The Effects of Changes in Legislation and Regulatory Policies, Staff Shortages and Declining Support
Analysis about the future of California policing generally focuses on recruiting, hiring and retention. Significant shortages of applicants who want to be police officers may cause one to wonder why anyone would want to become or remain a police officer in California, given the current state of its politics. Who would want to remain in California given the potential for population changes, increases in homelessness, abundant crime, budget deficits and pension reform? It is against this backdrop that the goals of police reform and police recruiting coexist.
California has a history of pushing legislative mandates onto counties and municipalities. [5] This continued in the aftermath of George Floyd’s homicide in 2020 when the state passed legislation to constrain the police. Several of these bills required significant staffing and resources to be expended by underfunded, understaffed and undertrained agencies. This included local and county agencies, as well as the California Department of Justice (DOJ) and California’s Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). [6]
Less is known about how California regulatory policies will affect municipal police agencies and their ability to recruit, hire and retain officers. Even as the police struggled with public protests in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted local legislators to enact related mandates. These local laws often required officers and deputies to be vaccinated — and, if they refused, to be terminated. This resulted in the resignation or termination of police officers and deputy sheriffs at a time when staffing was already under duress. [7,8] Regulations have also caused an exodus of businesses out of California due to high operating costs. In 2021, California business headquarters left the state at twice the rate as in 2019 and 2020, and three times the rate of 2018. In the last three years, California lost 11 Fortune 1000 companies, often to states with less regulation and lower taxes. [9]
People followed the businesses out. In 2018-2019, 56% of persons relocating in California were families leaving the state. In 2021-2022, the figure was nearly 60%. The rising cost of living, mortgage rates, inflation, recession, the ability to work remotely, rising violent crime and homelessness were among the reasons. [10] Included in the migration out of California were police officers. One example of many is the three veteran officers from the Orange Police Department who resigned and left the state for similar jobs at a fraction of the pay and benefits because of politics, the cost of living and regulations affecting them and their families.
The revenue shortfall
The loss of businesses and people equates to decreasing tax revenues, federal funding and congressional seats, which California lost during the 2020 Census. As funds are lost, local communities suffer. Most municipal revenue is generated by property and sales taxes. If more businesses and residents leave California, municipalities will be forced to adapt to reduced revenue. In most municipalities, public safety accounts for at least 50% of expenditures, and the cost to maintain adequate police staffing is increasing. The current response to attract candidates for police positions is to compete with neighboring departments by offering monetary incentives. One recent examination revealed hiring bonuses ranging from $10,000 to $75,000. [11] This practice, especially for small and rural departments, has exacerbated shortages because they can’t compete. [12]
Within this context, concerns about becoming a police officer or remaining in policing continue to grow. [13] Officers and future candidates face increased scrutiny because of transparency of personnel files; fear of being prosecuted for shootings; being overworked because of staffing shortages and increased call volumes; lenient district attorneys; [14] lower hiring standards to meet staffing shortages or tougher hiring standards to make it more difficult to be a police officer; potential for civilian or federal oversight; and inept leadership at all levels. Clearly, the status quo needs to change, and not incrementally. Law enforcement leaders should seriously deliberate making substantial changes to who and how they hire, regionalizing all or parts of their agencies, and adopting nontraditional processes to retain staff.