Chief of Police Wayne Tucker announced that his department would not meet its goal of 803 officers by the end of this year, or even next. Why is OPD having such trouble meeting this highly prioritized goal? Don Link, chair of Oakland’s Community Policing Advisory Board, shares his thoughts.

Earlier this month, Chief of Police Wayne Tucker announced that his department will be unable to meet its goal of being “fully staffed” with 803 officers by the end of the year. After a full year of back-to-back police academies, OPD’s sworn staffing stands at 728 with the recent infusion of 28 new officers. The deficit, Tucker predicted, would persist through 2008 or even later.

Chief Tucker attributed the extension of this deadline to three factors: the competition among police departments everywhere for recruits and seasoned officer transfers; a higher number of retirements from OPD than was expected based on historic rates of attrition due to injury, age, or transfers to other police departments; and a shortage of experienced officers qualified to do the 15 weeks of one-on-one field training that follows Police Academy training.

Why is the Oakland Police Department having such difficulty reaching its goal?

Two answers have occurred to me. One is the aging of the baby-boom generation, which was a bulge in the population curve. Police officers can retire at 50 or after 30 years of service for the highest benefits, which, in most cases, coincides fairly closely. Most sworn in OPD joined the force when they were 21 or 22. Any sworn officer born in 1955 or 1956, or any years earlier can now retire with 30 years service, and many are retiring and claiming those benefits. Those who have planned for the event have a second career to embark on, with a generous monthly retirement that makes the selection of a second career easy: pay does not matter as much as passion for the enterprise. I know of sworn who want to teach school in the liberal arts after retiring. Others want to go on in enforcement-related work. It runs the gamut. No one I know wants to go to Iraq to fix things there.

This demographic phenomenon is affecting police departments throughout the region and the entire United States. We are not unique.

The other factor is less scientifically demonstrable, but probably as real, and that is the Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA) that settled the Riders Lawsuit. Oakland, represented by the City Attorney’s office, settled with the 119 plaintiffs before the District Attorney’s Office was able to win a conviction, and none was ever won by the DA after two trials.

The Negotiated Settlement Agreement commits Oakland and OPD to a number of enumerated reforms and reorganizations (51) that must be met under Federal court mandate and oversight, or the city will be held in contempt and a federal overseer will be assigned to manage OPD (much as the schools are being managed by the State Superintendent of Schools).

That Agreement requires OPD to implement a number of changes in police behavior and tracking of police behavior at a number of levels from street stops, to supervisor review of many field activities, to commander oversight and discipline. The results of this clamping-down on the system—after the fact—has led many officers in the field to question whether the rules and standards have been changed mid-stream for them. Many feel betrayed or undercut or both, because they do duty as they were taught and are now being subjected to disciplinary measures for doing what they were trained to do. There is some confusion in the ranks of those doing patrol and other entry-level duty. We need to remember that OPD depends on new officers moving up through the ranks to command positions as Sergeants (supervisors), Lieutenants, Captains and beyond. Some of us have witnessed officers move through this structure to being Deputy Chiefs today, addressed as “Chief _” by the rank and file.

The element of doubt today is a problem for OPD: some officers at all levels are looking for new employment. Part of the normal attrition of two-to-three officers per month (injuries, voluntary retirement, which includes lateral transfers to other police departments) has been exacerbated by the voluntary retirement/transfer during the last year or two. (When an officer transfers to another jurisdiction, it is technically and legally a retirement from OPD.)

Anecdotally, it seems that the attrition rate in OPD has been amplified by the NSA. I have spoken to maybe a dozen officers who complain about the effects of the tightened disciplinary requirements of the NSA. They say that they know of a number of other officers who are keeping their heads down, looking straight ahead with blinders and getting through the shift. Proactive enforcement means a probable complaint—why do it? The Crime Reduction Teams joke that CRT means “Career Reduction Team” because of the almost automatic registration of complaints about arrests that will occur when this team is effective, as they usually are. Arrests of drug dealers, robbers, prostitutes, etc. will lead to complaints as a mater of course. Many of these CRT members are the best police officers working for OPD.

I have no official figures about the lateral transfer/retirements, but I know that the two-to-three retirements per month figure was the operating standard for OPD a year ago and before. Are the ages of those retiring/transferring today different from a year of two ago? If we have more officers retiring/transferring at age 25 or 30 or 40, then there is a change that warrants scrutiny. Why the decision to leave? More money? Or fleeing the strictures of the NSA and its implementation by OPD?

I have heard the complaints and pondered the issues and do not have an answer at this point. My gut instinct on the basis of what I have heard from trusted sworn OPD is that the NSA’s squeezing of OPD’s operations and OPD’s response is the source of this discontent and flight from the department, if that flight can be verified. The increased “retirement” rate, above the normal age-related retirement rate would suggest that there is some self-initiated relocation employment activity in operation. (If that verbiage qualifies me for a job in public service, I decline). If OPD retirement is above expected levels at this time, “why is it?” would be the question.