LBPDheadquarters
LBPD headquarters. File photo.

LBPDheadquarters

It can’t quite be called “ironic” that there were two gun crimes that we know of (one robbery, one shooting) in the four days since Part 1 of this story was published, because one can hardly call such incidents unexpected in our current milieu. Though 2011 had the lowest homicide rate in the city’s history, at the end of this past July, the Press-Telegram reported that the murder rate had spiked 54 percent. The shooting rate had increased 38 percent. And since September 1 alone, there have been six murders and countless shots-fired calls within city limits.

However complicated the reasons, it’s a simple fact that violence—gun violence in particular—is up in Long Beach.

It’s a trend that comes as the Long Beach Police Department attempts to cope with significant cuts. Just how significant was outlined by Chief Jim McDonnell during the August 14 city council discussion of the proposed Fiscal Year 2013 budget, which included a variety of cuts to an already understaffed and underfunded force.

“[… E]ach of these cuts will hurt,” he told the council. “After 10 years of reductions, each proposed cut will result in some amount of service degradation. Over the years this department evolved into a highly effective team of sworn and civilian staff who performed a full range of police services. That structure has been decimated by cuts […].”

A good indication of the extent of that decimation can be seen from a statistic he quoted: had the FY2013 gone into effect as proposed, LBPD staffing levels would have been reduced by 19.7 percent in just two years. One-time funds were eventually used to restore some gang-enforcement positions and allow for overtime; however, as passed, the cumulative staff reductions between FY2013 and FY2010 budgets still remain in the 17-percent range. 

Though a 40-cadet police academy was included in the FY2013 budget for the first time since 2009, the Department is still bleeding more than it is replacing. LBPD currently has about 800 staff, down from its 2008 high of 1,020 budgeted officers, a decrease that leaves Long Beach with one of the lowest police-to-population ratios for a high-crime city.

“We’ll continue to provide the best service possible with the resources available,” McDonnell continued. “But there are fewer resources.” He went on to note that generally residents could expect “some decrease in response time”; that “we won’t constantly be monitoring all of our camera systems”; and that the department’s investigations bureau was downsizing its homicide and violent sexual predator sections, among others—including half of the gang-enforcement section.

It is difficult to overstate the significance of that last cut (even if it ended up being not as severe as originally proposed). According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), “Gangs are expanding, evolving and posing an increasing threat to US communities nationwide, […] becoming more violent while engaging in less typical and lower-risk crime, such as prostitution and white-collar crime. Gangs are more adaptable, organized, sophisticated, and opportunistic, exploiting new and advanced technology as a means to recruit, communicate discretely, target their rivals, and perpetuate their criminal activity.”

The FBI states that gangs “are responsible for an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others, [with m]ajor cities and suburban areas experience[ing] the most gang-related violence.” The FBI names California as one of the five states in the country with the highest per capita rate of gang membership; and Long Beach as one of three major Southern California cities with noteworthy gang-related drug activity.

The LBPD declined to provide an official response to the Long Beach Post‘s invitation to respond to the concerns raised by residents in Part 1, but they did say that they work closely with City Prosecutor’s Office in these areas and deferred to their statements on the subject.

The Post extended the same invitation to a variety of city officials. We received no reply from Mayor Bob Foster and Congressmember Bonnie Lowenthal; nor from 5th District Councilmember Gerrie Schipske, who has generally opposed the majority of her council cohort regarding cuts to core services (see, for example, her opposition to the council’s use of the surplus in the Uplands Oil Fund).

Senator Alan Lowenthal, however, was critical of the City’s recent budgetary choices.

“The City’s austerity-for-austerity’s-sake approach is just accelerating us down a slippery slope that ultimately leads to the abandonment of our neighborhoods,” he said. “We know our police and fire officers are doing the very best they can to keep us safe, but they need the support of City Hall.”

City Prosecutor Doug Haubert posited that the current spike in crime has expansive roots:

There are multiple reasons we are seeing a crime increase. First, the reduction in the number of officers and police resources are taking a toll. It is not necessarily about the number of officers or the amount of money spent, because it also matters how you use the resources; but it is contributing. The new academy class will help.[3] Second, prison realignment is a major factor. Realignment, which started October 1, 2011, has shifted felons from state prison to county jails, and that causes the early release of county jail inmates. This is happening at the same time police departments are downsizing and do not have the resources necessary to address the increase of criminals on the streets. We are seeing dangerous criminals getting returned to the streets at an unprecedented pace. Third, we are seeing cuts in other services, like libraries, schools and parks. These do not directly affect crime stats, but they can indirectly have an effect. For example, when you cut activities that otherwise would keep teens busy, especially in at-risk communities, it can lead to gang recruitment or opportunities for crime. All of these things happening during a period of recession, it’s like a perfect storm.

Congressmember Laura Richardson’s reaction was broader:

One of the primary purposes of government is to protect the constitutional rights of all persons, including the right to life, liberty and property, none of which can be secured without public safety. Unfortunately, adequately funding public safety has become more difficult as a result of the unfunded wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which have drained $1.379 trillion from the national treasury, and the worst recession since the Great Depression, which increased unemployment and shrunk the revenues and tax base of state and local governments. […] The constituents of the 37th Congressional District and I are very concerned with the increase in violent crime, which should sound the alarm throughout the City of Long Beach. I remain committed to working with local, county, and state officials to prioritize our scarce resources to ensure that critical domestic priorities are adequately funded. And at the top of the list is education and public safety.

Vice-mayor Robert Garcia, in whose 1st District the residents quoted in Part 1 of this story reside, seems to strike an optimistic note: “Over the last 10 years, crime has been steadily decreasing in Long Beach. Unfortunately, we have seen some spikes recently. I am confident that our Long Beach Police Department is doing everything they can to keep our city safe. I am looking forward to our new Police Academy starting, and getting those new cops on the street as soon as possible.”

***

“We need to prioritize,” Chief McDonnell told the city council in September after the council restored approximately $2.5 million of the $8.7 million in cuts originally proposed to the Department in the FY2013 budget. “We want to focus on doing our core services as well as we can. We’ve been given a sum of money with the expectation that we will restore everything, and there’s no way that is going to happen.”

Click here to view our policies covering Long Beach city council.