Police audit appears to prevent public from learning key findings

In somewhat of a strange twist, a long-overdue independent audit of the Kyle Police Department classifies Kyle as safer than average, recommends a major change to the department’s structure at the top levels, an increase of five positions, beefing up code enforcement and animal control activities, but concludes with saying many of its recommendations should not be revealed to the public.

Page 118 of the 121-page audit, labeled "Appendix C — Patrol Staffing and Property and Evidence Analysis and Recommendations," is otherwise blank except for the notation in all capital letters "CONFIDENTIAL (NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE)," which seems somewhat counter-intuitive since this audit was paid for by public funds. (A copy of another audit performed by Texas Commission on Law Enforcement comprises the final three pages of this audit.)

The results of the audit are part of Tuesday’s city council agenda, which also includes another particular twist: a presentation by City Manager Scott Sellers that is the second item on the agenda, ahead of the Citizen Comments period, which usually holds down the No. 2 spot on the agenda.

That ‘CONFIDENTIAL" notice on the final page of the police audit is noteworthy because the document does contain a number of recommendations throughout its findings. It is also sad that the audit did not come in on schedule because those recommendations might have had a significant impact on the formulation of the city’s budget that went into effect at the beginning of this month.

Something else that is glaringly missing from the audit is a response. Every audit I have ever witnessed performed on a department of a municipal government contains some kind of section-by-section response from the department that is being audited.

Here’s one theory on that blank page and I am going to admit right up front I have absolutely no proof of any kind to support this theory. Nearly three months ago, on July 16, I wrote Sellers asking about the audit and noting at the time it had been 23 weeks since the council authorized what it called "a 14-week contract" to conduct the audit. He told me the next day "We received the draft last Thursday and are in the process of reviewing it now. It will definitely be made public as soon as we receive the final draft, which hopefully will be in the next several weeks." That was back on July 17, exactly three months prior to Tuesday’s council meeting. My unsupported theory is that the city’s staff, even perhaps some members of the council who might have previewed the audit, were adamantly opposed to one or more of the major recommendations contained in the audit and wanted those recommendations removed. I’m thinking that after some back-and-forth a compromise was reached where they wouldn’t be formally removed from the audit, but would be hidden behind a mask of ‘NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE." What kind of a recommendation could trigger such a response resulting in this long of a delay? I have absolutely no idea, but I did find it interesting that the audit’s Appendix A, an analysis of a survey the auditors conducted among police department personnel, revealed only 8 percent of them agreed with the statement that "Current Police Department facilities are adequately sized." It further notes: "Staff across all groups agree that the existing facilities are inadequate." In other words, they overwhelmingly believe a new police headquarters is needed, a notion that also has some community support, but is opposed by staff and most elected officials because it would involve incurring more debt than the city is willing to take on at this time. So instead of giving supporters of a new police headquarters building some additional backing, it was agreed that recommendation — and perhaps others — would be classified ‘NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE."

The audit revealed the Police Department has allotted for 80 staff positions — 36 in patrol, 7 in criminal investigations, 14 in special services, 15 in communications, 4 in records and 4 in the chief’s office. The audit recommends a staff of 85 — 35 in patrol, 8 in criminal investigations, 14 in special services, 18 in communications, 5 in records and 5 in the chief’s office. It must be noted, however, that the auditors recommended the three additions to the communications staff based on the premise the city would not be co-locating its 9-1-1 call center, which, of course, it has decided to do.

Local residents should take comfort in the fact that the auditors reported "Kyle is safer than most communities." Specifically, the audit reported, "Violent crime has steadily declined since 2011, though Kyle’s population has grown approximately 33% during the same time period. The violent crime rate is 1.58 crimes per 1,000 residents. The average national violent crime rate in 2015 was 3.8 crimes per 1,000 population. Kyle’s violent crime rate is one-half the national average."

And even though property crimes in Kyle have risen, according to the audit, they are still "well below" the national average. "Interestingly, the property crime rate has increased at the same rate as Kyle’s population," the audit stated. "The property crime rate was 13.74 crimes per 1,000 population in 2015. In 2015 the national property crime rate was 24.9 crimes per 1,000 population."

The audit noted that the department’s Code Compliance division is comprised of one full-time and two part-time officers who were tasked last year with dealing with 7,635 reports of code violations. "As Kyle continues to grow and see more development, it is expected that the number of code enforcement complaints received will continue to increase," the audit reported. "While many property maintenance issues arise from older properties that may not be maintained, complaints received for new construction are a significant workload driver. New construction complaints typically stem from improper securing of trash and placement of dumpsters, illegally parked vehicles, noise complaints, construction without permits, care of premise which includes overgrown lots. These types of complaints can be time consuming as it is a challenge to locate the appropriate party who has committed the violation. As the city and Code Enforcement continue to evolve, it is important to have consistency in staff handling the active caseload. In order to achieve this, it is recommended that Code Enforcement transition to two full-time employees and one part time employee."

The audit also noted that two full time employees are assigned tom complete animal control functions and that their workload has increased roughly 13 percent during the last three years. "As the population of Kyle continues to grow and more undeveloped land continues to be developed, it is expected that the workload for Animal Control will continue to grow," the audit said. "Similar to Patrol functions there are many unknown factors associated with Animal Control duties. In order to meet the current increase in workload, a part-time animal control officer should be hired for up to 19 hours per week. If the workload continues to grow, as one would assume it would in a growing city like Kyle, the position may be easily transitioned to a full-time position."

The audit said the chief’s department could become more efficient by cutting in half the number of positions that directly report to Chief Jeff Barnett. "The chief has four direct reports and is the direct supervisor over the Criminal Investigation Division and the Communications Division supervisors," according to the audit. "This results in the chief spending too much time on day-to-day operational issues with these areas and less on strategic administrative duties. In order create a more consistent and streamlined reporting structure throughout the KPD, the project team believes an effective solution is to create a second lieutenant position. The second lieutenant position will allow for more effective oversight of the support services associated with the department. In addition, implementing an additional lieutenant position will allow for the chief and captain to focus on management and strategic issues for the department while allowing the lieutenants to focus on the daily operation of their respective functional areas. Based on the recommendations in this report, each lieutenant will have a similar number of employees under their span of control, noting that the patrol lieutenant will have a greater number of direct reports. The ‘patrol lieutenant’ title should be changed to ‘operations lieutenant’ and the second lieutenant should be titled ‘support services lieutenant.’ With the addition of a second lieutenant, the result of the organizational structure is that both the chief and the captain will only have two direct reports each. This proposed structure will allow the chief and captain to focus more on establishing a strategic direction and providing a high level of managerial oversight and decision making."

The audit also recommended the number of warrant officers on staff should be cut in half, from two to one. Council only recently doubled to two the number of warrant officers in KPD>

Other items on Tuesday’s agenda worth noting:

• The consideration of a resolution approving the issuance of just under $9 million in bonds on behalf of the city to pay the first installment on its share of the costs of the Alliance Regional Water Authority’s project to provide water to the area. This is the smallest of the three planned bond issuances; another one for $24 million is scheduled two years from now and a third for nearly $27 million is set for 2021. The city has yet to formally declare how this debt will be repaid but it is expected to come predominantly from major increases to the city’s water rates. A public hearing is attached to this item.
• ‘Consider an agreement with Enterprise Fleet for procurement and disposal of City of Kyle fleet." I’m not exactly sure what is being proposed here, but I think it’s a deal with Enterprise (you know, the outfit with this commercial) to lease instead of purchase city vehicles. What is not clear is whether this is an idea the city is exploring or whether it’s already happening and this is just some kind of a revision or amendment to a current policy.
• An amended PID application and a change in the Development Agreement for the multi-use development to be located between Rowland and Opal lanes just west of the railroad tracks that will require the developer, among other things, to install quiet crossings at the railroad crossings at both Roland and Opal lanes as well as to "finance a portion of the offsite wastewater facilities sufficient to serve the property."
• A resolution (which reminds me of the classic Rodgers and Hart song Where or When; you know, the one that begins "It seems we stood and talked like this before, we looked at each other in the same way then, but I can't remember where or when.") calling for a public hearing on a so-far undisclosed date (the "when" part) to get citizen input on the possible creation of a Public Improvement District at a so-far undisclosed location (the "where" part). But the fact that this comes immediately after the item referenced in the preceding paragraph and the development agreement associated with that item requires the creation of a PID, it wouldn’t be a stretch to guess the two are intertwined.
• Awarding a contract for $172.236 for gateway signs to be placed at five different highway entrances to the city — on the north and south of I35, the northwest and southeast of 150 and at the northern city limits on 1626 — and another $38,760 for wayfinding signs to be located in at least 16 different spots in the city. The money will come from the city’s Hotel Occupancy Tax fund and was already approved as part of this year’s budget.
• Although the agenda appears lengthy, unless something unexpected happens that requires seeking legal advice, an executive session is not likely to occur.