The fate was unknown Friday of new hats purchased by the police chief before the Pine Bluff City Council voted down the necessary legislation Monday to adopt them as part of the PBPD uniform.
“We are exploring several options regarding our uniform policy and any recent purchases,” Police Chief Brenda Davis-Jones said in an emailed statement from department spokesman Capt. Greg Shapiro.
The one-line comment was in response to several emailed questions, including:
• What will happen with the hats that have already been purchased? Has it been too long for them to be returned with a refund? What was the number of and total monetary amount associated with the hats purchased?
• Will the officers who have already purchased the hat that was not approved by the council now be required to purchase a different hat from their clothing allowance?
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
• And will any type of uniform inspection be carried out where the officers would need a hat?
Davis-Jones issued a special order on Jan. 23 alerting officers below the rank of sergeant that the hat required as part of their uniform had changed and instructed them to submit their measurements by Feb. 2 so that the new hat could be ordered, according to a copy of the order obtained by The Commercial.
Alderman Thelma Walker questioned Davis-Jones about the purchase — which was taken out of the officers’ clothing allowance funds — in April and informed her that the change in uniform should have come before the Pine Bluff City Council for approval.
Davis-Jones prepared the legislation and brought it before the council, which voted down the change at Monday’s meeting. The council also voted down a proposal from Davis-Jones that would have set up policy guidelines for holding periodic inspections of police uniforms and equipment.
Although Davis-Jones and Shapiro declined to comment in the email about how many of the hats were purchased, the Jan. 23 special order states that the change is for “sworn officers below the rank of sergeant.” According to the 2012 city budget, there are 110 uniformed police officers who meet that description.
Davis-Jones said at the City Council meeting that the new hats cost $52 each. It was unclear Friday if the officers had also been required to purchase badges to go onto the hats or if they had been issued used badges. This emailed question was also not answered. A vendor who submitted bids for the hats (his bid was ultimately not selected) said he was also asked by the police department to submit a bid for a badge to go along with the hat, bringing to total amount for the headgear into about the $73 range. According to existing department uniform policy, badges for the hats are supposed to be issued to the officers.
If those numbers are correct, the department spent somewhere in the range of $5,720-$8,030 on the hats.
Alderman Wayne Easterly was one of the aldermen who was vocal during the discussion of the proposals Monday.
Easterly said it was unfair to require officers to buy the hats when the annual clothing allowance of $600 hasn’t been increased in about 15 years.
Contacted Thursday, Easterly said he is considering a proposal to increase the clothing allowance for both the police and fire department employees as part of the 2013 budget. Drafting of the budget will begin in late summer/early fall and will be finalized in December or January.
Currently police employees get a $600 annual clothing allowance and fire employees get a $500 annual clothing allowance. Easterly was told Monday by police and fire officials that the allowance has not been increased in about 15 years.
Easterly said he has not determined the amount of his proposal, but wants to research what other nearby agencies are doing to come up with an informed suggestion.
Davis-Jones said Monday that one of the reasons she suggested the change in the hat was that she is trying to bring the department more in line with national and international policing standards, which include periodic inspections.
She said the PBPD officers had not gone through uniform inspections in the past, so that coupled with the expense of the hat listed in the department policy manual and the fact that many of the officers are new to the department has meant that about 60 percent of the officers had not purchased the hat.
Davis-Jones said she wanted to switch to the other hat style because it cost less, would distinguish between supervisors and police officers and required less upkeep to keep it looking nice.
Easterly also said Monday that the hats, which would be worn for inspections and formal events like funerals, were not a necessity. Asked Thursday if he was considering any policy changes to remove the need for the hat or otherwise address the issue, Easterly said he thought that if Davis-Jones wanted to start inspections that included a hat, then it should be provided by the department and not come out of the officers’ clothing allowance.
“It ought to be something that’s in their initial package when they are new hires if they’re going to start requiring them to have it for inspections,” Easterly said.
Davis-Jones did not respond to emailed questions asking for her response to Easterly’s ideas.