Letters to the Editor: The LAPD is already stretched thin. It can’t afford to shrink even more

To the editor: So let’s get this straight: The city of Los Angeles — with 466 square miles of land, a population of 3.8 million and 8,700 police officers — can afford to cut 300 officers from its ranks (“With L.A. in crisis, Mayor Karen Bass’ hiring goal for the LAPD slips further out of reach,” May 10). Meanwhile, New York City covers 304 square miles of land, has a population of 8.2 million, and makes do with 34,000 uniformed officers. Before the proposed cuts, in L.A., that’s one officer for every 437 of us folks; for N.Y.C., that’s one officer for every 241 residents. So, in N.Y.C., each officer has almost half the workload of their peer in L.A. No wonder it feels so much safer to walk Manhattan at night than much of L.A.

John Arcos, Long Beach

..

To the editor: I urge the full City Council to reject the budget committee’s proposal to reduce the number of police officers by slowing hiring, leaving the department with about 8,400 officers by June 2026. The city of L.A. would be at its lowest level of police officers in 30 years. With 530 police officers expected to retire this year, recruiting only 240 leaves a net decrease of almost 300 officers.

This proposed cut and, along with others that preceded it, will mean a department stretched too thin. Though we saw a reduction in the violent crime rate last year, we need to at least maintain our current level of sworn police officers. If this proposed cut is enacted, what will be affected? Response time for each of our emergency calls? Cutting back on units working on major crimes? Community relations? Narcotics? Counter terrorism?

Rick Tuttle, Culver City