2004-01-AU Hawai‘i County Police Department Vehicles

Home

Fi nal I y, the report ci ted the sal ary scal a for motor pool faci I i ty staff obtai ned from the 2002 M aui Poll i ce Department fleet study, asfolIows: Position Title Salary Motor Pool coordinator $ 29,712.00 Utility Worker $ 24,282.00 Attendant (F /T) $ 22,290.00 (2) Attendant (P /T) $ 21,792.00 Car Washers $ 16,796.00 Premium Pay $ 1,900.00 Total $116,772.00 The H CPD report asserted that " subsi di zed vehi d es are readi I y i denti f i abl a to the resi dents and vi si tors al i ke ... the bl ue strobe I i ght affixed to the top of the vehi cl e i s hi ghl y vi si bl a duri ng the day or ni ght." I t made no comment on the I ack of " Pol i od' i denti f cati on marki ngs on subsi di zed vehi cl es. The report di d propose, however, that a " f I yer photo program wi th the ai rport, H V B, ai rl i nes coul d sati sfy the i nfrequent vi si tor" to become fami I i ari zed wi th county pol i ce cars and suggested that thi s mi ght be a " proj ect for WH CS." Fi nal I y, the study summari zed the advantages and di sadvantages of a f I eet vehi d e program as fol I ows: Advantages of Fleet Vehicle Program Disadvantages of Fleet Vehice Program • Standardized Vehicles Longevity 2.5 — 3 years • Prisoner more confined Suscepti bl e to vehi d e abuse • No cost to officer High start -up cost • Standard 36 month 36K mi I e warranty unl ess extended warranty purchased • Need 3 mai ntenance faci I iti es to accommodate I ogisti cal concerns • Need to hi re new staff to man faci I iti es (possi bl a 24 hours) • Bidding process I. Hawai'i Police Department Fleet vs. Subsidized Vehicle Report II, 2003 On December 2, 2003 Police Chief Lawrence K. M ahuna transmitted an updated report titled H awai ` i Police Department Fleet vs. Subsi di zed Vehicle Report 11 to Mayor Harry Kim. Chief M ahuna' s cover letter to the mayor stated that the report was transmitted "in accordance with your directives to provide recommendati ons on i mprovi ng the vi si bi I i ty of our department." The December, 2003 report provi ded five opti ons for departmental vehi d es, as wel I as recommendati ons for enhancing the visibility — upgraded lighting systems, directional si gnage, etc. — of county police stati ons. The report was prepared after consul ti ng nei ghbor i sl and county pot i ce departments. A I I other county police departments recommended purchasing fleet vehicles with no extended warranty. They advised aged nst I easi ng due to the excessive warranty costs for I eased pot ice vehicles. I nstead, the other counti es recommended purchasi ng vehi d es outri ght, decl i ni ng extended warrant es, and pl ad ng a hi gh pri on ty on preventive mai ntenance. The Ford Crown V i ctori a Pot i ce I nterceptor was reported) y preferred by nei ghbor i sl and pot i ce depart- ments. I n devel opi ng a cost esti mate for thi s I atest report, H CPD quoted the actual purchase pri ce for a 32