In today's Journal-Gazette, Fort Wayne Police Chief Rusty York takes exception to Matt Kelty's claim some Fort Wayne Police officers' body armor is no longer warranted to be worn. At first reading appears York seems to state that Kelty's claim in untrue. However, going back and reading the statement paragraph by paragraph York could be playing the word game. York could have just come out and said it was untrue and for Kelty to produce one piece of body armor that was out of warranty.
Following is York's statement. BOLD CAPITOL TEXT is of mine.
SETTING UP HIS ARGUMENT
On numerous occasions, mayoral candidate Matt Kelty has publicly expressed concern that officers of the Fort Wayne Police Department are not provided body armor and suggests that the administration of the police department is jeopardizing their safety. Kelty is misinformed, and I feel compelled to provide an accurate account of our protective body armor program.
STATEMENT OF FIRST EQUIPPING AND THE REQUIRED WEARING
Every Fort Wayne police officer is issued protective body armor when he or she begins work with our agency. Uniformed officers are required to wear body armor at all times, and all other personnel are required to wear it during arrest or high-risk situations.
CONFUSING STATEMENT - VESTS OR TOTAL BODY ARMOR--- YORK SAYS FIVE-YEAR WARRANTY AND THEN WARRANTY DOES NOT EXPIRE AT SAME TIME.
The manufacturers of protective body armor typically provide a five-year warranty on their products. In 1999 the police department was able to secure a federal grant, which allowed us to replace all of our officers’ vests that were older than five years. Keep in mind that the warranty of all of our body armor does not expire at the same time.
QUALIFIED ANSWER - DOES NOT ADDRESS ANYONE HAVING BODY ARMOR OUT OF WARRANTY.
Our budgeted level of commissioned officers is 460. We have hired 93 officers over the past five years, providing them with new body armor. Body armor costs about $497. This year we replaced the body armor of 191 of our officers at a cost of $95,280, and we have budgeted the same amount for 2008.
SAY WHAT? - EITHER THE $1,700 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE IS GREATLY TOO MUCH OR "PAY IT OUT OF YOUR OWN POCKET!"
Officers receive a $1,700 annual clothing allowance. At any time, if an officer feels compelled to replace his or her vest outside of our rotation cycle, they could use their clothing allowance for that purchase.
SELF SERVING STATEMENT
Our agency prides itself on being one of the most professional, highly trained and well-equipped police departments in the United States, with officer safety being our highest of priorities. Officers put themselves in harm’s way on a daily basis – it is a requirement of their profession. We recognize their valor and do our very best to keep them safe.
MY CLOSING COMMENT
If Police Chief York disagrees with Kelty he should have just laid out the numbers. He should have not danced around with words, that in conclusion, leaves one wondering if every officer does in deed have the proper body armor.
If York is right, he should just challenge Kelty to produce one vest that is out of useful life. York should not play with words, because a bullet will go right through his words and just maybe a worn-out vest.
Eric White over at the Center Line blog has his own view on this subject. You can check it out at: http://americanwhiteguy.wordpress.com/2007/10/26/police-chief-rusty-york-responds/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Chief York's explanation is more than a little incomplete with regard to the body armor issue. When the last mass purchase of vests occurred, all of the vests were warranted for 5 years. As the warranty expiration date approached the City adopted the position that officers were required to purchase new vests from their uniform allowance; this position was abandoned in the face of fierce opposition from the Patrolmens' Benevolent Association. (PBA's position was that the city is required to provide all safety-related equipment.) After some wrangling, Chief York agreed to to replace approximately one hundred vests per year, based upon assignment, seniority, etc. It is easy to see that while the warranties for the first several hundred vests have expired, only part of them have been replaced under the new agreement with the city's largest police union. The officers whose vests have not yet been replaced are still relying on their old vests, a significant number of which are out of warranty. Matt Kelty's information likely comes from members of the PBA, who are quite familiar with the gaps in the Department's body armor replacement rotation. York's comments are nothing more than spin for political purposes.
Post a Comment