The economics of local public safety
What if I told you the San Bernardino Police Department budget has risen about 600% over the past 25 years? Wow?
Yes, most reasonable people would reflexively think that sounds like an accelerated pace.
But reasonable people would also need more information, namely contextual data about such matters as crime rates, tax rates, local revenues and other program expenditures, before they could really judge whether 600% is a rate consistent with city's wants and needs.
Well, many of those numbers are readily available, and the basic picture they paint shows police and fire (ie. public safety) spending drastically outpacing both city revenues and other program expenditures. At the same time, crime has ebbed and flowed over the years, peaking in the early 1990s and falling moderately on a per capita basis over the past decade.
In short, the data, including an expenditure table since 1982 that I've posted below, is not particularly heartening. Clearly, police and fire spending have ballooned by a far higher rate than the one at which crime and fires have been reduced, meaning we get less bang for each additional buck than we'd like (economists call this diminishing marginal returns, a theory that says that beyond some point, each additional unit of investment, ie money, yields less additional output, ie crime reduction).
At the same time, because the expenditures in public safety increase at a rate far exceeding that of city revenue growth, other services have fewer available resources (economists call this opportunity cost, or the cost of choosing one option as opposed to another, ie. every dollar spent on a police helicopter or a bulletproof vest is a dollar not used on something else, say youth recreation or library computers).
Click below and you'll see a table of spending patterns in four major departments since 1982. Data is provided by the City Manager's office.
year Parks Fire Police Library Total city funds
FY 06/07 $5,794,000 $30,248,000.00 $55,536,100.00 $2,836,600.00 $132,818,100
FY 05/06 $5,680,100 $28,812,300.00 $50,789,800.00 $2,758,400.00 $124,722,000
FY 04/05 $5,457,800 $26,994,000.00 $47,610,600.00 $2,487,500.00 $117,420,700
FY 03/04 $5,286,900 $23,026,300.00 $44,003,700.00 $2,395,300.00 $105,755,000
FY 02/03 $5,447,300 $21,305,000.00 $43,959,900.00 $3,185,700.00 $98,250,300
FY 01/02 $5,060,800 $19,653,000.00 $40,973,100.00 $2,855,700.00 $96,809,100
FY 00/01 $4,881,200 $18,128,900.00 $36,145,800.00 $2,838,100.00 $83,827,400
FY 99/00 $4,653,600 $17,325,900.00 $35,311,700.00 $2,730,700.00 $78,923,400
FY 98/99 $4,757,200 $16,659,500.00 $35,387,300.00 $2,684,400.00 $80,177,200
FY 97/98 $4,688,500 $15,197,300.00 $33,301,000.00 $2,175,000.00 $76,248,900
FY 96/97 $5,015,400 $15,076,500.00 $33,259,800.00 $2,745,900.00 $72,793,700
FY 95/96 $5,093,300 $14,568,600.00 $32,012,800.00 $2,961,400.00 $71,964,700
FY 94/95 $5,224,300 $14,124,100.00 $28,824,900.00 $2,916,600.00 $71,787,200
FY 93/34 $5,360,500 $14,423,200.00 $28,959,500.00 $2,934,200.00 $72,410,300
FY 92/93 $4,818,016 $13,410,250.00 $28,027,750.00 $2,889,727.00 $70,371,907
FY 91/92 $5,985,588 $13,735,266.00 $27,859,248.00 $3,020,389.00 $70,760,795
FY 90/91 $5,690,261 $12,665,556.00 $22,556,879.00 $2,910,455.00 $68,398,857
FY 89/90 $5,129,542 $11,840,189.00 $20,297,321.00 $2,777,693.00 $61,268,323
FY 88/89 $4,772,083 $11,267,983.00 $18,530,421.00 $2,676,225.00 $56,235,706
FY 87/88 $4,412,156 $10,053,542.00 $18,465,321.00 $2,515,064.00 $49,475,585
FY 86/87 $4,224,253 $10,737,364.00 $17,424,057.00 $2,370,918.00 $49,538,586
FY 85/86 $4,234,369 $9,948,414.00 $15,935,725.00 $2,384,122.00 $46,643,881
FY 84/85 $3,838,810 $9,050,840.00 $14,099,923.00 $1,431,828.00 $43,738,878
FY 83/84 $3,236,607 $8,148,631.00 $11,187,654.00 $1,282,910.00 $37,749,277
FY 82/83 $3,733,421 $7,342,343.00 $10,673,982.00 $1,154,588.00 $36,545,451
A number of things jump out from this table, which represents money NOT adjusted for inflation. The first is the rate at which the police department's budget has grown, particularly over the last 5 years.
From 1982 to 2007, the police budget jumped about 520 percent in unadjusted dollars.
Over the same period, the city's total general fund budget increased about 360 percent. Whereas the city's $10.7 million police budget represented 29 percent of overall city spending in 1982, the department commanded 42 percent in 2007.
Similar, albeit slightly lower, rates are present in the Fire Department.
So, two questions immediately emerge: 1) why the drastic increase in public safety spending and 2) has it paid dividends.
The answer to the first is complex, but some factors stand out. The cost of personnel is probably the biggest driver. Due to heavy demand, strong unions and a surge in political popularity,
Police and Fire personnel are much better paid than they were 25 years ago.
The bottom pay for new police officers is $4,685 per month, or $56,220 per year. With insurance, outstanding benefits, a retirement program that promises up to 90 percent of salary for the rest of a retiree's life, the total cost to taxpayers of each officer is well over $100,000, probably closer to $150,000.
There was a time when police and fire personnel were low-paid, low-prestige public servants. Those days are over, with even the lowest paid officers making nearly double the county median wage, which is in the $30,000 - $40,000 range.
With the benefits and retirement package, it isn't even that close.
Of course, policing is hard, dangerous work (although it should be noted that many other lower paid occupations have higher fatality rates than policing, including commercial fishermen, roofers, refuse collectors and loggers), but it has always been so.
Now, its men and women are paid better for their efforts.
If personnel is the biggest factor, political popularity is another. Police spending is enjoying an epoch of near universal approval.
Cities all over the country are beefing up their forces, spending more, buying helicopters and tank-like attack vehicles to "keep us safe." No one within the political mainstream suggests pay cuts for officers, lowering benefits, wresting power from unions or reducing staffs. Those sentiments may return, but they are dead for now.
This is the post 9/11 era, and security is enjoying a period of what I like to call "supreme value status."
As to the second question, has it paid dividends, the answer is still more difficult. It is always hard to say directly that more spending should result in something directly on the street, because people and the crimes they committ are governed by innumerable factors.
If, for example, I say more money was spent on policing and crime went up, therefore the money was ineffective in its goal, you could easily retort that much more crime would have been committed had the new money not been spent, a point that may be impossible to disprove.
But we do know the law of diminishing returns is at work, otherwise we could just spend more money on police until crime disappeared. That won't happen because, in part, above a certain point the benefit of hiring another new officer is outweighed by its costs.
Not sure exactly where that point is, but we can say that it appears the record jump in police spending from 2006-7 to 2007-8 didn't have the desired impact. Violent crime was up 7 percent.
Homicides were up by one. Arrests were down by about 5 percent. All of this despite boosting the from $55.5 million to 63 million.
Not too much bang for the additional buck with these levels of spending, perhaps.
We are in the midst of an unprecedented police growth since 2000. In 2000, the police budget was $36.1 million. Eight years later, $63 million, or a 175 percent increase.
Over the same period, total violent crime remained virtually unchanged, violent crime per capita fell about 10 percent and criminal homicides rose nearly 50 percent.
In sum, crime has not been effected in proportion to the massive increase in spending. At the same time, we can't conclude how much crime was prevented by the new spending or what would have happened had the department been flush with new resources.
It's all very interesting. In the next post we'll explore the notion of preventive spending, which is en vogue among many economists and social theorists, with the idea that long-term crime reduction is better achieved with more investment in at-risk youths because those dollars can save the need for more policing while generating wealth through cultivation of productive citizens.
4 Comments
Leave a comment
About SB Now Blog
Andrew Edwards. E-mail Andrew here.
Some of those numbers are pretty eye popping. One thing you didn't mention is how many six figure princes work in that department, guys who don't get on the street anymore and are just waiting to retire and get paid $100,000 a year forever.
This is just a tragedy. If the library had more funds we'd find more kids THERE after school READING instead of out ont he streets causing trouble and woulnd't have to fork out all this money for "Operations Phoneix" either! Maybe if the Mayor would spend more time promoting boy schouts or girl scouts we wouldn't need his high priced crime guy either!
I think what has changed during the years is pride in the profession of Policing. Nowdays it is just a government job that pays a fantastic retirement (not unlike the Post Office).
Most of the officers in SBPD do not live in our city.
They have not (to date, and to my knowledge) participated in VOLUNTEER activities like the Police Activities Leage (PAL) which has proven to reduce crime.
BUT WHY SHOULD THEY? It is NOT their community. Their kids don't go to these schools, their spouses don't drive these streets on a daily basis.
And then you have the division between the Police Union and the Top Brass. What is going on when you have a newly formed PAL that can't get volunteers but the Police Union can form their own organization (TEAM VIP) and get volunteers.
While everyone is playing games, CHILDREN (and adults) are DYING on OUR streets.
The prison industrial complex, like the military industrial complex are both manufactured economies with manufactured WARS.There are very rich stockholders making tons of money on SECURITY.The WAR on DRUGS is America's civil war, being fought on our streets with police. The police dont work for you and I anymore to keep our neighborhoods safe. They fill prisons. That is there job.While Haliburton builds more prisons, Wackenhut feeds prisoners, profits are made. Todays police officers are not PEACE Officers. They are PUBLIC Enemy #1.There targets people of color and the poor. The fact that operation phoniex money was spent on helicopters and bullet proof vests should tell everyone what they are really doing. They are ARMING for BATTLE.They are not investing in "The Community" and making it a vibrant livable community, they are going in to shake it up, put people in jail, destroy lives. The message also is how afraid they are of the people who they are supposed to be working for. None of these people
( police) live in the community, so they can make as much of a mess as they want.The crime #'s come from them(police) so they can apply for their grants and raise tax's. Its all in illusion. When a kid gets caught for a little pot, gets a record, then is disqualified from college grants from the federal government...what is the real message.Was a criminal just MADE?Communities around the country that have less police, have less crime. San Bernardino is a crime ridden community with a huge police force.Like any INDUSTRY they need to keep there numbers high.Special DRUG tasks forces have been formed in San Bernardino who COMPETE for busts. Its a game my friends.Its all about filling the prisons, keeping this manufactured economy going. Who pays...the community.If the leaders really cared, they would be providing livable communities for the families of those communities, instead, helicopters and police tasks forces will be infiltrating these already poor neighborhoods striking FEAR, not LOVE or Compassion into these already troubled neighborhoods. More people will go to jail, some guilty, some not and new criminals made by thier visits to the California prison system. What a racket.There are 2million people in jail for POT. The USA has the largest prison population in the world.Once in jail, you are excluded from jobs, college , renting apartments. You also are not COUNTED IN THE UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS that DRIVE THE ECONOMY!More police means MORE crime.In San Bernardino it appears more VIOLENT, HOMICIDAL Crime.Police are making the criminals out of our youths. People really need to WAKE UP.
Ronald Regan's WAR on DRUGS opened up a an Economy that is destroying this country.Before he did this, there were NO GANGS. There were NO BLIGHTED CRIME Infested areas. There were NO SWAT TEAMS. Stop blaming the poor. Put the blame where it belongs. The POLICE.The stockholders of Corp. America, the corrupt politicians.The police departments true colors are being exposed tho...with none of them volunteering to HELP kids with the PAL Program. Just more ARMOR.They have such a us against them attitude. In San Bernardino, everyone is a criminal in their eyes, except for them. Look at the mess they have made. I think they should all be FORCED to LIVE in the MESS they have made.