What is the Randolph Village Police District Traffic Bottleneck? (video)

  This is a new video explaining the report on this blog, specifically the traffic issue in the Randolph Village Police District. More video...

Sunday, January 28, 2024

Police District Expansion - Executive Summary




I would like to thank The Herald owner, editor and publisher Tim Calabro for making The Herald articles available online for free to research this report. Without the publicity and information provided by our local hometown newspaper, we lose a critical leg of our democratic system. 

Please support The Herald! Please say - Thank You, Tim!

Police District Expansion

  1. The businesses that used to populate the village police district and represented a destination for area residents have moved on or closed over the past 40 years since the town/village merger in 1984.

  2. There have been very few new businesses to replace them, leaving significant commercial vacancies throughout the village district.

  3. The residential population in both town and village has remained flat since 1980. Zero growth for decades.

  4. The areas south and east of the village district have seen substantial growth and development of new business real estate since the merger. These properties do not pay police district taxes and are a major destination for traffic passing through the village.

  5. The demand for law enforcement in the village is primarily traffic related, due to the flow of commuters traveling through the village, instead of to the village, to get to their destination.

  6. This traffic is caused by residents who have no choice but to drive through the village to get to their destination.

  7. The village traffic is further exacerbated by area students and parents attending elementary, middle and high school in the village, as well as area residents going to Gifford Hospital.

  8. The village police district tax is an impediment to bringing significant new business to the village, which is confirmed by the significant new development outside the village district. This puts the district residents at a disadvantage, paying taxes for police coverage while business stagnates and vacancies proliferate. The result is ever increasing costs for village residents.

  9. The animosity created by this town/village division will continue to hinder growth, compromise teamwork and foster uncertainty for the entire community. The selectboard spends countless hours dealing with village police district issues. This is time and effort that could be much better spent elsewhere. It is also likely to discourage otherwise willing volunteers from serving on the board.

  10. A partial expansion of the district will only create the same situation over a larger footprint. The incentive and opportunity to avoid police taxes will still exist, and business will be likely to avoid new development in the partially expanded district. This will push new development to areas just outside the new boundaries.

  11. A partial expansion will perpetuate and compound the existing division within the community. That leaves the problem up to future generations; what past generations did to us (“kick the can down the road”).

  12. The logical choice is to expand the district to the entire town, level the playing field, and establish a town wide police force with the goal of growing into a regional law enforcement agency serving Randolph, Braintree, Brookfield, Bethel and perhaps Chelsea and Tunbridge. This would provide stability and a career path to new officers and help to reduce the risk officers decide to leave.

  13. Residents in town, outside the district, are not likely to ever vote in favor of town wide expansion. Therefore, this will probably only be accomplished either by selectboard fiat, or by the village district taxpayers refusing to fund any budgets for police services until and unless the town wide expansion is approved. Essentially, this would be holding the town hostage with the possibility that the police department is dissolved and Randolph is left without coverage. If the town refuses to vote for approval, and the selectboard refuses to act, this may be the only choice for change.

  14. Alternatively, to show good faith, the village could simply refuse to fund more than the cost of three (3) full-time officers, the same number of officers under the OCSD contract which worked so well. The village should not be held hostage by the town and forced to pay for more coverage than necessary.

  15. Approval of a town wide police department should include plans to establish a new headquarters centrally located to serve the entire town and surrounding areas. One ideal location would be the old Especially Imports blue building on Route 66. The parking lot and utilities are already established, the building could be easily renovated to provide offices and the garage area necessary for prisoner security. It would be easily accessed and allow favorable response times, especially to East Randolph. This would help to ease concerns that town residents are paying for a village police force. Finally, it would provide a focus for the community to rally around and celebrate finally resolving this issue after so many years in limbo.

  16. A new headquarters on Route 66 would be highly visible to area residents, something to reassure people and a reason to take pride in their community. It would also be far more affordable than a new building from scratch. This support from the town would improve department morale and provide incentives for long term commitment to the department, a serious concern given the lack of qualified personnel.

  17. The area's population has been stagnant for 40 years. Is it a coincidence that it has also been 40 years since the merger? It is time for change.

Main Street Bridge, Randolph


Old Business Sites in Randolph Village




























The Cost of Law Enforcement Inflation

 


This graph shows what the PD cost in past years (blue), adjusted for inflation to 2023 dollars (red), then compared to the proposed FY2025 budget (green). The difference between the red and green lines is the inflated cost of law enforcement, over and above the actual rate of inflation. 

For example, in 1991 the actual cost was $260,020, the inflation adjusted cost for the year is $592,571, for six (6) full-time officers, including chief, plus administrative and part-time officers. 

The FY2025 budget proposal of five (5) full-time officers, including the chief, is $721,838. 

The difference, $200,267, represents the inflated cost of law enforcement, over and above the official rate of inflation for the economy as a whole. 

The FY2025 budget is funding fewer officers than in 1991, yet the cost is $200,267 more dollars. That is an increase of 33.8% ($200,267/$592,571=.338).

In other words, we are spending way more money, and getting fewer officers, than in the past. This is why the proposed budget seems to be expensive compared to past years, and also why the village residents are balking at the cost. It seems more expensive because it is!

This is law enforcement inflation.

What can be done about it? Not much, given the demographics. Our birth rate has been falling for 20 years now, and we new see reductions in the population of graduating seniors each year. When I graduated from RUHS in 1987 there were nearly 100 students in my class. Last year, RUHS only graduated something like 54 or 55 students, roughly half compared to thirty years ago. There are some indications that the birth rate will recover but until then there is not much society can do - the people were never born. The only other option is immigration.

Law enforcement demands young people to work in the field. They are not going to hire a 45 year old changing careers for whatever reason, the physical demands are too great. Like lots of other jobs with which they compete, the salaries of law enforcement officers are at a premium, and filling these positions will be challenging.

For this reason, it is critical that any department do whatever they can to retain qualified personnel. There are too many other agencies competing for a small pool of people in any given area. In a rural area such as ours, this becomes even more important.

Randolph Village Police District
FiscalTotal ActualTotal AdjustedDifference =Adjusted
YearDollars Spent *2023 Dollars (1)Official Inflation10 Yr. Average
1991$260,020$592,571$332,551
1992$217,526$483,166$265,640
1993$227,027$488,356$261,329
1994$232,331$487,460$255,129
1995$267,358$545,649$278,291
1996$263,631$523,755$260,124
1997$282,791$545,223$262,432
1998$308,972$586,485$277,513
1999$321,695$600,600$278,905
2000$307,796$559,332$251,536$541,260
2001URURUR
2002$393,895$682,246$288,351
2003$391,803$663,130$271,327
2004$394,977$654,199$259,222
2005$374,427$602,275$227,848
2006$403,430$624,057$220,627
2007$415,078$629,019$213,941
2008$452,324$657,327$205,003
2009$441,161$640,913$199,752
2010$410,804$583,295$172,491
2011$446,924$624,392$177,468$636,085
2012$460,364$624,890$164,526
2013$553,091$738,970$185,879
2014$541,416$712,127$170,711
2015$605,193$796,726$191,533
2016$582,981$757,088$174,107
2017$589,719$747,159$157,440
2018$568,272$705,382$137,110
2019$433,236$529,550$96,314
2020$318,625$380,010$61,385
2021$305,122$358,882$53,760$635,079
2022$312,337$341,802$29,465
2023$524,102$524,102$0
2024$721,838$721,838$0
UR = Unreported data
(*) Information on Total Spent, Total Incidents, Total Requests and Staff from annual town reports.

Randolph Village Police District
Difference Between
FiscalTotal ActualTotal AdjustedAdj 2023 & Budget
YearDollars Spent *2023 Dollars (1)= L.E. Inflation
1991$260,020$592,571$721,838
1992$217,526$483,166$721,838
1993$227,027$488,356$721,838
1994$232,331$487,460$721,838
1995$267,358$545,649$721,838
1996$263,631$523,755$721,838
1997$282,791$545,223$721,838
1998$308,972$586,485$721,838
1999$321,695$600,600$721,838
2000$307,796$559,332$721,838
2002$393,895$682,246$721,838
2003$391,803$663,130$721,838
2004$394,977$654,199$721,838
2005$374,427$602,275$721,838
2006$403,430$624,057$721,838
2007$415,078$629,019$721,838
2008$452,324$657,327$721,838
2009$441,161$640,913$721,838
2010$410,804$583,295$721,838
2011$446,924$624,392$721,838
2012$460,364$624,890$721,838
2013$553,091$738,970$721,838
2014$541,416$712,127$721,838
2015$605,193$796,726$721,838
2016$582,981$757,088$721,838
2017$589,719$747,159$721,838
2018$568,272$705,382$721,838
2019$433,236$529,550$721,838
2020$318,625$380,010$721,838
2021$305,122$358,882$721,838
2022$312,337$341,802$721,838
2023$524,102$524,102$721,838
2024$721,838$721,838