[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 172 (Thursday, November 2, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2103]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              SEAL BEACH SAYS NO THANKS TO 1993 CRIME BILL

                                 ______


                         HON. DANA ROHRABACHER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, November 2, 1995

  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, during 1993 and 1994 Congress debated 
H.R. 3355 of the 103d Congress. Many of us believed that the amount of 
assistance that this bill was to provide to fight crime was being 
greatly oversold. None of the provisions were more oversold than the 
number of additional local police that would be paid for by the so-
called ``free'' Federal money provided in the bill.
  This was because there was a catch to the ``free'' money for 
additional police. The catch is that after 4 years the local community 
has to continue to pay the full cost of these ``free'' policemen or the 
citizens and towns would have to return the grant funds.
  The Seal Beach, CA City Council in my district has taken a close look 
at what the real cost of this program will be to them in the outyears. 
After consideration they voted unanimously not to apply for this 
``free'' assistance.
  I am inserting at this point in the Record a copy of the minutes of 
the Seal Beach City Council meeting where they unanimously said, ``No 
thanks.''.

                  Grant Application--Cops Ahead Grant

       The Interim City Manager reported that the City has been 
     informed of a second round of the COPS Program, the City 
     having previously received authorization for one Police 
     Officer under the COPS FAST Program, this item simply 
     authorization to submit the grant application for the second 
     program.
       The Manager expressed concern with the future ability to 
     fund the officer if the application were approved, noting 
     that the first three years would be of benefit to the City, 
     the costs would be minimal in terms of cost benefit, however 
     the City would assume all costs upon the fourth year, and if 
     the grant is accepted the City must agree to pay its share of 
     the total cost for the grant period as well as make a good 
     faith effort to keep that position in the budget thereafter 
     with an assurance to the Department of Justice that keeping 
     that position will not eliminate another.
       He pointed out that the officer obtained through the COPS 
     FAST Program will cover the downtown/pier/beach area and it 
     is understood that the City committed to retaining that 
     officer at the end of the grant period. The Manager asked for 
     direction from the Council as to the desire to file the 
     application, if granted a determination can then be made as 
     to whether or not to accept, or the application could be 
     filed with a notation that the City may not accept for a 
     period of time however that would likely jeopardize any 
     approval.
       Councilman Brown inquired if the officer acquired through 
     the grant program could be retained as a replacement should 
     another officer resign for one reason or another, or does the 
     personnel contingent need to be maintained. The Manager 
     responded that the requirement is not to keep the individual 
     rather to keep the position, as an example, if there are 
     twenty patrol officers and a twenty-first is obtained through 
     the grant, at the end of the three years the agency must make 
     a good faith effort to keep the twenty-first position. 
     Councilman Laszlo posed questions with regard to the City's 
     costs relative to the grant officer(s).
       The Manager advised that costs borne by the City under the 
     first grant will be $180,000 for the period of three years 
     which includes salary, benefits, hard costs, there are other 
     costs that are not included in the grant however they are 
     relatively minor, in turn the grant pays $75,000 of that, 
     thus the cost over three years will be $105,000, pointing out 
     that $35,000 was included in this years budget for that 
     officer with the assumption that the officer would be 
     employed by the first of July, however, in actuality will not 
     be employed until about September 22nd or 23rd.
       As to a second officer should this application be approved 
     the Manager once again expressed concern as to the source of 
     funding after the three year grant period, and with regard to 
     the first officer, the position will be part of the budget 
     process next spring and should there be inadequate revenues 
     the Council will need to make some priority choices. 
     Councilman Laszlo expressed concern as a result of the County 
     losses as well.
       He offered that the City has good police officers however 
     said they are the second lowest paid in the County, and 
     expressed his opinion that this action could take money away 
     from raises that they are deserving of. The Mayor said it is 
     likely that if the City could not fund the position in the 
     future the officer would probably be cut and the City would 
     need to refund the grant.
       Hastings moved, second by Forsythe, to not authorize the 
     grant application for a second police officer under the COPS 
     AHEAD Program.

                          ____________________