Kansas City has a crime problem. Adding 65 new police officers won’t solve it
Nathan Garrett, the president of Kansas City’s Board of Police Commissioners, thinks the city needs more police officers.
“I think we have a serious shortage of officers,” he said at a recent board meeting. “If we need 65 officers, then that’s what we’re going to be asking for.”
Garrett and his colleagues can of course make any request they’d like. But let’s be clear: The Kansas City Council should give no consideration to any request that would add that many officers to the police department.
The current budget proposal adds 10 officers, phased in during the next year. That recommendation is reasonable, and a good start for discussions. The overall budget increase planned for the department is 4.1%, roughly double the rate of inflation.
The City Council added 12 officer positions in last year’s budget. The year before, it added 24 officers. According to one study, Kansas City has more uniformed police per 10,000 residents than San Francisco, Tampa or Dallas.
Kansas Citians provide more than adequate funding for their police force. Missouri law requires the city to spend at least 20% of its general fund on the police; in the new budget, the department gets 38% — almost twice the amount required by law.
The Kansas City Police Department also receives and spends more than $15 million in grants and fees outside of the general fund.
Adding 65 officers would increase taxpayers’ contribution to police, requiring further cuts or freezes in other city services. And for what? There’s no evidence that the additional officers would significantly reduce the city’s murder rate, the major concern for most residents.
Adding 65 officers would be expensive — the price tag would total more than $3 million in the first year, with additional costs in the years ahead. Training and equipping that many new officers would also take time, lessening the immediate impact of the new personnel.
Pouring yet more money into the department reduces its incentive to find cost efficiencies in other parts of its own budget. On average, the police department spends more than $9 million a year on overtime. Additional scrutiny of scheduling might yield more officers on the street.
Almost three years ago, a special study recommended dozens of other cost-saving measures, including adding patrol officers by cutting other spending. The department has failed to implement most of the recommendations.
To his credit, Garrett says he and his colleagues understand the need to carefully review department spending habits. “Our efficiencies are not at a level of satisfaction for any of us, especially those of us in the private sector,” he said in an email. We agree.
The board should not be an advocate for the police department. It should represent the people of Kansas City, who pay the bills. If Garrett believes Kansas City needs to hire more officers, he should direct Chief Rick Smith to find the money to do so in the existing budget, which is far larger than what’s required by law.
And he should understand the mistrust between the police department and some members of the community. If the choice is between more officers and body cameras for the existing police force, the cameras are the better investment.
Policing is an important and dangerous job. No one doubts the courage and hard work of 1,350 Kansas City officers and their civilian colleagues. The new budget calls for spending $7.3 million on salary increases for the department, raises that have been well-earned.
But the demands on Kansas City taxpayers to fund the police department must have a limit. It’s the department’s job — and that of the board of police commissioners — to prove that every nickel they get is spent in the public’s interest.
Once that evidence is provided, Kansas Citians will be willing to talk about adding officers to the force.