The city's budget emergency is forcing all departments to cut back, but that doesn't mean we should be reducing the number of officers on duty.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has, so far, made good on a promise to expand the Los Angeles Police Department at a steady pace. The City Council has backed him up, and we have cheered him on. Now that the recession has severely reduced revenue, the mayor wants to keep hiring steadily to achieve a force of 10,000 officers, a city goal that dates back well before his administration -- and one that could finally be achieved this year if the pace of hiring remains unaltered. But the city has to cut expenditures, and some on the council want the police to follow the lead of every other city department and freeze hiring to avoid even deeper cuts in other programs.
Villaraigosa puts the magic number at 560 -- the number of officers who must be hired this year to keep LAPD growth on track. The number is a little too magical. It is unrealistic to pretend that, even at the Police Department, everything can go on as usual in the midst of a budget emergency. The city cannot afford police expansion this year and should put it on hold. If that means not reaching 10,000 officers this year, so be it.
But there is still a number to strive for, and it's not that much smaller. It's 520. That's how many officers are expected to be lost this year to attrition, and how many the LAPD must hire to keep the force at status quo. It's the number the council should work to reach as it takes up the budget Monday. There are plans afoot in the council to replace only, say, 420 officers, but that would be a mistake. There is a huge difference between taking a break and taking a giant step backward. A break in LAPD expansion is fine for the short term, but the city should not allow the ranks to once again be depleted to the point that they are dangerously inadequate.
Police hiring is a top priority -- but not, obviously, if it means insolvency. The council is right to pore over the numbers and to ensure that the city remains able to pay its bills. The purpose of a larger department is a safer city, not a bankrupt one. Police hiring may have to come at the expense of other programs but not of fiscal responsibility. To reap the payoff of a larger LAPD -- to make a safer, more livable city -- Los Angeles also needs youth programs, recreation, libraries and the like. Cuts in those services will surely hurt, but they can recover once good times return.
Layoffs in other departments are often proposed, yet virtually never implemented, in part because it's simply too hard and too expensive to lay off anyone in city government. It's more likely that enough money for police hiring can be cobbled together from various fund transfers and from additional efficiencies in city programs. And that includes, by the way, in the LAPD, which similarly must economize in less-essential tasks to be able to save enough money to help keep the size of the department constant, until times are good enough to begin building again.
