Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 30 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Not enough money?
Clerk says city can’t afford additional police officers
Published Thursday, November 29, 2007
NATCHEZ — If the police department hires the police officers approved in Tuesday’s aldermen meeting, the city could not afford it, the city clerk said Wednesday.
The starting pay for an officer is $24,120, City Clerk Donnie Holloway said. With benefits, that totals $31,986.
The board voted Tuesday to approve hiring two more officers, bringing the number of allowed officers up from 48 to 50.
The money to pay the officers will come out of the city’s general fund, which pays for city operations, Holloway said.
With sales taxes down 7 percent compared with the same time last year, the city’s budget is tight, he said.
Depending on what the future holds, the funds could come in later months.
“Hopefully, we will rebound on sales taxes. Hopefully, next year we will have two more (casino) boats and more ad valorem (property) taxes.
“Right now, if we had a full staff, and with last year’s raises, we couldn’t afford 50.”
When the city approved the across-the-board $2,700 raise for police and firefighters, the police station cut back from 50 to 48 officers, Police Chief Mike Mullins said.
With officers out for retirement, injuries and military service, the department rarely has a full staff.
“It takes 48 to do what we need to do,” Mullins said. “If they alot 50, we may actually have 48 working.”
The shortage means officers are not doing as much traffic enforcement or ongoing training as they need, he said.
In Tuesday’s meeting, aldermen suggested assigning administrative officers and investigators to patrol.
That wasn’t possible, Mullins said Wednesday. Under his administration, the police department has cut personnel and excess as much as possible, he said.
“We’ve cut and cut and cut,” he said. “There’s no slack in the station. There is no one in the station without a 40-hour job that has to be done.”
By adding officers, the department would likely be able to cut back on overtime, Mullins said.
“If we can get positions filled, I’m hoping we can stay well within our overtime budget, and I hope we can cut overtime some next year,” he said.
Comments
Posted by gunther57 (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 1:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
leave it to the aldermen to suggest stupid things...thats obserbed take investigators and put them on patrol...do they not think that if they do that it will mean no crimes will have the chance to get solved...stupidity we need new aldermen the ones we have suck...i know i will get crusified for this, I THINK THAT OLE BUBBER ALONG WITH A FEW MORE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO JAIL WHEN THEY GOT COUGHT, BUT THEY GOT THE SAME TREATMENT AS BINKY...
Posted by ntzmom (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 3:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ya know what?
You know how hospitals have the pink ladies helping and answering phones ect...?
I bet several upstanding citiens would gladly rotate shifts working dispatch for FREE. That would free up one or two officers so they could patrol.
One officer I know personally is stuck there answering the phone!
Have a few classes and see how many people show up to volunteer.
Anyone else think is do-able?
Posted by ntzmom (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 4:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Another thing...but PLEASE dont forget to comment on my volunteer dispatchers idea!
But think of this, 24, 000. A year.....
That is about 2000.00 a month.
Rent= 600.00 a month
Personal car note = 400.00 a month
Car insurance = about 200 a month
basic utilities = about 400 a month
add a cell phone--- about 60.00 a mont
groceries = about 200 a month
that leaves about 260.00 a month to put gas in their car, rent a movie here and there...and that is just WRONG.
These men and women put their lives on the line every single day for us and are BARELY surviving on that pitiful pay.n ( how do they even buy clothes?)
Yet the fat cats that sit in offices get what? About 52 thousand a year or even more?...how is that right?
Posted by justthefactsman (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 7:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The reason the city doesn't have enough money to pay the Police and Firemen decent wages is because all these city officials are all overpaid. If they would all take a cut out of there FAT wallets maybe they could afford to pay the Police and the Firemen. They don't seem to be struggling driving around in Escalade's and BMW's...This Corrupt little town is sad..Pure D Sad!! Wake up people..2 meetings out of the month making 24 grand..Comer on...
Posted by kpage (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 7:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree, justthefacts. It's been said there are positions within the city held by people who either aren't in the office enough or do crappy work...all smoozed in by the wonderful mayor. How does he sleep peacefully at night knowing the lack of support he has for the PD? He's giving his buds a damn good job at a wonderful salary to the dismay of Mullins...the chief could use the money that's wasted on stupid, made-up "positions" the mayor claims to need.
Posted by justice (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Justthefactsman you said a mouthful ! Natchez is a corrupt town and has been so for decades . The people in office get away with blatant corruption because they depend on citizens remaining blind to the democratic process . We as citizens of Natchez can change anything we don't like about this town . We need to be more aware and pro-active . We can change this corruption and sweep Natchez clean !
Most career politicians are lazy and parasitical in nature . Natchez is full of them ! This is what draws them to politics . They get in office and become a tic , hence : Politics .They are all bed-fellows and are only a drain on the system and tax payers . Eliminate the career politician and elect more business minded people to office . There is too much waste in politics and it's all caused by career politicians everywhere .
Posted by noneya (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"In Tuesday’s meeting, aldermen suggested assigning administrative officers and investigators to patrol." How DUMB can they get??? Every citizen wants the streets safe, but yet the alderman want to cut back on the police dept. (that is ALREADY running on lean). Cut back your own pay aldermen!
Posted by areuserious (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The dispatch idea sounds great. However, it's not as easy as it sounds. The dispatcher can hold the life of an officer in their hands. You don't want some person coming in every once in a while to dispatch a few hours. Most people have no idea that a dispatcher has to be certified through the state board of minimums and standards. It takes a special person to dispatch and it's every bit as stressful as being on the streets. Law enforcement is a totally diffrent animal than most things. People don't realize that certain things have to be done certain ways, and to someone that has never been around it certain things may seem foolish or make no sense. However, there is logic behind it all. If procedures that may seem foolish to the public aren't followed, it could end in an officer being badly injured, or worse. Just something to think about
Posted by bear45 (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The reason the Police Department is there is to PROTECT and SERVE, I would be willing to bet if something happened to someone in one of the Familys of the Mayor or the Board of Aldermen something would be done to turn this fiasco around. Let the Police Dept. go over their budget and hire those few extra officers and make the cuts elsewhere in the citys budget. What about that 100,000 that he Mayor wanted to use to hire someone for recreation, unless you get the crime rate down recreation is a thing of the past. No one is going to let their children out to make use of recreation. They need to get off their @$$$ and help the Police Dept. out or shut up about the crime rate in theCity of Natchez/
Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 9:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
(((justice))) you're right on point! However, this has been a problem for many decades -- it didn't start with Phillip West, that's for sure.
If the salaries paid to the Board of Aldermen is taking away from the funds needed to provide police protection, and there is no plan to reduce these salaries, then the Board of Aldermen need to come up with some viable sources of funds to cover this shortage.
But until people come together with a meeting of the minds to elect the BEST, MOST-QUALIFIED person for the job, AND NOT VOTE BASED ON RACE AND THE "GOOD 'OLE BOY SYSTEM", we will continue to get what we've been getting!
Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on November 29, 2007 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, there is the set aside for the consultants that could be used for two additional police officers!
Posted by stateofnatchez (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 9:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
48 officers? Since when did Natchez have 48 officers qualified to patrol within the city limits? Where are these people? Looks like the city needs to get most of these people out from under a desk and out on the streets for now.
Posted by ntzluv (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you ijohnson for pointing out that these problems with the city's salaries DID NOT start with Phillip West. Seems to me everything that goes wrong, that man gets blamed for it!
Posted by kpage (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 10:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Not trying to be nasty ntzluv...the problems may not have started with West, but he sure is keeping it up! If he tried to reduce Ntz corruption, it would show.
Posted by Bar_Louie (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't see why they can't afford it as many fines as they hand out daily. Anything important, Natchez can't ever do! What a town...!!!
Posted by lowrider (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Tickets and the rest of the fines apparently go back to the aldermans and other city officials pockets, then lets not forget the hundreds of thousands of dollars the mayor wants to pay a planner to draw up some designs to improve tourism here. thats where are money is going.
Posted by kpage (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And probably a lot of other places we haven't thought of yet.
Posted by lowrider (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
lol true
Posted by kpage (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Are you a Natchezian, lowrider? If so, you can use my Concordia Parish address to vote in our next election! The sheriff said it is OK. (sarcasm inserted here)
Corruption everywhere you look and what blows my mind is there are people who SUPPORT that crap!!!!
Posted by destiny (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 12:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't know about all of you, but the thought that our tax dollars have been taken and used for this years parade leaves my mouth with a bitter taste. The parade would have been carried out without our tax dollars anyway so who was the wise galoot that decided to pay for it with our money? Were the tax payers allowed to vote on this? I wasn't, were you? Don't get me wrong, I love a prade and love to watch the kiddies faces when Santa appears. But the word here is, it would have taken place without our tax dollars. I would much prefer to take the money and pay our protective heroes instead of an hour event for once a year thing. I would like to see Keven and his staff get an itemized list of exactly what this is costing the citizens, from the very conception of the idea 'til the cleanup is finished. Which by the way the tax dollars would have gone for the cleanup anyway. To me that would have been enough contribution (the cleanup). So much of our money is wasted on such mundane things, no wonder we can't have the public protection we need. I hope all of you will remember this come voting time, and get these monkeys away from the table.
Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 12:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
(((destiny))) I see your point. You would think they could have had the parade underwritten by some major companies, i.e., AT&T, Verizon, Atmos Energy, Wal-Mart, Isle of Capri, etc. Have some of these major companies give back to the community (they can write it off on their taxes). Why use up all our tax dollars to fund it -- USE YOUR HEADS INSTEAD!!!
Posted by frogprincenessntz (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 1:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
third circuit upheld Marchman ruling
Posted by frogprincenessntz (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 1:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lots of kids under the age of eight have bedtimes at 8 pm They are grouchy by seven if not allowed to slow down in preparation for bed. How many of the organisers have small children? One more Natchez party for the boozing set!!! I hope everyone takes their video cameras. They might get some footage for funniest videos.
Posted by 3kids (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 1:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
frogprincess did you say that randy is still sheriff
Posted by dottie (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
frogprincess--3kids
Shh,shh let's keep it quiet.
Posted by blackdog (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 6:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The only thing that comes out of there mouths, we need more basketball courts. Its sad to see this.
Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 7:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No kidding blackdog.
Posted by DZNUTZ (anonymous) on November 29, 2007 at 11:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
That $24,000 a year translates to $617.74 after taxes every two weeks. At least it did for an unmarried patrol officer back in the mid 90's.
Posted by NtzMom55 (anonymous) on November 30, 2007 at 1:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So we cannot afford 2 more officers yet we can spend 100K on a consultant for a recreation facility? The public can hadle the consulting. We need more cops on the beat and they need raises. If you cannot give them raises, how about exemting them from paying federal and state taxes as a benefit? (if it would be possible to do). That would surely help.
Posted by lnl4evah (anonymous) on November 30, 2007 at 6:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You get what you pay for..... I don't have much faith in the NPD or any other position or office where an individual has more authority than integrity....
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)