Posted by create (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How about those numbers! Only 1,000 applicants out of 7,000 received this grant. Good deal!!!

Whoever wrote the grant needs a pat on the head. Attaboy!

Posted by yev_kassem (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 2:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I wish they would have given it to the department directly and told them to spend wisely as opposed to forcing them to hire new officers.

I really don't know so don't shoot me if I am wrong :-) but do we need another 2 officers? I saw in the budget that the department WANTs some new patrol cars. That $295k would come in handy buying those.

Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Where will this money come from again?

Posted by yev_kassem (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 2:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

seriously--

It will come from that big pile of money out back of the White House. Apparently they have a whole orchard of money trees back there.

Posted by justthinkin (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes, funding is for 3 years... where does the money come after, or what happens to those positions at the end of three years.... taxpayers, get ready, the hook has been taken.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 2:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Looks like another budget revision to include an expenditure for to new squad cars for two new officers !

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh, and this is all free money, just in case you forgot !

Posted by paulkersey (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 3:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Looks like another budget revision to include an expenditure for to new squad cars for two new officers !"

Ain't no such thing as a free puppy.

Posted by create (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Fine. Send the $$ back. You guys can be in charge and explain to the people why we don't have anything.

Posted by giggles (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 3:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

We don't already have officers? Oh, we have nothing, nothing I tell you! What are we ever going to do?!

Create, you sound like half of the parents I see. They give their children everything they ever asked for because they can't say no.

Posted by mjl (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nice to have some good news for Emporia. Good job to whoever did the work to land this.

Posted by giggles (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 4:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

mjl, this good news is relative. We can't balance our budget now, how are we going to cover the costs in a couple of years when the grant ends? There are a number of costs we will incur besides their salary. It is only good if we can actually sustain it.

Posted by booker5m (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just getting us deeper into the hole that the U.S. will never dig out of

Posted by YY4U (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 6:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Money to hire train and pay two new officers for three years that doesn't come out of local funds is great! D.C. will spend the money on some town in New York City if we send it back. Lets hire and train two new police officers on D.C.'s dime, by the time they start getting paid by local taxes they will be trained and experienced.

Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 7:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So where does D.C. get their dimes from?

Don't answer that, I'm pretty sure I know.

Here's an idea to maximize the the use of the money. Hire them but don't give them cars to patrol in. They can be foot cops, old school style. In old time uniforms swinging night sticks. They would have actual authority but only patrol down town during business hours. They would be like a living tourist attraction. It would tie in with our historic down town theme. I know it sounds silly which is rare coming from me but I'm actually serious this time.

Posted by YY4U (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 7:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I get the picture seriouslyfolks, I think giving them just one car would be fun though:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZBdxvego...

Posted by YY4U (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 7:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

About D.C.'s money, They get it from us. I know that silly.......They are giving it out like Halloween candy......Emporia aught to get their bags full too. They are going to give it all away to someplace. Why not here?

Posted by paulkersey (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'd like to see them use this money towards some of that $50 million debt we have accumulated. But, at least it does offer two new jobs in a city very short of those right now.

Posted by navywife (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

of course we need 2 more officers. if u haven't noticed, as the economy gets worse, crime rate increases. great job epd!!

Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 7:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Has our crime rate increased?

Posted by YY4U (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 8:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It would be nice to be able to hire a couple local kids about 23 - 25 and get them started in a meaningful lifelong career.

Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

just goes to show you, you get enough roosters and hens together, somebody lays an egg. Good job folks for dumping on a fund that pays for two positions that already exist on the department. You all really need to check your facts before you cluck. I did and found out the officers positions in this article were going be be cut because of the inability to fund operations. Having read most of these, many of you are the same folks complaining all the time the cops don't get there quick enough, etc. etc. If bellyaching was an olympic sport, we'd have a hell of a lot of gold medals we could pawn to help bail out the city.

Sheesh!

Posted by biscuitboy (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 5:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So this stimulus money is not providing new jobs then.....its protecting a couple of existing jobs. Nothing wrong with that I guess.....still keeping two people employeed that wouldn't have been otherwise.

I just hope there is some more stimulus money around when I get my pink slip.....because unemployment funds are being stetched pretty thin.

justthefacts......this space is called a forum not something like "Cheerleaders Corner". If all we ever did was rah-rah everything the city....and especially the police department...... did, we wouldn't be doing our jobs now would we.

Posted by biscuitboy (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 5:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

And I beg your pardon justthefacts,,,,,but I had not posted on this thread until after you had allready made your remark about people complaining about the police not getting there fast enough. Which was the subject of our first disagreement on this space. :-)

Posted by giggles (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I for one have never complained about police not getting anywhere fast enough. They get there when they get there. I have never seen a police officer slacking in that manner. I do object to the government handing out money anywhere anytime like candy at a parade.
The buck is supposed to stop somewhere, nobody seems to know where though.

Posted by MeToo (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm amazed by comments from so many people determined to see this as something bad. Wake up, people! Your police department is getting about $300,000 that would otherwise go to a different community. That is the simple reality. You sound like children who are always whining no matter what their parents give them.

Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uROuR3Jm...

I've never complained about the police either, I just don't like all the spending that is going on. Maybe this spending is great and very beneficial, it was bound to happen. if you shoot at a target with a shotgun a few pellets are bound to find their way to the bull's eye. It's the billion ... scratch that ... trillion other pellets that don't even hit the target that upsets me.

Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I almost forgot.

rah rah sis boom bah

Posted by giggles (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Simple reality??!! There is no such thing. That is my problem with it all. The fact that you think it is simple reality nails the coffin shut. REALITY is that money does not grow on trees. Could it have gone somewhere else, of course. Should it? No. You know what financial crisis means? It really means there is NO MONEY. They will still rob from the poor to see these things through though.

Don't sugar coat my reality, I'm figuratively diabetic.

Posted by MeToo (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, the simple fact is that the government always spends tons of money. The national debt increased about $6 trillion during the Bush administration. Complaining about government spending is like complaining about the force of gravity. The best you can hope for is that some of it will benefit you. And in this case, I think Emporia should benefit.

Posted by yev_kassem (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The issue is obviously not that the department is getting the money, it is where they are getting it from and the burden it puts on the community once it runs out.

The way I read the article was that we were going to be required to hire 2 additional police officers and that those 2 additional officers salaries and benefits will be funded by our federal tax dollars.

My question still is....Do we really need 2 more officers? and How is the community going to pay for those 2 additional officers after 3 years? Are they just going to be temporary hires? Are we going to just "hope" we have enough other officers quit, retire or get fired in the next 3 years so we can gain them thru attrition?

I just want to know what the plan is. Someone in charge needs to have a plan in place and needs to be held accountable in 3 years and needs to justify why and if we need additional officers.

Because honestly, I would be more impressed if we said that we didn't need the 2 additional officers and gave the money back.

Posted by MeToo (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Giving the money back wouldn't stop the money from being spent. It would just be spent somewhere else.

Posted by yev_kassem (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Metoo--

I agree, but at least someone (community) would be taking a stand against some of this foolishness.

Posted by MeToo (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Another way to look at it is that your community will get a partial refund of the taxes collected by the government. Those taxes are going to be collected regardless. The only question is who gets the refund--you or someone else.

Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

We ain't goin' to get a refund no matter what. Like you say the government will just spend that too. Right?

Posted by yev_kassem (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How do you figure we are getting a partial refund on our taxes?

If the grant wasn't available we wouldn't be hiring new officers.

Posted by giggles (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

MeToo is on the apathy train. I am of the understanding that that train doesn't have any stops.
That's just the way it is so stop complaining? That is pathetic, and really just quite wrong. Apparently MeToo wants us all to just lay down and die, that's just the way it is.

Posted by boomer46 (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

For anyone that is interested, the following address is a link to the information on the grant that was available. Having helped with writing and budgeting of grants, all the questions that have been asked should have been answered in the grant application.

http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?it...

Posted by MeToo (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

On the contrary. I believe in being realistic. If you think you can stop the government from taxing and spending, I think you're mistaken. Given that the government is going to tax and spend, I'd prefer to see some of it spent helping our community. This kind of whining is a waste of time. If you think giving the money back is going to improve the situation, I think you're right: It will improve the situation for the other person who gets the money. I say, let's make the best of the situation. Our community is getting a chunk of tax revenue given to us to improve our law enforcement, and much of that money will be spent in our community by the officers who get the paychecks, providing jobs for our citizens. If you think posting a few negative comments on this website is going to help improve our government or reduce government waste, you're in a fantasy world.

Posted by giggles (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I didn't say posting here would change things, but I also know that there are enough of you apathetic Americans out there to never to get this to change. You keep throwing money at the problems, only making a great many more greedy, and not solving the real problems. We should really be re-writing and revamping our government rather than continuing on our express train to imminent destruction.

Posted by YY4U (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

D.C. is going to waste about one trillion dollars. It has already been approved by congress. There is nothing we can do about it. I think Emporia, Kansas should keep asking for more until D.C. spends all of it. Like I said before, They are handing out money like it is Halloween. Emporia should get a HUGE sack and say Trick or Treat and try to get as much of that money as possible.

Posted by kcfan (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So forgive me if I am wrong as I didn’t spend a lot of time on my calculations, BUT… the EPD website states that they have 29 patrol officers covering 3 shifts. To make it easy lets say 30 (but I doubt it). That’s about 10 people eligible per shift. Taking 2 days off a week so give or take 6-8 officers on duty at a given time.

That would be fine, except you also have to figure in people away due to illness, vacation, paid time off, family emergencies, doctors appointments, school meetings, sporting events and everything else that takes us away from work from time to time.

My guess is that there is at times not more than 4-5 officers for the WHOLE town on a given day. So you ask, ‘are 2 more positions needed and justified?’ Heck ya they are!

Posted by yev_kassem (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

There are 29 Patrol officers but 47 commissioned officers which consists of specialty officers. This also does not count the Lyon Co. Sheriffs Dept used for patrolling as well.

There are 8,736 hours per year that need to be patrolled.

The average worker works 1920 hours per year.

That works out to 6 patrol officers on duty at all time. That doesn't count the specialty officers or Lyon County officers. Do we need more than 6? Possibly, but if you are spending my money you better explain why.

Posted by lala (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 8:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

why would you expect Lyon Co. Sheriffs Dept to patrol the city, the people of Lyon county would probably apprecite them patroling the county

Posted by krazykansan (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 8:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

One way to stop the government spending is to not pay any taxes, PEROID,,,,,,,,,.........................

If we the people don't rebell and revolt on taxes NOW. You/we will have no say so forever more on where our tax money goes.EVER.................

Posted by YY4U (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 9:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

An experienced police officer can generate more revenue for the city than it costs to employ him or her. On an average eight hour shift, a police officer may issue citations adding up to $500 - $2500 or even more on a Saturday night.