NSB-911 was formed by a group of NSB taxpayers and voters who have become more and more weary and wary of the fiscal operations of the NSB government and its elected officials. As a group, we also felt that for the most part the city taxpayers as a whole, were not as familar and educated as to the actions or in many cases, the inaction by our leaders that in the end run wastes our hard earned money. The editorials here we hope will educate, incense and act as a call to arms, much like the patriots of old, that results in direct improvement to the operation of this lovely city we call home. Please join us in our efforts; we look forward to hearing from you. Our website and email will be active soon.
Welcome to NSB-911's Editorial and Education Page
This Article Started as a Response to a blog on the Shadow about accreditation. While we at NSB-911 feel that the current and immediate past leadership within the NSB Police Department have squandered time and resources over the last 7-8 years attempting to get accredited under the Florida Accreditation system, we remain convinced that the overall intent of law enforcement accreditation is a positive influence on the quality of local policing. We thus felt the need to give the readers some background and understanding of what exactly the program is about and why in the long run it will be good the city department.
10/10/11 NSB Accreditation
To 612-611 (the original blogger). Thanks for the link, however what you are reading there is the "I hate CALEA blog." It is also painfully evident that many of the people blogging there, do not have an understanding of what accreditation or the accreditation agency, the Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. (CALEA) was established to do. First it was established by the Justice Department with the help of the five national and international policing professional organizations (The International Association of Chiefs of Police [IACP] Police Executive Research Forum [PERF], Police Foundation, NOBLE [National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives], and NSA [National Sheriff's Association]) to further the development of policing standards in the US. Its roots go back to 1970’s and the President's Commission Report on Policing in America which uncovered the nearly universal lack of adequate policy and standards for policing in the US.
Despite their complaints, CALEA, is not run by a bunch of outsiders; it is run by police, with a sprinkling of local and state elected official (e.g., those the police work for and report to.) In addition, the standards are constantly under review by working police personnel in a variety of committees, with changes voted on, in open session, after much public debate. That is a lot more input than is allowed by our local commission which tries to rule by edict after stifling debate and preventing public input.
These review sessions are open to the public. In fact, when an agency is seeking accreditation and undergoing the on-site inspection (again by their peers, other working police personnel trained in the standards and not some “people behind a desk” as alleged by the bloggers there), the agency is required to make accessible to the public, at places such as libraries, copies of their rules and regulations for public inspection. In addition, the public has an opportunity to speak, in public session, with the assessors, either in support or in opposition to the agency’s accreditation. Again, much more than is allowed by our local elected ones (lead by the Mayor) here in NSB; and there is no three minute limit.
Finally, the standards DO NOT, as claimed by the bloggers, TELL the agency what to do. Rather they require the agency to address nationally accepted critical issues in their policy. An example might be that the standard would require that the agency emergency phone number be placed in a highly visible location on the agency’s vehicles. It does not say where or limit what else may be on the vehicle. I would think that makes sense to our bloggers here. In another area it is required that the agency have a system to respond to and investigate complaints about the police, e.g., an internal affairs function. It goes to list other critical elements or process steps of such a policy, all of which have been universally accepted as best practices nationally and within the judicial system. It does not write the directive nor mandate wording; only issues be addressed.
While we have issues with the manner in which this process has been handled by our local chief (or more accurately not handled), we do support the concept as a betterment of the department in the long run. In addition, from the legal standpoint, such compliance with national standards in local policy also usually results in lower levels of successful litigation against it for acts of its member and thus saves the public money in the long run, as one big case can cost the City five times what accreditation cost might be.
There is a lot more to the accreditation process including preemptive warning systems on officers who have use of force or other citizen interaction problems. There are statistical data reports that measure effectiveness and efficiency in delivering police services and in other cases watch over the storage and handling of evidence and property. There are evaluations of use of force, how high speed pursuit is conducted, monitored and controlled. Other areas include the personnel function, investigative services (case closure standards) and how police interact with the community. The system is best described as an on-going staff inspection of the entirety of police operations that wise police leaders use to ensure professional and acceptable delivery of service. All of these can only enhance the service delivery here in NSB.
We have been addressing CALEA as that was what was being bantered about on the blog. But the NSB department has chosen to become accredited under the Florida Accreditation System, which, while quite similar, has fewer standards than the national system (roughly abut 55%). While CALEA was the forerunner, many states have also adopted their own systems similar to Florida. In some cases it was cost and others it was the differences with the standards and to some extent local options. Within Volusia County there are several CALEA certified agencies including the Volusia County Sheriff's Office, Port Orange Police (both of which have been accredited since the 1990s. Volusia County agencies accredited under the Florida System include Volusia County Beach Patrol, South Daytona Police, Port Orange Police, Ponce Inlet Police, Ormond Beach Police, DeLand police, Daytona Beach shores police, Daytona Beach Police, to mention a few. While Florida agencies were a large part of the initial CALEA system, the trend has been to go with the state system for many of the reasons noted above, most importantly the cost.
So what has happened to NSB? We at NSB-911 can only point the finger directly at management or the lack thereof. For the last 6-7 years there has been at least four (4) commanders and a chief floating around a 50-60 person department with a low crime and event rate, coupled with a laid back service population. In essence more than enough high paid help to manage the streamlined and simplified Florida accreditation system. In fact the retention of at least two of these commanders was repeatedly predicated on their involvement with the accreditation process. We must face that fact, for a department this size, meeting the Florida standards at best is about an 18 month job and that not at a full time pace. They have even had a computer software package that not only managed their written directives and training, but also compliance with the various standards. But compliance requires thoughtfully developed policy that not only meets the standard, but is acceptable to the workers and that entails respect at all levels, something we believe is missing from the NSB department. Hiring a consultant to do the clerical work associated with such a project does not relieve management from developing the policy and quite frankly we do not believe such management expertise is currently present to accomplish the mission.
In closing we would like to point out that resident within the city population are numerous retired police personnel from all walks of policing. Some of these were actually accreditation managers, usually under the CALEA system and have the expertise to fix this problem at little or no cost working as volunteers. We used several of these retirees as sources for this article and feel the city missed a great opportunity by not engaging them.
Here is the link to the Florida Accreditation Home Page : http://www.flaccreditation.org/Index.html
Here is the link to CALEA's home page: http://www.calea.org/
Till we talk again,
Your Friends at
NSB-911
FROM OUR FRIENDS AT NSB-911: THE SHADOW RECEIVED THIS OPINION PIECE FROM OUR FRIENDS AT NSB-911 AND IT IS PRINTED HERE FOR YOUR REVIEW:
NSB-911 Comments on Consent Agendas and Public Safety Pensions
NSB-911, like many others in New Smyrna Beach, is concerned about the absence of transparency of the City Commission and City Government. While the veil of compliance appears in place, the reality is that much of what goes on actually goes on behind closed or otherwise “unannounced doors.” Complicating this issue is that when the issues are finally brought to a vote during the Commission meetings, taxpayers are muzzled and not allowed to comment. directly to the issue. Furthering this sham is the excessive use of the consent agenda to ramrod things through approval with no discussion, apparently supported by both the Commission and the City Manager.
Consent agendas are designed to facilitate approval of routine pending items that are part of the normal course of government business, but which require some level of legislative approval. An example might be the closing of a city street to accommodate a city sponsored event directed at the entirety of the city’s residents. There is no question about the public purpose, but an approval vote is required. Other examples are the routine approval of existing contracts for city purchases such as fuel for city vehicles and service contracts for city equipment. None of these actions would generate much public debate and are considered necessary for the continued and normal operation of the city government.
The City Commission, however, has taken the position of placing anything on the consent agenda which might spark public interest or debate in an apparent effort to prevent such debate. The most recent example of this was the labor contract with the fire union, the IAFF. While the labor negotiations are open to the public, the public has no opportunity to comment at these negotiations, so they are forced to the position of observer not participant. The City’s “shade meetings”, where they plan their approach, are closed to the public. Yet as the Shadow has commented repeatedly, there is probably no secret to the union as to what is discussed as some commissioners tend to lean to the unions’ point of view and take their money for re-election. One can only assume how quickly the message is passed on. So the only party left out of these “shade”” meetings is really the taxpayer.
Add to the mix that the Commission has announced in their annual goals that addressing the problem with these (using the Mayor’s words) “unsustainable” pensions was a high priority, the fact is nothing has been done for the second or third year in a row and they have now merely put it off for another year in the contract. We believe, these pensions, followed by those of the police department, are the single most pressing problem with the City’s fiscal survival in the long run and demand the attention of the City Commission before anything else. The must address these before they waste time on nice-to-have projects like bathrooms in beach parking lots that no one uses or badminton courts on the beach. Fixing the problems of the Sports Complex, while important also, takes back seat to the City taxpayers holding the short end of the stick on the unfunded liability of these pension; an unfunded liability that continues to be under-estimated because of using unattainable rates of return on investments.
The issue is that the City has again hid the problems of the pension and their non-action (one might wonder if campaign contributions play a role here) and the taxpayer remains the odd person out. In summary, transparency is again disrupted by the City Commission and it is time, more than ever, to hold them accountable. Maybe a short group trip up north to Port Orange might clear their cobwebs.
10/17/11
10/10/11
