Law enforcement cuts called for in Winnebago County’s executive budget would result in “cheap, inefficient” services that could hamper the ability of officers to keep the public safe, Winnebago County Sheriff Michael Brooks said.
Citizens could expect longer waits for officers in the event of crime, fewer officers patrolling to keep local highways safe and delays for completion of investigations, Brooks said.
“I believe it would be irresponsible to reduce our staffing levels to those included in the county executive’s 0 percent increase budget,” Brooks wrote.
He said a two-officer reduction to the detective bureau would make caseloads unmanageable for remaining detectives, and force them to prioritize their investigations. Patrol cuts would slow response and limit ability to spend the proper amount of time investigating cases, he wrote.
“I just think that’s a sad state of affairs,” Brooks said.
“The first priority is public safety, or should be public safety,” Brooks said.
Harris would recommend adding more than $1 million to the sheriff’s department budget for 17 positions if a half-percent sales tax was passed, according to the budget message.
Winnebago County Sheriff Michael Brooks reports that proposed budget cuts to the Winnebago County Sheriff’s Department would:
Eliminate the department’s boat patrol, thereby increasing response times when emergencies occur on the water.
Eliminate DARE and GREAT school-based crime prevention programs, and the community liaison, crime prevention officer position that administers numerous community programs.
Reduce the detective bureau by two officers, leaving overburdened, remaining officers to prioritize between highly solvable property crimes and more difficult, but more serious violent cases.
Reduce patrol by four officers, resulting in response delays, lesser highway patrol and decreased officer safety
Source: Oct. 11 letter from Brooks to Winnebago County supervisors
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/local/stories/local_23007688.shtml
7 comments:
What the sheriff is saying is cuts need to be prioritized. Mr. Harris is not doing that. He is cutting equally across the board (0% increase). He is doing this to scare the public. The sheriff believes cuts could be made in other departments other than his. The sheriff does not support the tax. He supports cutting the fat in other departments that do not impact public safety.
Everyone wants cuts made that will not effect them, that is human nature - and also impossible.
To not cut the Sheriff, we would need to eliminate human services almost entirely.
Is that fair?
Exactly what do you think we should cut?
First Harris was cutting 130, then 100, then 77, now about 50. If you look closely many of those proposed 50 cuts are positions that were empty last year. That is not a real cut. When all is said and done only 30 people will be cut. 12 of those will be people connected to the Huber Center (a cut that was going to be made anyway), and the 17 from Park View due to state mandates. The numbers Harris is putting out there just do not add up. There are other cuts that can be made and have been proposed to Mr. Harris. If the tax fails those cuts will come to light. If the tax passes we will still have the Huber Center and Park View cuts that would happen either way. He will then add all the other positions back. In the end there will be few cuts and the county will remain fat.
Now, you need to correct one thing you said - Harris is not cutting these jobs. He is instructing the department heads to do what they need to do so that the budget can be met.
The department head then submits to Mr. Harris what the cuts need to be to hit that.
So, the numbers and any change in them are a result of the department heads revising thier budgets.
What kind of spin is that? Mr. Harris instructs HIS dept. heads. The buck stops at his desk. If he choses to defer to his dept. heads that is his choice. Make no mistake, the decision to cut positions or not lies with Mr. Harris. WHen he tells a department to cut $100,000.00 and 93% of that departments budget is personnel what else can you do?
You are correct, but you can't call Harris a liar if the number of positions needing to be cut drop - the dept heads told him a total of 100 before, now they have it down to 70 or so.
Harris is working with the heads on this, and has the final say, but the position decisions are made first by the dept heads and approved or denied by Harris.
You are trying to spin everything anti-Harris when it is a colaboration.
You are obviously lacking many facts on how the county budget process is working. When all is said and done if the tax passes there will be a net loss of less than 10 current employees other than the Huber cuts and the Park View cuts, which were going to happen reguardless of the levy freeze. Yet Mr. Harris used scare tactics to lead the public to believe 130 PEOPLE would lose their jobs due to the levy freeze. That is not acceptable. Use the tax for 100% property tax relief as the law states. I am all for the tax then. Mr. Harris has played games with the #'s to help support his agenda. Oh by the way, I supported and voted for Mr. Harris. I justdo not agree with him on this issue.
Post a Comment