Position on budget for police officers and firefighters

There’s been some misinformation going around about the vote which I took on June 18th regarding the City’s budget. Some people are saying that I voted to lay off in excess of 100 police officers and firefighters.

Nothing could be further from the truth. I didn’t vote to cut any police officers or firefighters and I wouldn’t.

Here’s what really happened.

On June 18th, the Council was scheduled to vote on the Mayor’s proposed budget. Her budget included a minimum of eight furlough days for all 4,000 city employees, including police officers and firefighters.

At that June 18th meeting, Councilor Martinson made a presentation which included figures that had been taken from the Mayor’s budget. The Mayor’s figures showed that, over the next year, the City expects to receive $141.2 million in revenues generated by the City’s two-cents sales tax. The Mayor’s figures also showed that the combined police and fire department budgets for the next year total $142.7 million.

In other words, just the police and fire departments’ budgets, alone, are more than all of the money which will be raised by the two-cents sales tax. That’s just personnel costs, without including capital expenditures such as police cars or fire trucks.

Keep in mind, we have to operate all City departments on the money which is generated by the two-cents’ sales tax. The two-cents sales tax is where the City gets the money for its operations. But, the Mayor’s budget shows that more than 100% of that money will go to police and fire, without any of it going to any of the other City departments.

Obviously, that’s a problem. If all of that money goes to operate only two departments, then other City departments, such as the Parks Department, are left with a shortfall.

At the Council’s June 18th meeting, I made a motion to delay the vote on the Mayor’s budget to give us time to examine those numbers and try to find an answer to the problem. The motion to delay the vote was defeated, 5-4.

One of the other Councilors then made a motion to approve the Mayor’s budget. It was approved by a 5-4 vote.

No one voted to lay anyone off. Councilor Martinson’s budget amendment was never voted on. We only voted on whether or not to delay the vote on the Mayor’s budget to take a look at the problem.

There are two basic facts:

1. We cannot continue to pay police and fire more money than the two cents sales tax generates.
2. We need more police officers.

For a long time, a lot of people have been saying that we need more police officers, but no one knew exactly how many. Last fall, an independent company, MGT of America, presented a report on the Tulsa Police Department. Their report showed that we need to increase our police manpower on the street by about 80 officers. They recommended that we reassign about 30 officers who are currently working other jobs, put them back out on patrol, fill those jobs with civilians, and hire about 50 additional officers.

I’ve always believed the MGT report to be accurate and I still do. We need more cops on the street.

But, how do we pay for them? How do we properly staff our police and fire departments without cutting the budget for other departments?

This is a serious problem that goes beyond posturing and giving 10 second sound bites to the media. It’s a problem that serious people are going to have to have serious discussions about. It’s a problem that goes beyond the next fiscal budget or the next city elections. It’s a long-term problem and it must have a long-term solution.

My vote on June 18th was to delay the vote on the budget so that we could try to discuss this problem.

I never voted to cut police officers or firefighters. If someone tells you that I did, they’re mistaken. I didn’t and I wouldn’t.

I intend to continue to work on this problem and try to find the long-term answer that the citizens of Tulsa must have.

I am asking for your vote on September 8th.