Finally, I want to address one administrative issue that has been in the news of late, and which has been of ongoing interest to the Committee. That is the issue of police overtime.
Over the past several years, MPD has been both vigilant and successful in reducing the number of hours our officers engage in overtime. In FY 2000, MPD used more than 900,000 hours of overtime. By FY 2005, that number had been cut by more than one-third, to fewer than 600,000 hours. With a decrease of more than 19,000 locally funded hours in FY 2005, the OCFO estimates a savings of almost half a million dollars in local funds. This was achieved despite the retroactive pay raises established by the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the MPD and approved by the Council. As a result, the FY 2005 costs were skewed because they included some prior year costs.
The Department continues to achieve significant reductions in court overtime hours, even as arrest activity has increased. In FY 2005, court overtime dropped another 21 percent. Total court overtime hours have dropped 59 percent since FY 2000. On average, officers spent 2.1 hours in court per arrest in FY 2005, compared to 5.3 hours per arrest in FY 2002. Unless other stakeholders are committed to radically changing this process, I do not think MPD can decrease this much further. All things being equal, officers still have to go to court when they make arrests.
I think we all need to keep in mind a few things about police overtime. First, overtime enables our Department to quickly respond to both critical emergencies and emerging crime and disorder problems in our communities. Overtime is essential for a variety of traffic safety efforts, including photo radar, sobriety checkpoints, and seat belt and child safety seat compliance. Overtime is also used for so-called “reimbursable details,” in which nightclubs, sports teams and other venues reimburse the Department for extra police coverage outside their events, or when the federal government reimburses us for overtime associated with major events, such as demonstrations, inaugurations and the like.
In many of these cases, the use of overtime actually allows us to keep more of our uniformed officers in their PSAs or other operational assignments. Without overtime, we would have to pull on-duty officers out of our communities in order to carry out these other public safety initiatives. Furthermore, most of these initiatives are funded not through local tax dollars, but rather through grants, reimbursements or, in the case of photo radar, fines paid by speeding violators. In fact, more than 60 percent of all FY 2005 overtime hours were reimbursable through grants, Federal funds, or other sources (sporting events, night clubs, etc.).
Of the remaining overtime hours in FY 2005, about half was used for court overtime, when officers who have made arrests or investigated crimes need to appear in court to support the prosecution of criminal cases. The remaining locally-funded, non-court overtime has sometimes been called “discretionary,” but I think that is a misnomer. The majority of this overtime—more than 60 percent—was spent in the District’s neighborhoods, addressing persistent or emerging crime problems, or investigating crimes. The remainder included coverage of polling stations during the 2004 elections and court-mandated care of MPD canines.
And despite recent media reports questioning the amount of overtime earned by some of our officers, audits by our Office of Professional Responsibility have found no instances in which these members violated any Departmental policies or regulations. Television coverage focused on the top overtime earner in the MPD, Master Patrol Officer Frank Buentello. I believe the city is very fortunate to have an officer as dedicated as MPO Buentello, who will celebrate his 40th year of service with the Department next month. Though some people might be slowing down after working for 40 years, he clearly is not.
There is no doubt that MPO Buentello works a considerable amount of overtime, but I’d like to share a bit more information with you that the media didn’t cover. With 40 years of service, he has seniority over most of the force, and a high-priority in selecting overtime options. His 40 years of service also means that he has earned longevity pay, which is factored into his hourly overtime rate. Most importantly, almost 75 percent of his overtime was not funded by local tax dollars, as it was earned through reimbursable or grant-funded details.
Lastly, the media coverage mischaracterizes the portion of his pay earned from overtime. Based on his base salary, his longevity pay, and the retroactive payment, he would have earned more than $100,000 even if he had not worked any overtime in FY 2005. His overtime earnings also included retroactive overtime pay, per the collective bargaining agreement, and mandatory buy-downs of his comp hours. Yes, MPO Buentello worked a lot of overtime in FY 2005 and throughout his career. But I certainly wouldn’t mind if everyone were as dedicated to the Department and the city as he is.