that needs to be done. Equipment is needed for our officers to safely respond to threats of an active shooter on many SUNY campuses.
Because SUNY’s twenty-nine police departments are de-centralized each is under the control of the local campus, otherwise known as its hiring authority. Each local campus assigns a budget to its university police department, some enjoy a healthy budget for training and resources, and others do not. Typically, bigger campuses get bigger budgets and officers are issued proper resources to respond to a variety of calls. Smaller campuses sometimes “make do” and officers are compelled to respond to calls without safe equipment.
It is not that the PBA does not understand the budget dilemmas of university police departments on smaller SUNY campuses; with a single patrol rifle costing $1,500; ballistic vest $500; ballistic helmet $400, ballistic shield $1,500 and ammunition for a twenty-member department qualifying twice a year, $1,500, we understand the financial realities campuses struggle with, however, we also understand that our campuses are asking our
3
members to respond to very dangerous, and possibly deadly calls for service. Regardless of budget realities our officers must be given the resources needed to do their jobs as safely as they can.
Therefore, we are asking that the legislature include in the one house budget proposal an Appropriation of $75,000, to be distributed by SUNY Systems Administration. This Appropriation shall be disseminated to university police departments requesting such funds to purchase active shooter response equipment (i.e., patrol rifles, ballistic vests and carriers, ballistic helmets, ballistic shields and ammunition).
Conclusion
In closing, the PBA of NYS encourages the Legislature to provide University Police, Park Police, Forest Rangers and Environmental Conservation Officers with the proper tools and give us parity with other law enforcement. This will assure the PBA of NYS can continue to keep the public safe and maximize the public’s ability to take advantage of New York State’s natural beauty. We ask that you include Three-Quarter Disability benefits, increased Forest Ranger Staffing, and University Police Officer with heart presumption in this state budget process. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before you today.
4 UNIVERSITYPOLICEI ENCONPOLICE . I PARKPOLICEI FORESTRANGERS
Testimony by: Troy Caupain Park Police Officer and PBA of New York State Board Member
Testimony before: 2018 Joint Legislative Hearing Committee on Public Protection
Date: January 30, 2018
Good morning members of the legislature,
My name is Troy Caupain and I am a Park Police Officer, with 17 plus years working for the Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRNP). I am currently assigned to the Long Island Region, however as a long-time member with OPRHP, I have been deployed all around the state in one capacity or another working for OPRHP. For the past 7 years, I have been fortunate to also be the Director for the Park Police Officers Association and board member within the Police Benevolent Association of New York State Law Enforcement (“PBA of NYS”), which is the exclusive bargaining unit for four different units: (i) the State Park Police, (ii) Environmental Conservation Police Officers. (iii) Forest Rangers and (iv) University Police Officers.
Today, I am here to speak on behalf of the Park Police Officers Association regarding the Public Safety concerns my members have been facing for far too long. I, as well as the PBA of NYS, have spoken at various public hearings in the past several years and it seems that every year, I find myself resurrecting the same desperate cry for increased staffing within the Park Police Force. The same desperate cry for increased thnding for the Park Police Force. The same desperate cry for equipment.
{WD041362.1} 1
{WD041362.1}
wants when
don’t represent.
police
well
emphasize the
at
staffing
Academy
Academy
should
have
members
80
York
to
responsibility has
increased However,
the
prepared
tomorrow
of
of
an
officers
state
the
Municipal
average
exact
grown
as
approximate
307
have
they
State
to
Due
As
services
I
Thirty
be
same
the
level
would
provide
parks
for
of same
of
Officers
at
It
classes
don’t
that
a
responsibility it
that
the
exponentially
as
from
to
PBA
retention
is
a
few
the
January
would
OPRHP
needs
years
of
statewide
well
is
questionable
the
Police,
necessary
is
to
public
issues
is
like
State
have
owed
approximately things,
the
adequate
of
the
up
graduating
currently
level
within
limited
as
ago,
have
ring
NYS.
to
227
thanks
10,
visitors
rate
enough
legislature.
by
our
plague
not
safety
a
provide
of
level
in
2018,
staffing
the
under
true
level
resources?
the
in
to
partners
the
is
only
levels
More
fact,
235.
time
how
only
terms
underway.
Division
to
provide
is
same
the
of
of382
an
Officers?
today.
11
in
the
the
then
very
have
Governor
235
state
a
This
a
average
Park
recognized
I
important
of
40%.
1988.
analysis
The
basic
State
of
in
visitors
Dept.
recommendations
have
public
Officers.
Governor
does
important
changed.
Law
parks geographic
Those
is
of
Police I
Police
1988
How
am
a
agency
Criminal
overview
today
of
2
of
far
not
Enforcement.
Cuomo’s
Historically, of
to
protection.
and
than
Civil
confident
study
questions 30
Park
now
cry
does
State
the
services
Today,
include
Mario
to
The
new
the
to
can
that,
from
size
Service
the
New
that
Justice
Regions.
called
a
Parks,
speak
of
residents
biggest
New
provide
police
initiatives.
the
members
as
Cuomo,
the
around
plagued
is
that
the
where
must
throughout
York
OPR}IP
from
the
for
Park
York
recognizes
but Services.
27
with
Park
if
officers.
changes
the
be
a
This
safety
of
members
we
to
a
the
State
highest
Police
1988.
DCJS
them
State
of
answered
Report
you,
NY
the
Park
Police
are
This
state
was
has
the
the
of
residents
Park
Ironically,
State
thirty
are
today.
agency
Force
the
In
and
Police
I
Unfortunately,
Park
level
completed
an
the
has
and
just
attending
was
Force
other
State.
that
Park
Police
increase
the
when
if
Officers
years
visitation
led
Police
is
of
OPRHP
Today’s
Force
want
released
OPRHP
provide
of
staffed
Bureau
words,
safety
Police
to
many
to
they
New
This
ago.
was
the
the
14
as
to
an
of
to I
{WD041362.1}
Attachments
residents
rectify
with
prepared
considered the
join
of going
ago.
issues
staffing
12
staffing
specific
country
the
the
I
Also on
have
were
I
the
would
levels
PBA
support
to
today
and
and
problem
attached
problems
a
protect
attached
and
budget
visitors
mass
of
of
providing
within
ask
the
NYS
of
the
them?
and
each
gathering
number
some
with
is
New
within
of
were
the
and
the
staffing.
New
member
protection
my
Force.
members
York
demand
current
identified
of
OPRHP
testimony
York
within
soft
State
If
With
of
those
list
State
that
targets
to
of
the
ranging
any,
Park
in
increased
the
of
the
a
3 a
issues
deserve.
Senate
providing
copy
Legislation
complete
public.
if
Police.
Legislature,
within
not
from
of
existed
and
threats
that
most
On
State
Just
budget
study
the
Assembly
report
any
that
30
of
like
and
which
Parks,
level
years
given
be
the
our
to
what
acts
and
poor
done
PBA
of
we State
there
ago,
before
within
day
of
was
public
morale-
feel
that
terrorism
has
there
imagine
Parks.
must
done
me
the
may
analyzes
introduced,
safety
is
be
findings-
today,
the
30
Are
help
what
around
what’s
a
years
top
plan
the
we
the
to
to
is 2
Pohce Division
POLICE
MUNICIPAL BUREAU Administrative DiVISION FOR John
.. of Harlin BUREAU J.
Pokiemba, Criminal EXECUTIVE R. Mario OF STATE McEwen, CRIMINAL FOR M. Director OF Cuomo, MUNICIPAL Deputy DEPARTMENT NEW JUSTICE Governor
of Justice YORK Cornrnissoner Criminal POLICE
SERVICES Services
Justice
Services Unit NEW OFFICE
AND
DIVISION
STAFFING
YORK
John
ALBANY, HISTORIC
Harlin
BUREAU
OF
J.
PREPARED
Poklemba,
EXECUTIVE
B.
Mario
OF
STATE
McEwen,
PARKS,
STATE
CRIMINAL snnnr sn__n, DMS!ON snfln. SERVICES JUSTICE
BUREAU MUNICIPAL POLICE CRIMINAL
FOR
M.
Commissioner
STATE NEW
n.m.
Director Cuomo, OF
MUNICIPAL
and NEW ANALYSiS
Deputy
DEPARTMENT
YORK
NEW
PRESERVATION
JUSTICE
OF
Governor
of
YORK
PARK
RECREATION
Commissioner FOR
FOR:
Criminal
YORK
L
POLICE
SERVICES
s5
S
Justice
POLICE
iOL1.
Police.
OPRdP,
as
mission
statement
his
Historic
a
park
participating
the
the
this
commanding
for
Overview
realistic
administrative
Police.
Administrative
police
Historic
Introduction
clear
the
agency’s
Saratoga
park
Municipal
The
police.
group,
Mission
Ac
basis
together
undertook
statement
purpose
the
Bureau
Preservation,
police.
of
The
Preservation
of
recommendations
officers
with
the
for
request
the
overall
meeting
of
objectives
officers
Following
Police,
and
Services
with
for
statement
the study
all
park
the
a
to
it
staffing
staffing
Municipal
within
Park
operations
the
mission.
of
UMP
to
was
assistance
police
developed
Executive
Commissioner
(OPRHP),
that
the
submission
the
of
associated Unit
which
felt
Police
was
for
the
the
Office
Office
this
deficiencies
study
and
—1—
of
Police
critical
by
organizational
he
New
of study
the
a of
—
the
the
Summary
both
task
felt
statement
Following
of
the
of
of
of
the
York
guiding
Police
Lehman
Bureau
mission
recommends
were
the
Parks,
a
parks,
was
BMP
New
was
to
staff
preliminary
State
and
New
the
a
and
York
to
Training
submitted
principles,
for
representative
necessity
of
a
statement
Recreation
Recreation
of
to
Ycrk
improvement.
identify
effort
the
Park meeting
purpose
State
Municipal
the
the
provide
State
Police,
and
purpose
report
Bureau
a
of
Park
because
with
of
for
and
serve
and
the
Park
of of Organization organized
officers Directors
Regional
Enforcement
the
(actually
Deputy OFFICE
answer
Administration
on
to are
Commissioner
OF
is
a —
the
responsible
CURRENT PARKS,
Currently
regional
a
to
Assistant
staff
the
RECREATION
ORGANIZATIONAL
appropriate
person
REc1c4&&L
basis.
of
on
the
Depty
to
Regional
OPRHP.
law
New
the
ADMIN
Cocnissiooer
located
enforcement
Eleven
AND
I
York
STRAT1I
Deputy
The Regional
Director).
HISTORIC
STRUCTURE
State
in
park
Director
Commissioner
Albany
related
police Park
Director
PRESERVATION
The
of who
police
commanding
matters.
Law
Regional
advises
for
is police of preferable two of
staff
the problems Director Directors.
operations1 still
set
Parks
Law
options
police
major
In
Graphically
This This
advisor.
answer
under
Enforcement
this
Recreation
of
that
modifies option
policy
option
and
to
Under
however, Law
report
the
to
exist
reorganizing
if
Enforcement
the
Director
this
provides
for (11)
opted is
this
would Directors
the
the and
Regional
in RegionaL
one
the
the
option Regior.al
present
option
the PARKS
Bureau Dep.JtY
Historic
for
of
become
Director
police.
c044!sStceJtR
Option
of Option a
Option MD
present
the
total
would central
on CfliSSiOflcC Atinistratioa
1
Law
Directors
is RECREATI
the
for
a structure
Park depicted a
i
Enforcement. Preservation.
level 2 U.
centralization
alleviate line
commanding
of This Law )4ew
Municipal
organizational Park
source Director Enforceoeflt
Police
Law York
manager Police
with
option regarding State
as
by Enforcement
of
within
placing
many
the follows:
Police
officers
authority
provides
The
rather
The
Regional
of
of day
structure.
the
Director
offers
first the
the
the
would
to
would
than
Office
for
park
day
for
and
a drawback vital
any supervisors. individual depicted special Regional
officers. New Staffing analyzed
of regions officers civilian
sworn
factors.
sworn
sound
York
standardization The
officers
effort
and
is Directors
in
Analysis
State
officers statewide. the
communication
organization, staffing
regions
In
that
the
it
permanent
Although
this
between
Park
is for
following
regional —
our
be
to
recommendations
and
report
field
The
Police
In increased meet on
recommendation
cooperative
the Commanding
staffing
personnel
this
present
addition the
duty.
commanders
Option chart:
the
local
Director
stands
statewide
second
Bureau
by
fulltime
levels
needs.
42
we
in
Officers.
at
about
were effort
of option
recommend
some
are
two that for
level
Law
of
based
eighty Naturally
working
complement
Municipal hundred
regions
is
the each
would
Enforcement,
but
a
This
on
permanent
increased
necessity
of
full—time
still
a for
require
twenty
to
option
a the
number
Police
of
major
free two
eleven allows
the
seven
level
a
in
is
of
has Assignment a
vacation hours
officers staffing Geography complaints. makes park miles. Patrol officers from
Adequate the §fcerSafe day were with reasonable
officers officers backup
more Situations
patrol
Bureau
patrol
officers
each
based
Regional
officers.
a
the
Initiated
officer.
day
Consideration
days, post
data
who are
Patrol
safety
in
police
park
of
Availability
and response on
for
of
with
the
respond
Park responsible,
cannot was
is past
Directors
this
sick
police
Municipal
supervisory —
and
parks considerations.
only
region. Policing
initiated
Recommended
In
determined
Regions
policy
nature
time
Supervisory times
addition
be
for
one
unique
was
are
covered
for
and
etc.
the
Police
officer. —
are given by — of
alcohol can
by
coverage.
each
A
Patrol
Police
most on
in officers
a the staffing
—5--
must
high
the
spread
be
major
seven
a
comparison
Coverage
to
has
Region
volatile Many BMP
officer part
regional
related
be
percentage
areas,
patrol
Personnel.
Factors
recommended
over combined
problem
days
considered.
These
to
levels police
to —
service —
It
on
telephone visibility
hundreds
for and
incidents.
per
basis,
Where to
like
recommendations
patrol. is
confronting calls
included
of municipal
which
with
require
week,
obvious
24
days
activity
needs.
reasonable
using
Current
of
hour
interviews
require
park
eight
and
off,
This
square
two
that
data
seven
by
or
a — based Off research that period Present recommendations
use Niagara LI. Region Thousand Taconic N.Y.C. Genesee Central l1egany Saratoga Palades Finger
a4on Taconic
N.Y.C.
Thousand Niagara Saratoga Genesee 1.1. Central Palasades Finger Aliegany
Season
of
many
on
the
is
Lakes
Lakes
Staffing
years
indicates
Is.
Is.
recommendations
the
Use
parks
busy
of of
Present
Present
by
Sworn
Data
during
24 12
20 56 35
12
experience, Park
First 6 8 7 6 9
SNIP that time —
Staffing
10
Facilities
took
6 # 1
2 1 1 1 1 6
1 1
The
present
for
Staffing fall
Line
of
were
Civ.
Overall
4 0 4 5 2 5 5(lft) 0 0 0 0
Bureau
Park into
Sgts.
(4pt)
and
Supervisory
hence,
made.
Summary
staffing
winter consideration
Police, —
Recommended
for
Although
Sworn
Recommended
it
16 69 29 15 31 35 15 17 20 13 17
Municipal
months.
is
and
permanent
Staffing
13
4
2 2 3 5 4 5 2
3 3
from
Totals
deployment
the
the
Staffing
this
#
Police
summer
Civ.
5
4 9 5 5 5 5 5
0 0 0
staffing
increasi.ng
basis
Difference
is
Sworn
+ Difference
+4 +1.1
+1 +9
+ -i-lI +10 *13
+
+
+
— 82 +3 —
÷
+ + 4- + -
5
0 9
9
1 3 2 2 2 1 1 2 1
3
Civ.
+5 +5
±4ft ±3
17
5 0 0
0 Q
0
0 Police Park Ranger
provide as PRAs parks must minor
parimeters
replacements security York activity Record
and activity
system reporting recommends computerized
Region, within Improvement assistance resource
needed
allocation
Ranger
should
be
State
and
functions
Assistants recommends
System
similar
the
assistance
taken
be
of
levels,
is
Recreation.
from in
procedure.
of
Park
that
Assistant
Division implemented
be
in
the
the
for
patrolling
for
system,
their
in
—
which
the assigned
decisions,
to
like
parks. The
basis Police.
the
Enhanced
orientating police
does
that
CPRAS)
the
area
to
authority.
present
park
of
the
parking
similar
Program
the
not
for We one
the
During
Criminal of in
to
the
officers
park as
Since
police
further
Community
park
making systematically
the
all in
present
records.
police
security
parks.
record
enforcement
these
Appendix
to
—
police the
Bureau
regions.
police
a
The
They
standardize
the Justice
but
law sound
recommend
high commanding
policy
individuals
keeping,
Bureau
Safety
By
one
be
may
are
merely
enforcement
for
officers
E
patrol activity
personnel
formalized
of The used
want Services,
etc.
not
exist
Municipal
of
Unit for
this that
to
as
their
Systems utilizing
officers
intended
in
to
BMP
Municipal
Great
and
to enhance
within
it
season
(SIFECS),
a
report
the
seek
deployment agency’s
means
the
pertains
activity
record
within
is
to
Police
Taconic
care
another
to
perform
to
the
some Park
the
or
to
use
be
New
a
to
—
high
addressing
Recreation
increasing these
Police
York
weight
age
Personnel
and
cost
We
State
standards
Training
and
further
educational
of
Issues
a
the
and
physical
Civil
cost
living
Historic
salary
during
recommend Council. Service
—
of
Presently
regions.
fitness
standards
living
grades
the
preservation
Law,
that EMP
recruitment
allowance
standards
—8—
of
the
recommends
set
nor
the
park
park
do
forth
Office
officers,
should
they
for
prescribed
police
of
in
that
those
officers.
of
fall
Section
consider
parks,
are
the
as
under
working
by
not
well
park
58
the
bound
the
of
as
police
in
Municipal
the
height,
by
t1ew
follow the INTRODUCTION
Division of Criminal Justice Services The New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services came into being September 1, 1972. It now has five major components which include the Bureau for Municipal Police (SMP), Office of Administration, the Office of Funding and Program Assistance, Office of Identification and Data Systems and the Office of Justice Systems Analysis. Bureau for Municipal Police chapter 399 of the laws of 1972, transferred the Municipal Police Training Council (MPTC) from the Office for Local Government to the newly created DCJS. At the same time, all the functions and duties of the Division for Local
Police, the Director, and the Executive Director of the MPTC were transferred. BMP was thus created within DCJS and serves as the staff support unit to the MPTC. Presently, the four major components of BMP are the Police Training and Administrative Services Unit, the Highway Safety Unit, the Peace Officer Unit, and the Accreditation Unit. Police Training and Administrative Services Unit The Police Training and Administrative Services Unit of SMP, offers administrative counseling and in—depth surveys to local law enforcement agencies, or to municipalities considering the establishment of a police department. This
—9— counseling, and the resulting surveys, is an effort to assiet the agencies with the continuing task of reviewing and upgrading the many facets of administration requiring managerial attention. Frequently, emergencies of the day prevent police administrators from giving adequate attention to the areas of planning, research and operational review. Accelerating chanaes in the world today create unusual pressures for law enforcement agencies and increase the need for flexibility in management and organization. — The purpose, therefore, of the Administrative Services program, is to provide (on a short term basis) the staff assistance necessary to aid administrators in combining new ideas, concepts and methods with a professional and objective analysis of local realities. Conclusions and recommendations drawn from this activity are presented in written form. The report or survey, stresses immediate needs based upon historical or present trends. By its very nature, the survey is a critique. It is not an end in itself, but merely documents the need for change. The value of the survey will be directly proportional to the attention given to its recommendation in terms of evaluation, implementation and periodic review. The following guidelines explain the program in greater detail.
, ,.1_
more
survey: a
generally
limited
Bureau
conferences
of
Administrative
preliminary
states:
State
Guidelines
2.
1.
written
administrative
of
A
Limited
Staff staff
2.
3.
Upon
1.
The
These
Executive
limited
for
the
number
Division
done
report
Comprehensive
Limited
Staff
request agency.
or
results
requested
Conduct
Municipal
Consultation Consultation
following
guidelines
between
for
evaluation,
Surveys
operations
of
without
survey
Services
Police
Consultation
with
Law,
functions
Surveys
services:
of
thereof
studies of
an
by
Police
the
Criminal
Section
functions recommendations.
consists
are Training
the
administrator
the
Surveys
is
Unit
the
of
agency
available
and
established
preparation
simply
head
any
within
staff.
Palice
—11--
may
837
analyses
Justice
of
criminal
would
and
head
of
provide
subdivision
an
informal
a
Training
such
Administrative
Staff
for
police
analysis
of
and
be
Services
to
of
of
An
a
the agency
justice
included
the
following
a
implement
consultation department
the
analysis
discussions
agency,
formal
and
benefit
following
5,
of
administration
and
shall:
agency
which
a
in
Services
single
report.
a
make
New
of
including
of
such
and
one
or
is
tyces
such
when
York
the
a
or or Municipal methods and organizational effectively new operations; agency request Professional a for the have state provided service. analysis analysis 3. police Municipal or entire facility. The distribution The When Limited A A Comprehensive Training Feasibility Records Investigation Patrol and and comprehensive improved comprehensive to from agency purpose operation. with of by professional Police federal police improve its perform a information the and the Service System Police. police recommendations. and relationship head systems entire agency comprehensive staff, of control operation government; the personnel Surveys the its Costs requesting agency It survey survey capability service administration, and mission. there head comprehensive systems; examines over and procedures, and and to considers includes —12— to problems; is its Agreements reports surveys is other be where professional a no communications, the of provided administrative, written on charge. the functions role Consolidation New extensive Rules Personnel file appropriate, survey the resulting require operation its joint techniques police Bldg. of entire report with by staff of service the is services Bureau Conduct a of Facility review the agency to Systems written from police equipment and and spectrum of local, and analyze recommend and/or Bureau the shall for line services the and to of —
problems
Appendix
on
to
report
Park
summer
the
agreed,
Commissioner
effort.
needed
Municipal
responsibility
implementation
Implementation
October
the
12) 11)
10)
9)
8)
7) New
4) 6) 5)
3)
As
1) 2)
on
Following
At
The
Office
of
Poor
of Lack insufficient
Recruitment Lack Poor
Lack Lack
Supervision
salary
staffing Budget; reported
to September
York
identified in
A
the
Recreation
the
1986,
value
of
15,
assure
Police
February
morale.
quality
of
of
of of
request State
Prenderville this
of
findings
inadequacies;
NEW
1986. motivation;
mission; a
a
standard
a
of
of
of
levels;
in parks,
problem
commitment
results meeting
staff
30
report.
YORK of the
approved PROBLEM inadequacies;
were
any Park the
of training
and
of
of
and
A
partime
of
recruit
requesting
survey
1986, aforementioned
Commissioner
copy
STATE
Recreation
will,
Historic
policies
Police.
as
October identification
this and
was
the
IDENTIFICATION
follows:
by
recommendations
of
and
to
PARK
continuity
conducted however,
(seasonal) or
Bureau
meeting
selection;
the
this
undertake
1,
Preservation;
and
study,
agency.
POLICE and
Office
1986.
Lehman
report
procedures;
for
document,
was Historic
provide
at
process, lies
of officers;
Municipal
STUDY
of
a
provided
A
the
The
through
may
administrative
which
staffing
preliminary
Parks,
in assistance
Saratoga Bureau
be
preservation
the
the
during
is
found
Police
Deputy
by
actual
specific
the
study
for
B.M.P.
State
the
in
as
of —
of conducted
officers
levels
levels. and
locations
supervisors officers.
regional
BMP
made
critical
directly
identification considered
namely,
this
commanding
met
For
During
field
The
in
report.
with
budget,
a
and
Again,
directors,
to
or
during
top
the
the
general
At
visits
to
(sergeants)
1987 the
indirectly
first
regional
four
regions,
major
several
be
officers
of
this
success
the
staffing,
staff
the
to
the
problems,
summary
line
problem
park
field
report
all
most
of
directors
mission
with
from
in
supervision.
was
and
of
managers,
the
eleven
this
serious
visits of
salary
any
particular
focuses
police
inadequate identified
the
—14—
as
locations
the
of
administrative
report.
identified
and
park
Bureau
the
and
please
findings
and
officers.
first
primarily
police
regions.
park
supervision
all
emphasis
police
by
we
for
In
refer
line
regional
met
police
have
of
by
commanding
Municipal
addition,
this
the
on
staffing
police with
In
review.
to
At
been
on
staffing almost
was
were
Appendix
interviews
all
process,
patrol
managers
assistant—
addressed
police
seen
the
regions
all
as B
goals.
especially
basis
for
authority
to
of
as
factors.’
authority,
were.
a
of
organization
and
organization
duties
overall
establishes adhered
operation
piece
an
insure
things.
“organization”
organizational
although
An
Organization
The
that
organization
Organization
and
Authority
organizational
of
mission.
to
organizing
means
the
must
one
is
leadership,
equipment
responsibilities
by
It
the
is
it
goals
built;
compliance
the
that
involves
rely
that
not
can
hierarchy
is
tend
means
survival.
individuals
is
and
works
is
be
tangible,
on
process
necessary
there
it
and
a
concept
motivation,
concerned
to
scientifically
objectives
coordinated,
provides
source
us
different
of
ORGANI
it
on
complicate
of
must
with
individuals
cannot
required
a
—l
is
positions
like
7—
of
24
of
in
and
ZAT
the
be
dimensionless
the
with
the
hour—a—day,
any
ION
authority.
things
as
a
morale,
one
a
be
framework
pattern
centralized
centralized
street
its
well
group.
to
organization,
described
human
analyzed,
of
and
to
achieve
function.
to
the
as
organizational
and
their
beings,
or
different
which
carry
This
upon
seven—day
Source
primary
areas
other
a
as
two
the
authority
power
building
relative
process
will
which
if
out
as
such
factors
“First,
of
human
goals
it
people
source
well
its
be
week,
any
as or In addressing this key concept of source of authority with the park police there is a dilemma to be faced. This dilemma deals with the question of who is the source of authority within the organizational structure of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation as it pertains to the police? Presently, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation is organized as depicted in the following chart:
OFFICE OF PARKS, RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
—18— whether
position advisor regional majority, all cases These appropriate.
themselves field personnel regions
the it knowledge directors to own
lose
was
the
regional opinion
parks
Under During
The
out
visits
supervisory
individuals
a
decentralized
they to
preferred
director of
necessity,
Bureau to
with
and
of
have
is
this
the
felt
law
the
they
the
directors, be this
local
important.
Specifically,
equipment.
Commissioner.
the
an
enforcement chiefs, structure Bureau
that
larger
for
would
organizational and/or
personnel
the
further
overall
exception
problems
while
Municipal
the
structure
regional
be for
regions
captains
park
assistant
present
park
many
stated hurt
responsibility
Municipal
director
and
the
and
police
of
—19—
Police
police
commanding approach when
by
of
patrol
some
regional
the
or
structure
regionalized that
a
the
regional
commanders lieutenants
centralized
it
fact
of Police’s
is
can
regional
park
their
officers.
came
strictly
the
because
directors
also
that for
officers
was
police.
director.
officers
to regions
operating
aforementioned structure
the see
discussed commanders,
and
budgets,
answer
structure. they
that
The
advantages
regional
in in felt
would
Obviously
were
of
vast
smaller
some
The
to
their
was
that
an
with
the
of — communications. areas deployment police example. gathering documentation. that regions activity actual
regions standardized centraiized Recreation were appears During in
Albany.
exists operating
course
contact
greater
Under
The many
The dealing
such
are workload
the within
of
operate
kept
to
with
present
records
following
During
of effort
our
independently
as
at the detail etc.
promote course and
police
records with the
records
the
policy, best
the
study,
present
Historic
on Since are
in
The
the
become for organizational regions
Systems
of
eleven
later structure
a a
paper.
disunity authority
is
based
Bureau record similar
this
loosely
is in the this
record many
an
scheme
critical. the a
of
Preservation.
in
separate
example
Bureau
(not
Improvement
on study key
study
Each aspects
this
each
keeping
same for
of and
workload manner, keeping,
fragmented within
—20--
of
all)
example
the
Municipal
commander
structure other a it report,
it
for
decentralization
manner.
of
police
lack
of
became could Records was park
system
the
Municipal the
in
for
personnel within
planning,
of and
of our
organization.
terms Office
however, police.
fragmentation
not
departments,
the
Enhanced
of Police’s had evident
of cohesiveness.
It
will
is
perception
absence an support
is the
headquarters
of
a
his
Police
of
matters
our prime organization, be
staffing,
critical
the
park
During
the
own
that
Parks,
Community
data
discussed
opinion
of their
lack
was
No park
way
police
all that that
no
and
a
the
two
in
of—
two of
in
we commanding often made police make atmosphere many centralized present. Safety structure. have Services. park centralizing however record there addition in readily found remove In areas our been The of police by a It way than that point systems Unit operations field local was the the the lend present a like coordinated be within officers From all it number aforementioned This major commanders. administration regions recommended (SIFECS) and great the itself flavor interviews, mid—management should. the improvements. SIFECS police organizational study not problems of remain the difficulty regional on had to from within the to Office efforts we a Again, was an detract been function, in centralized commanding regional the the learned independant that example conducted the is directors the Bureau of policing training, in by adopted These within this CRESAP contact Division existed structure Parks from OPRHP that and fearing appears example contacts officers for approach. about OPRHP initiative and on avoid basis. of were study regarding several certain with then, Municipal of the the Recreation that and against ten is to in Criminal a that were SIFECS with surface parks. Granted are take centralized used political its park policies years it of Even their the might DCJS not acceptance. Police still place simply individua police regarding Justice does park ago, level, In if there in were police etc., this more yet to not favor of a centralized police authority. These officers were of the opinion that their regions might be lost in State bureaucracy and in turn lose out to larger regions. These concerns are real and great caremust be taken by those concerned to see that the effects of this proposed structural change are minimized. However, it is the opinion ot the Bureau for Municipal Police, that a more centralized administrative structure of the park police will eliminate or at least minimize the lack of coordination that presently exists.
—22—
Office police
for:
police
This
OFFICE
The
of
to
be
parks
accomplish
proposed
Bureau
reorganized
OF
RECOMMENDED
PARKS,
L
and
for
structure
U’)
Recreation.
PARK
the
Municipal
RECREATION
Regiona’
in
Regftnai
goals
ORGANIZATIONAL
POLICE
Deputy
the
should
—23—
Ccnnssionet
AóniM,traticr!
following
set
Police
—
This
AND
OPTION
out
better
HISTORIC
structure
recommends
for
STRUCTURE
manner:
1
assist
them
PRESERVATION
provides
within
that
the
park
the
the park
centralization
objectives.
also
feature managers. regional
police regional
Director
communication
any
centralization
as
In
8.
7.
6.
5.
4.
3.
2.
1.
commanders
a
of
an
cooperation
directors,
of
Administrative
coordination
Unity
necessity command;
Reasonable Authority
responsibilities;
clear
and
Equitable
sound
the
During
effort
Law
This
individuals;
between
effort.
decentralized
of
and
Enforcement.
and
practice
the
should
to
command;
effort,
in adequate
their
unequivocal
distribution
clear—cut
was
spans
alleviate
course
the
of
achieving
control.
brought
foster
effort;
assistants
regional
should
of
we
nature
of
to
control Additionally,
allocation
urge
problems
discharge
the
a lines
common
out
of
and
be
cooperative
directors
close
of
field
workloads
continued
not
and
for
of
the
goals
that
only authority;
individual
of
cooperation
administrative
visits
assigned park
individual responsibilities;
and
may
and
as
attitude
among
with
police,
a
this
the
occur
positive
any
park
elements
and
toward
park
with
but —
are
indicate
might
time. define.
personal
interpretations.
recognized
law are
3jety
forward,
define law
police
law within
may
is agency
wants
frequent.
unique,
enforcement
somewhat
enforcement,
enforcement In
Order
be
The
be
Commissioner
What
the
and the
agencies,
a
difficult
in
that
construed
Order,
interpretation,
either
law
civilian,
rules
maintenance and
the
flew
regulate
park
might
a
ambiguous
one
enforcement
quasi—military
Conversations State.
supported York
in
activities
are
someone
environment
and
of
the be
It
the
to
as
our
Lehman recreational
State codified
their than
order
considered
is
achieve.
majority
a
park
contemporary
situations
Under
and
breech
personal
broke
by
the
aspect
These
Park
has
principal
maintenance.
police
are
sometimes
the
with
order
law
the
and
order
been
the
at
of
The
generally
Police
acceptable
general
incidents
of
and
State
enforcement
present
even
park
incidents
peace
have
require
law
maintenance
mandate
quoted
maintenance
their
society,
goals
situational
require
to
though
or
police
two
agency.
by
population.
circumstances
be
understood,
they
job
are
more
as
is
another.
conduct
basic
of
are
the
unit, is
many saying
interpretation,
personnel
to
is
not
the
didn’t.
situations discretion
activity. straight
As
open
finest
provide
easier
at
functions:
as
park
of
by
with
working
the
that
to
easy
our
one
police
police
this
to other
same
many
a
he laws
to
and In-S safe atmosphere conducive to recreation. It is not difticu it to identify problems associated with “acceptable behavior” concerning various types of recreational activity. Recreational opportunities in New York State parks are inclusive; from hunting in Allegany Regions, to rock concerts in Saratoga, to the beach activity of the Long Island Region to the influx of tourists at Niagara Falls. Each type of activity requires a special type of policing. The park police are asked to provide service in a paradoxical environment. First they are mandated to provide a sate and — orderly atmosphere for family recreation and secondly they are asked to insure people the freedom to enjoy themselves. Order and freedom are at opposite ends of a spectrum. The park police are required to balance these competing societal demands on a daily basis. In a planned environment of leisure, relaxation and enjoyment, the park police are charged to deal with the unpleasant situations that arise. They are sworn to uphold the laws of the state and to provide an environment for fun! Police officers have been entrusted with unique and special authority in our society. They have the right to arrest (to take one’s freedom) to use physical force and in specific situations use deadly physical force to protect the life of another. The recently completed statewide Basic Police Officer Training Validation Project conducted by BMP included input from park police officers. This extensive analysis of patrol activity demonstrated that in addition to performing tasks generally associated with police functions, the park patrol officer performed an additional 55 special functions. The majority of these special functions were “park specific” service or order maintenance activities. This serves to validate the uniqueness of the park police mandates. A copy of this analysis is included in Appendix F of this report. Interviews with park police personnel isolated a number of problem areas resulting from their dual mandate. — Conflicts between traditional police procedures and the expected “low key” approach were articulated. This lead to discussions concerning the attitude of park police officers in relation to the question of providing general services versus “crime fighting”. It appears that these questions and issues are of concern to the majority of park police personnel. Issues of this nature create an organizational concern that reduces the effectiveness of the agency. Policing is a difficult job and policing in a park environment is a very difficult task. The park police require strong leadership and direction to carry out their special mandate. We believe leadership can best be delivered in a centralized fashion. Although this change may appear contrary to normal OPRHP procedures, the park police have a unique role that must be recognized and supported.
_, 7.-.
Graphically
commanded
considerations United
base’s
established Commissioner.
must
source
critical
recommends
conduct, director
deployment
the the
officers. nj2
authority
than
law
agency.
is
into
at
police.
day
enforcement,
Precedent
be
If
A
This
a
the
the
commanding
States
of
second
stronger,
taken
this
to
areas
training
of
aforementioned,
by
authority.
between
present,
centralization
that
recommendations,
day
As
by
Option
law
a
These
latter
Army.
to
an
organizational
a
relating
Provost
has
such
operations
they
enforcement
centralized
establish
example,
as
more
general.
etc.
the
#2
been
policy
but
recommendation
as
they
The
be
would
The
regional
professional
Marshall
record
to
to
established
set
Military
will,
relate
is
Bureau
considerations
of
the delineate
how
clear
appear
However
for
would
special
to
authority
the
option,
systems,
regional
allow
military
directors
keep
who
such
to
lines
for
police
Police
set
as
is
park
and
major
answers
as
events
the
the
specific
a
Municipal
although
follows:
followed,
statewide
in written
with
structure
director
staffing,
less
police
as
police
structure
park
on
should
and
Washington.
policy
etc.,
it
directly
army
regards
fragmented
the
lines police
related
less
operate
policy
Police
commanding
great
would
policy
include
bases
by
while
rules
director
the
desirable
of
the
to
to
to
by
care
way
oversee
to
are
is
the
of
the
police
for
evolve
the
the
of it OFFICE OF PARKS, RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION RECOMMENDED ORGANI ZATIONAL STRUCTURE PARK POLICE - OPTION 2
Pep.ty Ccanssioner Regional Aduinistration
In conclusion, there are inherent dangers in this option. it violates a key principle of organization, namely, clear and unequivocal lines of authority, Police commanding officers will continue to find themselves working for two supervisors. For this recommendation to be a viable alterna tive specific guidelines as to authority must be establisned at an agency level. For additional generic information regarding organization please refer to Appendix C of this report.
11
of
calculating
assignment/availability
cqhich
etc.
time
vacation, officer
Consideration
performed
of
not
how
duty,
work
Utilizing
The
used
a
makes
This
the
basic
unavailable
factors
or
365
for
holidays,
by
assignment/availability
Other
may
each
an
2,920
days
assigning
poLice
each
must
hypothetical
officer
be
(personal
of
Listed
done
a
man—hours.
of
be
Court
the
sick
for
year,
man—year
Regular
the
given
Staffing
Military
Sick
unavailable
by
one
eleven
below
factor.
duty;
leave,
Training
Time
Holidays
Vacation
establishing
factors,
the
leave,
officer
data,
and
to
—30—
consists
Days
were
i.e.,
staffing
However,
Con
regions
those
Analysis
Leave
Injury
compensatory
como.
the
factor
duty)
Off
considered
or
for
to
regular
factors
following
any
each
of
of
patrol
an
since
function
time
365
is
the
other
overall
post.
days
determined.
etc.)
which
time,
an
eight-hour
with
park
assignment.
is
assignment
cannot
officer
off,
average
an
police’s
respect
training,
make
example
be
the
does
tours to — - Average Number Average Number of non—patrol of non—patroL Factor fl4s man hours Regular Days Off 104 xS* 832 Vacation 21 x8 168 Sick and In jury 6 x8 48 Military Leave 0 x8 0 Holidays 12 xS 96 Court Time (on duty) 4.93 x8 39.44 Training 2 xS 16 Other 22.50 xB 180 172.43 xS 1379.44 * (To change man—days to man—hours) Once these calculations are completed, the hours are totaled. The resulting number represents the average amount of hours an officer is away from duty each year. If this number is subtracted from the basic man-year of 2,920 man—hours (365 days x 8 hours) the difference would represent the total hours available by an officer for duty.
1—
moderate
International to
records
Police determined
posts
Determining
account a
patrol
Man—Year
required.
number availability
hours
Hours
2,920
staffing
staff
Under
2,920
Once
In
The
necessary
available
utilizes
in
and
of
to
for
this
degree
each
2,920
Man—Year
the
personnel
determine
normal
it
chart
supervisory
the
an
example
Association
factor
tour
assignment/availability
is
officers
of
hours
calls
to
Number
to
now
with
circumstances,
validity
of
police
Hours
calculate
needed will the
—
necessary
it
duty.
for
in
the
1540.56
of
past.
will
a
number
time
Available
of
be
service, at
Patrol
availability
man-year
Average
to
to
Chiefs
used
This
a
take
the
oft.
This
•1_-
the
fill
given
1379.44
to
of
the
Posts
to
availability
formula,
determine
1.90
staffing
patrol
based
Hours
will
the
of
is
determine
Bureau
jurisdiction.
Assignment/Availability
factor
Police
then
factor
bfficers
posts
then
on
Off
posts
developed
process.
divided
=
a for
the
has
be
Factor
1.90
which
provides
police
Hours
included
the
factor.
etc.
Municipal
number
to
integrated
beers
1540.56
total
staff
are
by Available
by
needed
agencys
a
the
of
to
This
the
each on
Commanding
far Although policing
(weekly
Park
officer Telephones
to
unless
informed
routine
calls telephone;
service
initiate police
their
Patrol below.
totally
aforementioned
the
the
Municipal
Police
During
Bureau
With
responded
response
police
a
and
agencies
comes
Initiated
patrol.
general
are
is complaint
that
unsuitable
police
Officers,
are
about
monthly
the
the
Records
our
for
initiated
Police,
by
station
the
not
analysis
record
to
methodology
interviews Municipal to
records action.
on
(sheriffs
10%
Policing
reverse
calls
is
readily
activity)
by
— patrol.
for
that
and
are
Directly
or
severe
municipal
keeping by
a
of
of
find for
much
has
those
It
the
is
number
Police
and
—
available in
activity
the
of
— is
The service.
enough
true
been
it
complainant
a
1_
of all
system
related police
determining
officers
park
estimated
telephone,
officers
is
park
of
the was
the
verified in
the
park
key
are polices’
park to
police
of
within
departments)
police
park
to
In
opinion
campers
reasons
come
the
kept
users are
that
calling
patrol
most
policing.
but posts
regions by
activity
opinion
the
are
upon
generated staffing
in
park
about municipal
do
wait
of
discussed
etc.
all
park
initiated
unique
would
police
not
while
the
calls
we
police
until
that
regions
90%
and
police.
travel
were
Bureau needs
be
by
in
on
of
to
for
the
an —
patrol
coverage specific again
officers
region’s therefore be
New
is activities
square Geography
the
formalized will
activity,
or
performed
generated
a
even
York
park
The
major
settle
by
miles.
initiated
notify
police
areas
calls
staffing the
necessary
City
police’s
based
of
by
is
consideration
staffing
in
a
by
fact
Park
never
park
pieces
Region,
dispute
unique
for
Response
their
on
record
the
service
recommendations
that
Police
officers,
jurisdictions
service
the
for
recorded.
officers
methodology.
of
radio
to
park
and
systems,
following
the
adequate
time
land
policing
by
in
jurisdictions
never
information vast
police
dispatcher
the
determining
in
on
to
—34—
scattered
On
the
and
majority
park
patrol.
possible
coverage.
make
make
factors:
numerous
the
are
in
With
course
the
police,
this
a
it
parks.
responsible of
over
in the
—
written
widespread
the difficult
of
problem
The
the
most
a
report
occasions
of
This
exception
police
high
hundreds
number
the
uniqueness
activity.
their
of
record
is
degree
were
lack
areas
the
for
to
patrol
activity
multiplied
of
patrol
officers
of
of
use
of
police
of
had
of
of
the
any
it to —
of
of
adequate
assaults
their making
our
a
Officer
supervision
claims
resulted,
recommendation
most
full—time
Adequate
policy
24
consideration.
specifically
BMP
was
the
number
complaints
assaults
hour
field
with
based
fall
The
cases.
duty.
In
staffing
against
of
Safety
seven
manpower
happen, addition
Bureau
of
patrol
of
regional
visits
either
first
EMP,
on
on
park
of
1986
One
The
the
to
information
day
police officers.
—
the
when
is
for
level
line
and
police
however,
officer
officers
and
Another
directly
Bureau
following
and
much
is
supported
patrol
directors
police.
Municipal
conducting
supervisory
available
related
supervisory
officers the
recommendations
emphasis
require
for
lost
factor
coverage.
gathered
field
we
have
or
factors
Many
by
Municipal
and
are
—35--
interviews
indirectly,
an
Police
should
to
been
the
staffing
on
interviews,
two
taken
coverage
police
of
eye
of
coverage.
handle
at
staffing
high
were
officers
the
injured
these
This
understands
and
the
be
into
is
Police
commanding
opinion
we
number
studies,
taken
a
reduced.
has
officer
from has
—
Saratoga
suits
call,
were
consideration
It
conducted
recommendations
in
This
since
been
also
inadequate
has
Fights,
into
the
of
that
advised
have
the
that
safety.
to
done
recommends
liability
been
officers
meeting
About
retired.
course
recommend
number
if
by
police
family
ths
in
that
20%
in
of
In in and neighbor disturbances and large group calls should be handled by multiple officers whenever possible. In the course of field visits conducted by the Bureau for Municipal Police it was noted that the number one problem confronted by park police was alcohol related offenses. A minor disturbance involving intoxicated individuals can escalate. Calls of this nature therefore require a two officer response. Officer safety is a compelling reason for the park police to foster a cooperative attitude with other state and local law enforcement agencies. The Bureau for Municipal Police was impressed with the cooperation that exists between park officers, and the New York State Police and local sheriffs and police departments. We not only urge that these efforts continue but that they be strengthened through a formal policy within the park police statewide. For your convenience a copy of a model mutual aid agreement may be found in Appendix H. We urge that the
OPRHP counsel review this document for possible implementation.
Present Staffing Data — During our interviews with both regional directors and park police commanding officers, both were asked, “What is the paramount issue facing the park police?”, nearly everyone asked responded that police staffing levels were presently inadequate.
In the course of field visits, BMP staff had the opportunity to visit many of the major park areas and discuss staffing and deployment with regional directors and commanding officers. Time constraints did not allow a tour of each facility so many of the staffing recommendations are
—36— based on those interviews as well as the data provided to BMP regarding present staffing levels and deployment. Off Season Use of park Facilities
During the regional field visits by BMP, the majority of regions reported that there has been a marked increase in the use of park facilities during the off season. Many people are using park facilities for such activities as hiking, cross country skiing and other activities. This has lead to an increased demand for police service during these months of the year. — Regional Staffing Recommendations Utilizing the aforementioned methodology the Bureau for Municipal Police determined staffing levels for police for each of the eleven regions. It should be noted that these are minimum staffing levels.
Initially BMP determined the assignment/availability factor for each region. This factor was based on the personnel information (i.e. days off, sick days, etc.) supplied by the commanding officers. Secondly, the Bureau for Municipal Police made a judgement based on the factors discussed previously on how many posts are required to effectively police each region. Next the needed posts were integrated with our calculated staffing chart to account for an officer’s time off. It should be noted on the staffing charts, that those positions not covered on a 24—hoar a day, seven day a week basis were given a value of 1.00.
The following is an individual staffing analysis of each req ion.
—37--
I
I
NREG ION Niagara Region The Niagara Region includes park facilities in the Counties of Erie and Niagara along the north western boc.der of the state. The region’s parks are located along Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Niagara River and most are located close to the urban areas of Buffalo and Niagara Falls. The region covers fourteen park facilities, with the headquarters located at the Niagara Reservation in downtown Niagara Falls. The fulitime complement of police officers includes twenty four sworn officers. The rank structure in the region includes a captain as commanding officer, two lieutenants, six sergeants and fifteen police officers. During the summer months an additional twenty four officers are hired, bringing the sworn total to forty eight. During the off—season the park police allocate two motorized patrols on the day shift, three on afternoons and three on nights. Additionally a foot patzol officer works each shtt in the Nia;ara Reservatic’n. There an also suLervi’c.rs assigned on all thre: tocrs uf duty. During the pear s2ason Dcorized patr;ls are incressed significantly on the afternoon and night shifts, white foot patrols are upraded at the Niagara Reservation. As with all regions the police in Niacara face a variety of police activity. A malor are4 of concern that is di Ecrent here than in most other rgions is the iarernationa3 attraction for Nisgara Falls (Niagara Reservation). Here the park police must greet thousands ot tourist annually.
Niagara
of
availability
hours
Hours
duty.
would
man
duty
completed, represents
Court Other
Compensatory
Holidays
Military
sick/Injury
Vacation
personal
Regular
Factor
factor.
calculating
personnel
year
The
2,920
each
As
available
in
represent
The Time
Region.
was
above
man
of Days
Leave
Leave
year.
factors
the
the
(on
2,920
needed
previously
factor
year
the
Time
Off
2,920
average
hours
to
Totals:
duty)
the
If
Niagara
man
calculate
listed
to
will
total
this
hours
are
hours
fill Average
Number amount
stated,
be
number
totaled.
Region1s
below
hours
in
156.53
104
the
used
1252.24
13.29
11.25
19.9
—4
(365
the
--
2.08
1.25
4.6
a
.16 0—
of
of
Hours
posts
once
‘ian
were
available
is
to
availability
days
Days
hours assignment/availability
subtracted
determine
The
year
these
considered
Off
which
x
an
resulting
B
is
by hours)
xB officer
calculations
are
then
an
the
factor.
Hours
from
Number
utilized
in
officer
divided
1252.24 the
total number
106.32
832
159.2
is
respect
——
16.64
10
90 36.8
the
1667,76
vailab1e
1.28
difference
away
of
This
basic
number
are
for
in
by
Ecurs
from
to
the
the —
Civilian
Sworn
ppendix
advantages
operate
the
addition,
Region
Dispatch
Post
Post
Post
Post
Post
post
Sgt.
Captain
Ct.
Post
the
officer’s
chart
(Civilian)
Total
in
2,920
desk,
a
Present
The
recommended
5
6
4
3
1
2
Finally
Man
increase
with
Hours
(foot)
the
D
Bureau
sworn
SM?
Year
24
of
of
time
Niagara
desk
the
Staffing
this
using
recommends
we
1,75
1.75
1.75
1.75 1.75
Nights
1.00
1.00
officers
off.
their
availability
for
and
staffing
integrated
report
civilians
Region
Municipal
dispatch
present
The
Available
1667.76
are
that
Hours
dealing
during
result
Proposed
1.75
1.75
1.75
Days
1.75
1.00
the
...A
tree
factor
is operation.
5
staff
Police
1...
civilians
needed
explained
the
is
with
to
Afternoons
Proposed
Staffing
represented
from
included
perform
off
recommends
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.75
1.00
1.75
1.00
Assignment/Avai1abi1it
civilianization.
posts
season.
24
29
By
be
Total:
5
in
Staffing
sworn
Chart
patrol
utilizing
hired
to
to
Factor
greater
1.75
5.25
1.75
1.75
3.50 3.50
5.25
5.25
2.00
3.75 Score
1.00
below
a
that account
flaw
to
staffing
and
functions.
the
29.
detail
shows
34
Rounded
civilians
trained
5.00
2,00
2.00
4.00
4.00
5.00
4.00
5.00
2.00
1.00
for
Difference
Niagara
In
+5
an
in
to
the
The on
{W0041362.1}
7.
8.
6.
5. 3.
4.
2.
1.
2018
A81O9A
lump
A
Dumping)
S7534
55267
S3987
S6234
Presumption)
Staffing)
S4634A
S55948
8795
LeisIation
sum
YOUNG
Funke
Akshar
Funke
Abbate Golden
payments)
D’Urso
Funke
Same
Same
(Relates
No
Same
Same
of
Same
Same
as
Same
interest
as
A6968
as
as
to
as
S6571A
as
A
A7600B
as
Zoar
S
1459
(20
A6413A
Solages
6316
4
to
Valley)
year
GOLDEN
the
Abbate
Jenne
(Park
BROOKS
retirement
PBA
Abbate
(Increases
(3/4
Police
(Relates of
Disability)
New
(University
(Relates
bill)
Merger
to
Forest
York
increasing
Bill)
to
Ranger
State
Illegal Heart