From the proposal of the MPA, staff recently authorized the use of personally owned AR15 style rifles. Officers interested in using their own rifles must successfully complete a 40 hour rifle school prior to deploying with their rifle. The next rifle school is scheduled for April 7th thru 10th and is limited to 16 students. Rifles must meet certain specifications and be approved by a Mesa PD rifle armorer prior to attending the school. See the “Authorized Firearms” document under “Authorized Personally Owned Patrol Rifles”. Send all training requests to Training, not the range. Any questions can be directed to the firearms staff @ x2662.

Click below for February’s newsletter!

February Newsletter

Only the MPA believed strongly enough to pay it’s own way when submitting ballot arguments for proposition 300. The MPA Board felt it important to convey the fact that MPA investigated this proposal independently and concluded on its own, prop. 300 is what is in the best interests of Mesa citizens, the city, and membership.

We had no influence from Gaylord or DMB. We concentrated on the interests of what’s best for the citizens. We did not accept paid-for ballot arguments by anyone. If you beleive stongly enough in something, you pay for it. We have preached that to city government when it comes to providing public safety and it’s a principle we stand by.

We have suffient resources to financially back our decisions and need no financial assistance to let voters know what the truth is. We take pride in the city we serve and protect, and we intend to do all in our power to keep it safe, which is why we are 110% behind this proposition.

Yeson300.com

Recently in the news:

Record Number of Ballot Arguments Filed in Support of Proposition 300 – Mesa Proving Grounds Resort Core
Yes on 300 files 41 statements of support from across Mesa for the March 2009 Election

MESA – The Yes on 300 committee in support of the Mesa Proving Grounds Resort Core filed a record number of ballot arguments with the Mesa City Clerk yesterday. In all, 41 statements were filed in support with zero statements filed in opposition.

These ballot arguments will be part of the official publicity pamphlet containing ballot language and background information that the City of Mesa will send to every registered voter. Citizens are given an opportunity to submit letters of support or opposition to be included in the pamphlet.

“I am pleased with the record number of people who were willing to show their support for this historic project,” said Councilmember Scott Somers, Chairman of the Yes on 300 Committee. “Our goal with this committee will be to educate voters about the project. We want to show how the largest private investment in Mesa’s history will jump start development in the Gateway area. This will be a catalyst for Mesa’s future economic engine.”

“We need to be actively looking for opportunities like this to support the long-term health of our economy and boost revenues, especially in these challenging times,” said Mayor Scott Smith. “What we will be voting on represents a private investment of one billion dollars, and will create thousands of jobs and millions in revenue for Mesa without a tax increase. We won’t have to wait long to see the results either, as Mesa is projected to see nearly $70 million in new revenue in the first 10 years.”

The statements of support came from citizens and elected officials from all parts of Mesa and many organizations:

· Mayor Scott Smith
· Councilmember Scott Somers
· Councilmember Kyle Jones
· Councilmember Dave Richins
· Councilmember Dennis Kavanaugh
· Councilmember Alex Finter
· Councilmember Dina Higgins
· DMB Associates Inc.
· Gaylord Entertainment
· United Mesa Firefighters
· Mesa Police Association
· Mesa Fraternal Order of Police
· Mesa Convention and Visitors Bureau
· Mesa Chamber of Commerce
· Speaker-Elect Kirk Adams
· Senator Thayer Vershoor
· Senator-Elect Russell Pearce
· Representative Rich Crandall
· Maricopa County Supervisor Fulton Brock
· Carl Kunasek, Former State Senate President
· Rex Griswold, Former Councilmember
· Dr. Jim Zaharis, Former Mesa Public Schools Superintendent
· John M. Williams, Jr., President, SRP
· Roc Arnett, East Valley Partnership
· Pat Esparza, Chairperson Planning and Zoning Commission
· Frank Mizner, Mesa Planning and Zoning Board Member
· Matt Tolman, Chairman, District 18 Republicans and Former West Mesa City Council Candidate
· Steve Chucri, President and CEO of Arizona Restaurant Association
· Sherry Henry, Arizona Tourism Alliance
· Dr. Sally Downey, Superintendent and CEO, EVIT
· Lynn Strang, President, Mesa Baseline Rotary, Public Relations Director, EVIT
· Dr. John Schroeder, Provost, Chandler-Gilbert Community College
· Marty Whalen, Long-time Mesa Resident
· Terry Benelli, Neighborhood Economic Development
· Brian Campbell, Member of East Valley Partnership Board of Directors and Past Chairman of Mesa’s Economic Development and Advisory Board
· Jason Barney, Landmark Companies, Circle G Property Development, Barney Farms
· Chuck Wahlheim, Former CEO Cox Arizona Publications
· John Perkinson, Perkinson Companies
· Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce
· Lois C. Yates, Executive Director, Falcon Field Area Alliance
· Deanna Becker, Sophomore, Desert Ridge High School

“Voting Yes on Proposition 300 will bring a world-renowned resort and tourist destination to Mesa. Gaylord Entertainment is known for their ‘everything-in-one-place’ properties and they have earned a reputation as an employer of choice by treating their employees as STARS,” said Robert Brinton, President of the Mesa Convention and Visitors Bureau and Treasurer of the Yes on 300 Committee, “We have a great story to tell and these support statements are just the beginning of our efforts to encourage the passage of Proposition 300 and the Mesa Proving Grounds Resort Core.”

Click here for the Yes on 300 Mailer

Ready for Action-Groundbreaking Change in Operations for Police
By Sgt. Fabian Cota
President, Mesa Police Association

When firemen are outside of their fire stations cleaning their trucks, preparing the hoses and equipment for the next fire, playing Frisbee in the park, do you ever wonder if they are on the clock and being paid?  Yes – and if the City chooses to make the firemen clock out then do their preparation and you will probably have the firemen suing. But we can’t pay officers to be prepared for a fire fight, riot, and the next call? They are trained to clean and prepare their weapons, just not compensated. That’s not right.

The Tribune’s article entitled “Mesa police union still backs ’suit up’ pay” does not do the lawsuit justice.  The described “donning and doffing” is already a federal law from 2005 (IBP v. Alvarez & Tum v. Barber Foods).  The Mesa Police Association (MPA) tried to get clarification from the City of Mesa to the definition of “donning and doffing” in relation to police officers without going to court. We requested 15 minutes to be prepared for the day. The City of Mesa IGNORED us and wouldn’t even acknowledge court ruling supporting these claims. Kind of like if we ignore them they will just go away. The MPA filed a notice of claim. There still was no response. For over a year and a half, the city did not respond or acknowledge this issue. This meant that the city was now acting intentionally and increasing the damage amount. The MPA had no recourse but to file a suit on behalf of police officers to resolve these important pay issues and other similar issues.

There are over 35 items unique to the profession that require off-duty time to clean, maintain functionality, and don and doff. We are professionals and want to be ready for disaster and chaos. That’s our jobs-just being ready. Some officers there are required to be in uniform before driving to work. The city does not have “not on duty” signs for these cars. Only the city benefits from the presence of this officer “patrolling” to work. Are they on the clock? Is he supposed to tell people who flag him down that he can’t respond because he is not on duty?  There is an expectancy they act. Don’t you think someone robbed or raped would to sue the city if they saw a cop in uniform drive past them on his way to work? I don’t think anyone will buy that “he was off duty and on his way to work” argument as the city would pay out millions for that. Wouldn’t someone who sees a cop that is about to commit a crime not be deterred? That’s free service. They city doesn’t pay for that, the officer’s presence deters crime, but he is not paid. 

The last time there was this type of suit was over paid lunches, and it was discovered, as it is today, that many times cops don’t get a lunch or eat in their cars between calls. They also got lunch interrupted by calls for service that people have an expectation cops will respond when they call for a cop, and they don’t want to hear they are out to lunch. So the courts said you have to pay officers during lunch. The ironic thing is the city did not have a policy that required officers to skip lunch because of calls for service, but the courts ruled they had to pay for it because it was inherit in their job. They had to leave lunch so often and subject to call that the courts ruled that was paid time. Sounds like the same circumstances.  Interesting enough they made the same claims then as now that it was going to break the bank. It did not. That court ruling provided a universal practice of that cops have paid lunch nation wide. Much like is needed now with donning/doffing and preparation time. There was practically no impact on budget because the city just changed how it operated! Period. 

Agencies who have filed or are considering it are LAPD, Las Vegas, Boston, Florida, Dade County, Portland, Michigan, Maine, Salem, New York, Phoenix, AZ DPS, and Mesa. This includes the California Highway Patrol, who settled for 3% pay increase in lieu of the time and restoring take home motorcycles. Other agencies have settled similarly nationwide. U.S. District courts have ruled both for the employer and the employee. This begs for the matter to go to a higher court. There is the possibility the suit may proceed as a class action. If that happens, all officers may be automatically eligible.

The original case was for several minutes that included the employee donning & doffing and walking from the locker room, which was included and unanimously ruled as compensable under FLSA. If employers must pay for the time of walking to work, isn’t having a properly equipped police force with working and clean safety equipment more important than simply walking?  The time you test safety gear is not when you need it-that is for the safety of the officer and the public. 

An attack about this lawsuit is we are greedy. Not true, and our record shows that.  We have always looked out for the financial stability of the city, more so than the past council. That’s part of the reason our parent organization (Arizona Police Association) supported many of the new council, mayor, and propositions. We want to see it prosperous and are proud of the city that we serve.

Just think- a lawsuit could have been prevented with a phone call.  However, this is groundbreaking time for law enforcement, and the City of Mesa is now publicly profiled for giving definitions to donning and doffing.  But, it is disheartening that the City of Mesa will be on the map to the rest of the nation as the city that was unreasonable.

As economic disaster loomed in the back drop, the City Manager had every intention of laying off 40 sworn Officer positions on Jan 5, 2009. The department had already conducted its research and exercises slicing into economic divisions, the department’s personnel, equipment and support staff. Slated to go on the chopping block were all 18 Officers in training who were in the police academy as well as about 5 Officers (least senor) from each of the patrol districts. This is when the MPA swung into action and spent the day with city council persuading them this was not acceptable. BY THE END OF THAT DAY, MPA has assurances that Brady would not lay off one single Officer. So, the MPA unquestionably saved 40 police jobs! The new OIT’s owe their jobs to the MPA and didn’t even know it.

We argued strenuously for a incentive by Mesa to Officers eligible for retirement. The more topped out Officers who retire, the better our budget will be. We can hire almost 2 new recruits for every 1 topped out retirement eligible Officer.

MPA also advocated levying a secondary property tax on existing debt, re-evaluation of the Pinal County water farm, adjustment of the fund balance, and a proposal that could bring new revenue to the city (cannot be revealed at this time as another organization would love to know so they could copy, steal credit and lie as is their standard operation procedure).

Representatives of DMB and Gaylord Hotels invited the MPA to join the steering committee for the Yeson300 campaign.  The MPA was the only Mesa Police employee group present. We completely support  building  these resorts in Mesa.  Mesa needs this to pass to make these hotels and accompanying businesses be an integral part of the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport infrastructure.

Passage of this proposition is essential to jump starting this area and Mesa’s spiraling economy. Mesa needs economic vitality pumped back into it, so it can be in the position to provide essential city services such as police and fire protection ON AN ADAQUATE LEVEL.   

The MPA’s position supporting Proposition 300 is the very first one you will see presented to Mesa voters in ballot arguments mailed out for this special March 10 election. It is important that city have the resources it needs to allow it to pay for city services. The project will help do that. MPA encourages all Officers, families and friends to vote Yes on Proposition 300!

Yeson300.com