Questionable motives....

[Deerhunter]

I read where there is a proposal that will put Sheriffs in high crime areas of the city. Now, in Paytakis budget he wants to hire 300 Troopers to patrol high crime areas of the States cities. Neither of these entities will increase funding to Bflo. Even under the Control Boards watchful eye. Yet, they will create jobs, as long as the jobs are under their control. They'll pay salaries, benefits and pensions to these newly hired, additional Officers, yet they won't give any aid to the City. I would think, as the County knows, and leads by example, the way it purposely underfunds the Holding Center, that it is cheaper to pay overtime than to hire additional bodies.......unless it will portray to the public that you are tough on crime, which in so many cases is a facade. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Personally I don't mind having the other LE bodies around, but for my county and state taxes to increase, forever, which is what happens when there are new hires, I really have to question these actions, especially during these fragile financial times. I mean , the county is in jeopardy of not making payroll (according to our CE), and the State is facing a 5 billion dollar deficit ? Makes me wonder.

[Curmudgeon]

Yet, they will create jobs, as long as the jobs are under their control.

That's called management and that is what the people of the state of New York expect from their leadership: to manage the employees.

The BPD and the PBA are managed by no one except for themselves. They are an agency/organization whose primary purpose is to enrich themselves. They are not alone - another fine example of such an organization is the California State Prison Guards assoc/union.

By adopting policies like the PBA has, it has doomed itself to being confined to "the contract" and it can expect to be further compartmentalized and marginalized in the future. THis is what happens when any employee/organization decides it will no longer comply with management. Hopefully, this will be the beginning of the dissolution of the BPD as we know it. It will be a fine day for the taxpayer when that occurs.

[citymouse]

I would call it mis-managment. Joel is not going to get the political control of the Buffalo Police department he would like so he will put sheriffis on the streets to circumvent what the police are doing. He seems to have gotten his buddie George patacki involved as well.
If there is no comunication between the different agencies then they could prove a danger to each other on the street.
I fail to see the need for it. It seem redundant.
The Masiello administration is so quick to admit it's shortcomings it becomes a joke after awhile. If they can't police effectivley with what they have then hire more police.

[Night Owl]

Joel is not going to get the political control of the Buffalo Police department he would like so he will put sheriffis on the streets to circumvent what the police are doing.

I think I'm going to have to agree with citymouse on this one.

Did you know the 'high' crime rate has actually lowered in the past few years? (ie- high crime such as murder) I saw it somewhere in Buffalo statistics; I'll have to try to relocate it on the internet to post for this thread.

If there is no comunication between the different agencies then they could prove a danger to each other on the street.

Very, very excellent point.

[Curmudgeon]

If there is no comunication between the different agencies then they could prove a danger to each other on the street.

Possibly true. So, let the sherriffs do the hard stuff and let the BPD do traffic tickets and funeral escorts. After seeing all the scandals in the BPD Narcotics dept over the years, perhaps it's time to hand that over to somebody else.

If the two agencies are doing seperate things, the odds of them bumping into each other will be substantially reduced.

[Deerhunter]

Commissioner Diina manages the BPD. He along with 2 Deputy Commissioners, and 8 Chiefs comprise the managment team. The BPD is led by Bob Meegan, who was elected by the members. As the President of the Union, he looks out for the best interests of the members of the BPD. And in my opinion does a great job. You mention the California Correction Officers, they to have made great strides, but look how they did it...they play the game, and bought politicians, Nyscopba, the NYS CO's are doing the same thing, they recently attained binding arbitration. They did so by breaking away from CSEA, becoming independent, and lobbying (bribing) Paytaki. Quite effectively to. You may not know it, but the Sheriffs have binding arbitration starting in 05'. Watch and see the raise they get. Also they are on a 12 hr schedule. That job just got alot better, in a very short time. After they are brought up to pay scale, a merger might happen, as , to make somthing like that work, you've got to have the support of the actual workers that do the job. Another farce is that the Holding Center Deputies and the Alden Correction Officers have merged. That is an outright lie. They haven't . For that to occur you need the endorsment of both Unions members. There are senority , and bidding rights , as well as job titles , that are in question. And another thing...if they do merge , they are going to the higher pay scale, in the event they do merge, so taxpayers will be coughing up a little more. A little homework can go a long way.

[Night Owl]

So, let the sherriffs do the hard stuff and let the BPD do traffic tickets and funeral escorts. After seeing all the scandals in the BPD Narcotics dept over the years, perhaps it's time to hand that over to somebody else.

And what happens when we incur a time where the sheriff's dept. don't do thier job of 'up-holding' the law?

Perfect example: read this article The Erie County Fair; but is it really 'Fair'? (http://www.speakupwny.com/article_330.shtml)

QUOTE: "...a few members of the Indigo Lighting Company stood behind the stage’s barricade and smoked in the open area, as well as a law enforcement officer sitting on a horse. How much can be said for implement when the Sheriff’s Department doesn’t have the audacity to display example?"

now, I know this is just a minor instence; but it's still an example of how the Sheriff's department isn't all that perfect.

[Co.OfEeerie....]

--------> After they are brought up to pay scale, a merger might happen, as , to make somthing like that work, you've got to have the support of the actual workers that do the job <-----------

Oh? And if not? Seems as though there are many who would fill the slots of those who don't want to support the idea.

Or are we going to go back to the Taylor Law stuff again?

[Revolting!]

"Communication " between the lesser of two evils will not advance us as a community!

Time to take a little trip outside of the box buffalobabies!

[Deerhunter]

Thats the thing here. There are laws, like them or not, that state both Union bodies have to agree to a merger. As well as the Common Council, and both munincipalities. The Taylor Law, in my eyes, keeps Cops and Firemen from striking. It also prevents municipality leaders of creating , not so real deficits, during contract times. I think the so called surplus will help the City Firemen who are currently without a contract. That the city comes out and boasts about having a surplus, indicates to an arbitrator, that the cities ability to pay, exists. Look no further than Gorski, who hid money , annually, then in an election yr, came out with a surplus. People might not like it, but thats the way it is. Period.

[citymouse]

The fact of the matter is the oppisite of what crumudgeon stated. The Buffalo police do the hard stuff, shoot outs , armed robbery, homicide, domestic disputes and other risky police business. The sheriffs department deals with more of the traffic type situations.
While the seriff deputies are quite capable of dealing with these riskier situations, I am sure most like it the way it is.
As a city resident, I am happy with the level of proffesionalism that is the BPD. I think that they are more expirienced with street crime than the sheriffs could ever hope to be.
Joel is not doing us a favor, he is trying to create a political circus out of law enforcement.

[Night Owl]

Joel is not doing us a favor, he is trying to create a political circus out of law enforcement.

With this quote, I'm begining to like your train of thought more and more, citymouse. :)

[Curmudgeon]

You mention the California Correction Officers, they to have made great strides, but look how they did it...they play the game, and bought politicians,

????????????????

Wow. They are the single most powerful lobby in CA. There was an excellent article in the Wall Street Journal last week on just how powerful a special interest group they have become. They have completely co-opted the interal affairs dept and about a dozen inmates have been murdered by guards in the last year alone, with no repercussions. They completely control staffing and overtime alottments. They punish any politican who dares interfere with their operations (dem or rep).

They supported Gray Davis because he promised them a "get tough on crime" platform. Simply put, he was promising them an ever increasing stream of inmates to ensure job protection for the members of the CA prison guards union.

It strikes me as terrifying that the motivation for sending people to prison is rooted in preservation of civil service jobs, and not as a public safety policy.

If that's the kind of "great progress" you're referring to, then you can keep it. It sounds all good to you now, but not if you happen to live in california and your knucklehead 19 year old nephew gets sent to 5 years in prison for stealing a 6-pack with his drunken frat buddies just so prison guards can keep their jobs.

Oh, and prisons cost a fortune. Don't we have enough people in prison already?

P.S. This is coming from a pretty conservative curmudgeon here. Somethings wrong for sure...

[citymouse]

[
They supported Gray Davis because he promised them a "get tough on crime" platform. Simply put, he was promising them an ever increasing stream of inmates to ensure job protection for the members of the CA prison guards union.

WOW!!
You are saying that they support some one who takes a hard stand on crime because he will send more crooks to jail therby providing job security for the guards.
That's like saying law enforcment in NY backed Patacki because he restored the death penalty thereby creating jobs for out of work exicutioners.
Twisted logic. Very, very twisted logic.

[Curmudgeon]

Twisted logic. Very, very twisted logic.

Yes, I'm glad you agree. Your "death sentence" analogy really isn't applicable because the courts have ho hope of sending hundreds of thousands to the death chambers so there really isn't a "labor constituancy" to support.

However, in Gray Davis's case, it was a different story! He was supporting rediculous sentences for drug users, ect not because he wanted California "safer" or something. Nope. It was done entirely to curry favor with a rich and powerful labor union.

The private sector is guilty of this as well. There are private prison corporations who donate heavily to candidates who "get tough" (i.e. send a lot of young people to prison) on crime.

Bad news: your criminal justice system is being co-opted by prison guard unions so that we have an ever-increasing number of young people in prison and you're paying the bill. Don't you find that morally questionable?

You may not even have any morals. Let's assume I don't. Once you get past that, how about the staggering expense of the prison industry?

When you have Conservatives (like myself) doubting the criminal justice industry, something must be VERY wrong indeed. And no, I've never been sent to jail and neither have any of my relatives, if you're curious....

[citymouse]

I assure you I have high moral standards.
Just because they haven't pulled the switch dosen't mean there isn't some "bloated civil service appointment with a hand at the ready" (sarcasm).

[Night Owl]

The Buffalo News:

They did a great study on the city of Buffalo and how the 'crime' rate has dropped dramatically in a 5 year study.

violent crimes are down and nuisances are up.

http://www.buffalonews.com/graphics/2004/01/25/actualsize/0125bflcrime.jpg

menacing is up 39%
harassment up 25.8%

assult down 23%
robbery down 6.3%

LINK: Less crime, more nuisances (http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20040125/1034292.asp)

This is one of the best parts of the story:
There are a few Buffalo neighborhoods, the analysis found, where crime is no greater than in some of the suburbs. Six city neighborhoods have a lower crime rate than Cheektowaga. South Abbott's is lower than the towns of West Seneca, Orchard Park, Tonawanda and Amherst.