New "we don't call them quotas" for Phoenix Police (crime, credit)

[R_Cowgirl]

Consider yourself warned - They don't want to say they are giving the police Quotas... but they are "setting standards to increase efficiency..." Doublespeak for Quotas
Report: Phoenix police leaders discuss shakeup to boost officer productivity - ktar.com

[JAinAZ]

Originally Posted by R_Cowgirl

Consider yourself warned - They don't want to say they are giving the police Quotas... but they are "setting standards to increase efficiency..." Doublespeak for Quotas
Report: Phoenix police leaders discuss shakeup to boost officer productivity - ktar.com

Don't you have benchmarks you have to hit and standards you are held to in your job? Every job has a way to measure if you are doing what you are there for. Officers are no different. If there were no expectations of them to make traffic stops, some would not make any because it is not their thing. Trust me, their are plenty of people breaking traffic laws. The officers do not have to make things up if that's what you are worried about.

[johnp292]

Originally Posted by JAinAZ

Don't you have benchmarks you have to hit and standards you are held to in your job? Every job has a way to measure if you are doing what you are there for. Officers are no different. If there were no expectations of them to make traffic stops, some would not make any because it is not their thing. Trust me, their are plenty of people breaking traffic laws. The officers do not have to make things up if that's what you are worried about.

+1

I've always wondered why people get in such a dither over police "quotas". I can see that being a legitimate measure of an officer's job performance. So what if there's a quota? Worried about it...don't drive like an idiot.

[Bummer]

Makes sense to me, John and JA . . .

Most, if not all, jobs have some form of quotas or standards.

I have a feeling all law enforcement agencies have some type of "job standards" and, as a taxpayer, definitely would not want it any other way.

[wit-nit]

Yes, less donuts more activitiy, doing the job the taxpayers are paying for. Actually we need more cops to combat this bad habit of crime in the community and the idiots driving on public roads.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by JAinAZ

Don't you have benchmarks you have to hit and standards you are held to in your job? Every job has a way to measure if you are doing what you are there for. Officers are no different. If there were no expectations of them to make traffic stops, some would not make any because it is not their thing. Trust me, their are plenty of people breaking traffic laws. The officers do not have to make things up if that's what you are worried about.

A certain amount of this is perfectly legitimate ... however, when people think of "quotas", they usually imagine a certain number that employees have to reach on a daily/hourly basis, or on a weekly average. It's kind of like how many widgets have to be produced by factory workers per hour or per day. Law enforcement should be run much differently than a factory because they are providing a public SERVICE, not a product. I personally do not want police officers being forced to write a certain number of traffic tickets, arrest a certain number of people, or raid a certain number of suspected undercover brothels simply to make their "quota" just so they can earn a "satisfactory" or "exceeds" ranking on their next performance review.

These kinds of quotas will not necessarily improve crime fighting. In fact, I have gotten the impression lately that the PPD has become more lax when it comes to responding to calls. As an example, my neighbor's burglar alarm went off twice within a six month period ... both times were unfortunately classified as "false alarms" when the police arrived, so he was fined! Responding to calls is an officer's JOB, regardless how "false" the call is perceived to be. Fining a homeowner for the police responding to burglar alarm calls tells me that the PPD is less interested in doing their jobs & protecting the public, which our tax money is already paying them to do.

[johnp292]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

A certain amount of this is perfectly legitimate ... however, when people think of "quotas", they usually imagine a certain number that employees have to reach on a daily/hourly basis, or on a weekly average. It's kind of like how many widgets have to be produced by factory workers per hour or per day. Law enforcement should be run much differently than a factory because they are providing a public SERVICE, not a product. I personally do not want police officers being forced to write a certain number of traffic tickets, arrest a certain number of people, or raid a certain number of suspected undercover brothels simply to make their "quota" just so they can earn a "satisfactory" or "exceeds" ranking on their next performance review.

These kinds of quotas will not necessarily improve crime fighting. In fact, I have gotten the impression lately that the PPD has become more lax when it comes to responding to calls. As an example, my neighbor's burglar alarm went off twice within a six month period ... both times were unfortunately classified as "false alarms" when the police arrived, so he was fined! Responding to calls is an officer's JOB, regardless how "false" the call is perceived to be. Fining a homeowner for the police responding to burglar alarm calls tells me that the PPD is less interested in doing their jobs & protecting the public, which our tax money is already paying them to do.

Getting fined for false alarms happens all over, not just in a Phoenix. It's a deterrent and an incentive to maintain or fix the alarm system. Responding to false alarms is very time consuming, and can take officers away from an actual emergency, and needlessly endangers responders.

[Bummer]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

A certain amount of this is perfectly legitimate ... however, when people think of "quotas", they usually imagine a certain number that employees have to reach on a daily/hourly basis, or on a weekly average. It's kind of like how many widgets have to be produced by factory workers per hour or per day. Law enforcement should be run much differently than a factory because they are providing a public SERVICE, not a product. I personally do not want police officers being forced to write a certain number of traffic tickets, arrest a certain number of people, or raid a certain number of suspected undercover brothels simply to make their "quota" just so they can earn a "satisfactory" or "exceeds" ranking on their next performance review.

These kinds of quotas will not necessarily improve crime fighting. In fact, I have gotten the impression lately that the PPD has become more lax when it comes to responding to calls. As an example, my neighbor's burglar alarm went off twice within a six month period ... both times were unfortunately classified as "false alarms" when the police arrived, so he was fined! Responding to calls is an officer's JOB, regardless how "false" the call is perceived to be. Fining a homeowner for the police responding to burglar alarm calls tells me that the PPD is less interested in doing their jobs & protecting the public, which our tax money is already paying them to do.

Who should pay for frequent "false alarms" due to a poorly maintained and/or a system that was installed in a sloppy manner, Valley Native . . . definitely NOT the taxpayers and not at the expense of a real emergency.

Originally Posted by johnp292

Getting fined for false alarms happens all over, not just in a Phoenix. It's a deterrent and an incentive to maintain or fix the alarm system. Responding to false alarms is very time consuming, and can take officers away from an actual emergency, and needlessly endangers responders.

Excellent point, John . . . hopefully the next time Valley Native contacts 911 the cops are not already responding to some idiot's frequent "false alarm" system.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by Bummer

Who should pay for frequent "false alarms" due to a poorly maintained and/or a system that was installed in a sloppy manner, Valley Native . . . definitely NOT the taxpayers and not at the expense of a real emergency.

Excellent point, John . . . hopefully the next time Valley Native contacts 911 the cops are not already responding to some idiot's frequent "false alarm" system.

Yes, but a "false alarm" can mean different things to different people ... so in the case of the police, it is often a matter of opinion. Case in point: I received a similar warning for a "false alarm" from the PPD earlier this year, but I protested it because somebody (likely a would be intruder) actually came to my front door and banged on it so hard that it set off the alarm. The person left and never actually "broke in" (obviously because he heard the alarm). It was late at night and I was asleep ... and yes, I keep my alarm activated when I go to bed at night. So you tell me: what purpose would some jackass have for coming around late at night banging on somebody's door?! Likely, to commit a CRIME such as burglary! I credit my screeching alarm for scaring him away ... not the police who came out after the fact & slapped me with a warning a week later!

In the case of my neighbor who actually received a fine, I don't know what actually triggered his alarm to go off twice within six months, but he wasn't home when both incidents happened. All of us already pay taxes for the police to respond to calls because it is after all THEIR JOB to do so, whether the call is "false" or not. Sending out warnings & fine notices is putting an unnecessary burden on homeowners who are simply trying to protect their property ... it does nothing to fight crime.

[Bummer]

Sounds like you actually had an emergency, Valley Native . . .

As for "false alarms" . . . in most, if not all, cases the police rarely declare it "false" and assess a fine until there has been at least a couple of unnecessary calls.

As for paying taxes . . . WE ALL PAY TAXES and those that ABUSE the system with a poorly maintained system definitely need to pay more rather than raising the taxes for all of us in order to cover the additional expenses directly related to the negligence of a few arrogant bozos.