Framingham Police Department Selectmen Presentation November 15, 2005

Framingham Police Department

Selectmen Presentation

November 15, 2005

Presentation Overview

Framingham Police Staffing Comparison– Historical– Community Comparison Study

FY05 Departmental Accomplishments

FY06 Departmental Goals

Downtown Issues & Challenges

Miscellaneous Issues

Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Historical

1970 Police Management Consultants Report– Conducted as directed by Special Town Meeting

April 14, 1970– Article 22 of Town Warrant – Commission established to included

Three Selectman Police Chief Two Town Meeting Members (selected by Town Moderator) Member of Framingham Police Association

– Background: Commission reviewed over twenty applications submitted to conduct study and selected Robert Sheehan and Associates (Police Management Consultants)


1970

Sheehan & Assoc.

2004

FPD CAD

%

Change

Population 63,233 65,598 +3.7

Officers 98 118* +20.4

Crossing Guards 54 23 -57.4

Part I Offenses 1,452 1,875 +29.1

Part II Offenses 1,815 1,438 -20.7

Calls-for-Service 10,920 38,683 +254.2

Arrests 1,119 1,690 +51.0

Accidents 1,578 1,861 +17.9

*Authorized strength does not include vacant positions or officers on military deployment, FMLA, or 111F (22)


32,471 33,005

34,95236,007

37,93438,683

35,276

28,000

30,000

32,000

34,000

36,000

38,000

40,000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Town-Wide CAD Calls


Miscellaneous – Population

Population total for 2004 does not include emerging immigrant population, homeless, educational, and commerce related numbers

Sheehan Staffing Recommendations– Important to note: “On the basis of information available from the

Metropolitan Area Planning Council, it would be the consultants opinion that the department will expand manpower wise by at least 25% between now and 1990”

1970 = 98 Officers – 25% increase would mean a 1990 staffing level of 123 sworn officers

We currently have 118 sworn personnel This is 5 officers less than recommended for 1990

Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison

2004 Census Estimated Population

56,188

65,598

59,232

54,202

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth

Town

Po

pu

lati

on


Land Area

6.79

25.12

12.7

17.01

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Town

Sq

uare

Miles


Public Road Miles

111.33

241.83

159.79

176.4

0

50

100

150

200

250

300


Town

Miles


Sworn Officers / Authorized Strength

130

109

149

97

140

118

150

103

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


Town

Off

icer

s

Sworn Officers

Authorized Strength


Civilian Employees

31

11

37

14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40


Town

Em

plo

yees


2004 Police Budget

12,437,511

8,847,433

11,453,754

9,466,000

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000


Town

Bu

dg

et


Note: Part I offenses include murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and arson

2004 Part I Offenses

1,307

1,875

971

1,574

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000


Town

Part

I O

ffen

ses


Note: Part II offenses include numerous offenses including simple assault, fraud, embezzlement, receiving stolen property, vandalism, weapons possession, vice crimes, drug offenses, gambling, DUI, and various other offenses.

2004 Part II Offenses

1,438

1177

981

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600


Town

Part

II O

ffen

ses

Not Available


Note: It is unknown to what level towns responding to the Staffing Survey cleaned their CAD data. Framingham cleaned all CAD entries not requiring a police response from data utilized for this report.

2004 CAD Calls

31,777

38,683 38,632

26,835

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000


Town

CA

D C

alls


CAD Calls per Officer

244

355

259

277

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400


Town

CA

D C

alls


Note: In 2004, the FBI reported the national average is 3.5 officers per 1,000 residents

Officers per 1000 Residents

2.31

1.66

2.51

1.78

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3


Town

Off

icers


Officers per Square Mile

19.1

4.33

11.73

5.7

0

5

10

15

20

25


Town

Off

icers


Officers per 10 Road Miles

11.67

4.5

9.32

5.49

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


Town

Off

icers


Enforcement– Long-term gun and gang investigations in partnership with

MSP, ATF, and DEA– Weed & Seed application and training– Monthly MSP Fugitive Warrant Team deployments– Motor Scooter By-law– Streets Crime Unit development / implementation – Code Enforcement Task Force participation – Liquor license enforcement and mandatory training– Sex Offender Registry: monitoring and enforcement


Accountability– Attained Accreditation – Customer surveys: Post-contact and Downtown Merchant Survey– Implemented electronic evidence intake and tracking system– Conducted evidence room audit– Merged Detail and Evidence Officer positions– Alarm By-law enforcement– 111F wording change– Enhanced Internal Affairs / Professional Standards process – Conducted in-service training on town’s Customer Service Policy– Updated Department’s Pursuit and Use of Force Policies– Conducted phone, daily log, and officer report audits


Original Survey Property Damaged = 42% Business Broken Into = 39% Being Assaulted = 36% Being Robbed = 36% Property Stolen = 33%

Follow-up Property Damaged = 40%

– Pre/post = 40%

Business Broken Into = 38%– Pre/post = 35%

Being Assaulted = 41%– Pre/post = 35%

Being Robbed = 43%– Pre/post = 35%

Property Stolen = 38%– Pre/post = 30%

Customer surveys: Downtown Merchant Survey

Survey Notes:

Original Survey: N=135

Follow-up Survey: N=121

Pre/post: N=20

Responses of Fearful or Very Fearful to the following CRIMES:


Original Survey – Loud Music from Street =

62%– Undesirables – Trespassers

- Loiterers = 41% – Intoxicated People = 35%– Panhandlers = 34%– Gangs = 31%

Follow-up– Loud Music from Street =

54% Pre/post = 45%

– Undesirables – Trespassers - Loiterers = 42%

Pre/post = 35%– Intoxicated People = 49%

Pre/post = 45%– Panhandlers = 43%

Pre/post = 35%– Gangs = 45%

Pre/post = 35%

Customer surveys: Downtown Merchant SurveyResponses of Once a Week or More than Once a Week to the following QUALITY of LIFE ISSUES:


Customer surveys: Downtown Merchant Survey

Has respondent noticed an increased police presence in the downtown area?

– Yes = 41% Pre/post = 50%

How much safer does the respondent feel knowing that the police have made the downtown area one of their top priorities?

– A lot safer + Somewhat safer + Safer = 84% Pre/post = 100%

Is the respondent more likely to call the police to report problems today as compared to before the police made it a priority?

– Yes = 47% Pre/post = 63%


Homeland Security– Conducted extra patrols in area of rail station and

marshalling yard– Provided extra rail station security during Democratic

National Convention This initiative was coordinated with the Executive Office of

Public Safety and the MBTA– The department received reimbursement for their participation

– Conducted comprehensive vulnerability study of critical assets

– Initiated partnership with local corporate security directors


Grant Funding– Replaced 38 obsolete portable radios– Obtained commercial vehicle scales– New motorcycles– Unmarked cruiser– Computers– Surveillance equipment– Training– Tactical equipment for Special Operations Unit


Traffic Enforcement– Increased Commercial Motor Vehicle enforcement– Parking enforcement

Specifically, sidewalk and snow emergency violations– Conducted site-inspections of RMV designated safety &

emissions sticker providers– Conducted random inspections of wreckers / tow trucks– Conducted area-specific emissions/safety sticker

enforcement– Conducted training pursuant to enforcement options

available to deal with idling motor vehicles


Revenues

FY01 FY03 FY05

Traffic / Court

194,847.58 356,615.29 222,363.27

Parking 229,417.95 281,366.26 299,056.00

False Alarms 14,704.00 11,700.00 129,950.00

Detail Surcharge

123,117.53 103,572.29 102,332.35

Total 562,087.06 753,253.84 753,701.62

Percentage Change +34% +6%

FY06 Goals

Goal One: Proactively address the issue of “Racial Profiling”1. Fully comply with EOPS mandates and recommended best practices

regarding data collection and analysis2. Develop a customized database encompassing recommended

variables and dimensions to capture profiling related data3. Generate reports using the database to scientifically determine if

racial profiling is occurring, and if so, identify officers who appear to be improperly considering a motorists race

4. Participate in a Northeastern University Study developing state-of-the-art profiling data collection and management methodologies

- Framingham Police are one of only six departments in Massachusetts selected to participate in this pilot study

FY06 Goals

Goal Two: Concentrate police resources on quality of life issues detracting from the Downtown Business District

1. Assign Traffic Enforcement Unit to focus on specific violations which create a hazardous situation in downtown

2. Maintain strict parking enforcement in the downtown business district3. Apply for Weed & Seed grant funds to enhance police efforts with

revitalization of downtown4. Work with the Town Manager and SMOC to develop strategies to mitigate the

negative impact of the Wet Shelter in our community5. Maintain and enhance pro-active police presence in the downtown area by

deploying Street Crime Unit personnel, foot patrol officers, and bicycle patrol officers to target quality of life issues

6. Continue to actively work with Code Enforcement Task Force personnel to identify and investigate violations occurring downtown

7. Establish work group to develop and evaluate a strategy to facilitate and control the spontaneous 2006 World Cup celebrations expected in the downtown area during the June 2006 tournament

FY06 Goals

Goal Three: Implement the “Data Driven Management Model (Compstat)” concept at the shift level

1. Provide shift commanders and line supervisors with data regarding the personnel under their command so they can positively recognize productive employees and address deficient personnel

2. Provide training to shift commanders and line supervisors so that they can independently generate statistical reports

3. Insure that supervisors routinely utilize crime and calls for service statistics to deploy personnel in the most cost effective and efficient manner

4. Require commanders to perform formal and documented line inspections to ensure compliance with Accreditation standards

5. Require commanders to address issues such as attendance, patterned absences, and productivity on an on-going basis

6. Use graphical comparisons of productivity by shift, division, and officer as a motivation tool

FY06 Goals

Goal Four: Police, Fire, and DPW Joint Goal1. Assure all three departments are in compliance with the NIMS

mandate, assuring that all employees are trained.2. Review the two way radio capabilities the town has and

devise a written protocol to allow cross-frequency communication. One consideration should be a distinct call number for each radio in town.

3. Establish a written protocol for communication to be implemented at the scene of any major cross-department incident.

4. Work to prepare a full scale disaster drill in 2006

Downtown Issues and Challenges

Background / Crime Rate– UCR National Violent Crime Rate is:

– 475.0 per 100,000 inhabitants UCR New England Violent Crime rate is:

– 238.5 per 100,000 inhabitants Massachusetts Violent Crime Rate is:

– 263.1 per 100,000 inhabitants Framingham Violent Crime Rate is:

– 263.1 per 100,000 inhabitants

Note: UCR data presented was obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and represents the most current statistics available (Year 2003)

Violent crime is defined as murder, non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault


Downtown Arrests

1,846

842

1,894

758

1,546

580

1,690

732

1,473

646

0200400600800

1,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

Town WideDowntown


Homeless Arrests

251 260

137

272

236

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year


Wet Shelter– Individuals providing Wet Shelter address at

time of their booking / arrest

15

43 40

76

105

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year


Wet Shelter (continued)– Wet Shelter visit conducted August 16, 2005

21 registered guest on night of visit 17 Males / 4 Females

– 7 were from the Framingham area– 14 were from outside the Framingham area– 16 had criminal records

Crimes on these records included armed robbery, narcotic violations, assault and battery on a police officer, breaking and entering, prostitution, larceny, rape, indecent assault and battery, OUI, and various weapons charges


Wet Shelter (continued)– Wet Shelter visit conducted October 29, 2005

21 registered guest on night of visit 16 Males / 5 Females

– 6 were from the Framingham area– 15 were from outside the Framingham area– 19 individuals had criminal records

Crimes on these records included armed robbery, narcotic violations, assault and battery on a police officer, breaking and entering, prostitution, larceny, rape, indecent assault and battery, OUI, and various weapons charges


Wet Shelter (continued)– October 2005 Wet Shelter Visits

Throughout the month, information was obtained on 99 different individuals

– 33 were from the Framingham area– 52 were from outside the Framingham area– 14 individuals were unable to provide reliable identifying

information– Of the 85 providing reliable information:

40 individuals had extensive criminal records (over 20 entries on their records)

12 had active criminal warrants


Wet Shelter (continued)– Miscellaneous Wet Shelter information

During the two specific site visits mentioned in previous slides, only 2 individuals were at the shelter during both visits

Between January 1, 2005 and August 15, 2005– 15% of the individuals placed in protective custody / arrest in

Framingham reported the Wet Shelter as their address (N = 173)

57 individuals were responsible for these 173 PC’s / Arrests 55 of these individuals had a previous criminal record at the

time they were taken into custody

Downtown Issues and Concerns

Wet Shelter (continued)– Response to Wet Shelter issues

Prevention– Working with SMOC:

Development shelter in-take screening protocol Warrant checks on prospective shelter service users Enhanced case management of referred clients

Intervention– Weed and Seed– Working with court, probation, parole, District Attorney’s Office, Middlesex Sheriffs

Department, and Violence Prevention Roundtable to develop strategies to address individuals identified as negatively impacting the over-all quality of life in the downtown area. Targeted individuals will include repeat offenders and those involved in gangs, guns, and drugs.

Enforcement– Street Crime Unit– Zero-tolerance quality of life enforcement– Priority prosecution

Miscellaneous Issues

Code enforcement

World Cup issues and concerns

Staffing and funding– By 2008, optimum staffing level to be on parity with similar

communities– Overtime budget reflective of the realities associated with

policing a dynamic, diverse urban community such as Framingham

Framingham Police Department

Selectmen Presentation

November 15, 2005

Documents

Framingham Police Department Selectmen Presentation November 15, 2005