The Michigan Public Policy Survey Spring 2024 Data Tables for Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police

Back to the Michigan Public Policy Survey Homepage Search all Spring 2024 data tables

Summary tables for questionnaire items from the Sheriffs’ and Police Chiefs’ supplemental survey for the Spring 2024 Wave of the MPPS broken down by agency type are accessible below.

Table of Contents

Staffing

2. 1. Sufficient law enforcement officers in Office or Department
   2. Sufficient support staff in Office or Department
3. 1. Recruiting qualified law enforcement officers a problem for Office or Department
   2. Retaining qualified law enforcement officers a problem for Office or Department
   3. Having officers in poached by other local agencies a problem for Office or Department
   4. Officer morale a problem for Office or Department
   5. Negative public perception of officers a problem for Office or Department
   6. Lack of training and professional development problem for Office or Department
   7. Too much required training a problem for Office or Department
4. 1. Revising hiring standards would help recruitment or retention
   2. Streamlining the hiring process would help recruitment or retention
   3. Increasing pay rates would help recruitment or retention
   4. Increasing benefits would help recruitment or retention
   5. Increasing nontraditional incentives (e.g., more paid time off, flexible schedules, childcare, tuition reimbursements, etc.) would help recruitment or retention
   6. Professional development opportunities would help recruitment or retention
   7. Creating or expanding pipeline programs would help recruitment or retention
   8. Investing in community trust and relationship-building would help recruitment or retention
   9. None of the above would help recruitment or retention
   10. Don’t know what would help recruitment or retention

Law Enforcement Funding

6. Jurisdiction’s appropriations of funding to meet law enforcement needs (cities/villages/townships)
7. County’s appropriations of funding to meet Sheriff’s Office needs
8. County’s appropriations of funding to meet County Prosecutor’s office needs
9. 1. Priority of hiring new officers if given additional law enforcement funding
   2. Priority of increasing pay or benefits if given additional law enforcement funding
   3. Priority of other recruitment or retention efforts if given additional law enforcement funding
   4. Priority of mental health support for officers if given additional law enforcement funding
   5. Priority of additional or improved training officers if given additional law enforcement funding
   6. Priority of updating equipment if given additional law enforcement funding
   7. Priority of investing in new technologies if given additional law enforcement funding
   8. Priority of crisis response teams if given additional law enforcement funding

Public Safety Service Satisfaction

10. 1. Sheriffs’ satisfaction with state police
    2. Sheriffs’ satisfaction with local police departments in county
    3. Sheriffs’ satisfaction with county prosecutor’s office
11. 1. Police chiefs’ satisfaction with state police
    2. Police chiefs’ satisfaction with county sheriff’s office
    3. Police chiefs’ satisfaction county prosecutor’s office

Law Enforcement and Crime

12. 1. Violent crimes as a problem in jurisdiction
    2. Domestic violence as a problem in jurisdiction
    3. Property crimes as a problem in jurisdiction
    4. Drug crimes as a problem in jurisdiction
    5. Public-order offenses as a problem in jurisdiction
    6. Crime overall as a problem in jurisdiction

Police-Community Relations

13. 1. Likelihood of using community policing
    2. Likelihood of law enforcement civilian oversight board
    3. Likelihood of proactively making agency policies available for public review
    4. Likelihood of mandating independent investigations into officer-involved injuries
    5. Likelihood of training law enforcement officers in de-escalation tactics, cultural understanding, and/or bias awareness
    6. Likelihood of adopting policies to recruit a workforce that reflects jurisdiction’s racial and ethnic makeup

14. 1. Most people in jurisdiction trust law enforcement officers
    2. Inappropriate use of force by law enforcement is an issue
    3. Concern that a major incident of civil unrest connected to police use of force could happen in jurisdiction
    4. Most law enforcement officers in jurisdiction treat all people professionally
    5. Most people in jurisdiction want fewer law enforcement officers patrolling their neighborhoods

15. 1. Relationship between Chief’s department and the local government(s) the department serves
    2. Relationship between Chief’s department and County Sheriff’s Office
    3. Relationship between Chief’s department and County Prosecutor’s Office

16. 1. Relationship between Sheriff’s Office and County Board of Commissioners
    2. Relationship between Sheriff’s Office and County Prosecutor’s Office
    3. Relationship between Sheriff’s Office and local police departments in county overall

Court Reforms

18. 1. Support for or opposition to limiting the use of fines and fees in sentencing to those who are able to pay
    2. Support for or opposition to restrictions on the use of cash bail for low-level or non-violent offenses
    3. Support for or opposition to using structured screening tools to guide decisions on pre-trial release and release options
    4. Support for or opposition to shifting costs of monitoring from the defendant to the court

19. 1. Whether cash bail effective for reducing no-shows
    2. Whether cash bail effective for increasing community safety

20. 1. Whether cash bail has different consequences for community members based on socioeconomic status
    2. Whether cash bail has different consequences for community members based on race or ethnicity

21. 1. Whether pre-trial diversion programs help or harm recidivism rates
    2. Whether pre-trial diversion programs help or harm public safety in the community
    3. Whether pre-trial diversion programs help or harm law enforcement officers’ workload
    4. Whether pre-trial diversion programs help or harm the wellbeing of defendants with mental illness or drug dependency

22. Support or oppose local pre-trial diversion programs in general

23. Support or oppose local gun diversion programs specifically

Use of Data and Technology in Policing

24. 1. Likelihood of using unmanned aerial vehicles
    2. Likelihood of using dashboard cameras
    3. Likelihood of using body cameras
    4. Likelihood of using other public surveillance cameras
    5. Likelihood of using automated license plate readers
    6. Likelihood of using facial recognition technology
    7. Likelihood of using predictive policing tools

25. 1. Assessment of investment in unmanned aerial vehicles
    2. Assessment of investment in dashboard cameras
    3. Assessment of investment in body cameras
    4. Assessment of investment in public surveillance cameras
    5. Assessment of investment in license plate readers
    6. Assessment of investment in facial recognition technology
    7. Assessment of investment in predictive policing tools

26. Perceived accuracy of automated risk assessment tools

Relationship with County Prosecutors

27. Have heard about prosecutors across the country implementing reforms to local criminal justice

28. 1. Agree or disagree that county prosecutors can be trusted to ensure public safety
    2. Agree or disagree that county prosecutors can be trusted to support the police
    3. Agree or disagree that county prosecutors today make it harder for police to do their jobs
    4. Agree or disagree that county prosecutors today have the backs of local police officers
    5. Agree or disagree would be uncomfortable working with county prosecutors on reforms to policing

29. 1. Appropriate or inappropriate for county prosecutors to take public positions on social movements aimed at reforming the criminal justice system
    2. Appropriate or inappropriate for county prosecutors to advocate for reforms of police departments
    3. Appropriate or inappropriate for law enforcement leadership to question new policies introduced by an elected County Prosecutor
    4. Appropriate or inappropriate for rank-and-file law enforcement officers to question new policies introduced by an elected County Prosecutor

Law Enforcement Office/Department Priorities

30. 1. Quick response times for 9-1-1 calls is a priority
    2. Officers making arrests for violent crimes is a priority
    3. Officers responding to quality-of-life concerns, like vandalism and public intoxication is a priority
    4. Engaging in community outreach is a priority
    5. Investigating civilian complaints against officers is a priority
    6. Visibility of officers in the community is a priority

Traffic Stops for Minor Violations

31. 1. Stops for minor violations increase or decrease public safety
    2. Stops for minor violations increase or decrease officer safety
    3. Stops for minor violations increase or decrease community trust in police
    4. Stops for minor violations increase or decrease perceptions of racial profiling by police

Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs)

32. 1. Confidence that local law enforcement officers have sufficient training to decide when an ERPO is appropriate
    2. Confidence that local officers have sufficient training on the process for petitioning the court for an ERPO
    3. Confidence that local non-law enforcement petitioners will use the ERPO process correctly
    4. Confidence that judges in your county will make appropriate decisions regarding ERPOs
    5. Confidence that local law enforcement officers will be safe when serving an ERPO in your county
    6. Confidence that ERPOs are likely to reduce gun violence

33. Does Office/Department have a formal ERPO protocol?

Law Enforcement Accountability

35. Law enforcement should be held legally accountable for misconduct

36. 1. Support or oppose investigation of criminal misconduct by an officer by internal investigation
    2. Support or oppose investigation of criminal misconduct by an officer by the State Police or other law enforcement agency not associated with the officer
    3. Support or oppose investigation of criminal misconduct by an officer by the Michigan Attorney General’s office
    4. Support or oppose investigation of criminal misconduct by an officer by a civilian oversight board
    5. Support or oppose investigation of criminal misconduct by an officer by another independent outside investigator

37. 1. Whether County Prosecutor should be involved in prosecution of criminal misconduct by local law enforcement
    2. Whether the Michigan Attorney General’s Office should be involved in prosecution of criminal misconduct by local law enforcement
    3. Whether the U.S. Attorney’s Office should be involved in prosecution of criminal misconduct by local law enforcement

38. Residents’ confidence in effective response to law enforcement misconduct

39. Support or oppose formal civilian oversight commission or board that can review issues or complaints regarding your operations

40. Support or oppose providing a civilian oversight commission full access to police body-worn camera or dash camera footage

41. 1. Support for private database for law enforcement misconduct
    2. Support for public database for law enforcement misconduct database
    3. Support for department penalties for failing to review potential hire’s misconduct history
    4. Support for decertification for officers who engaged in felonies or other illegal acts

Co-responder / Alternative Responder Programs

42. 1. Support for co-response teams that involve mental health professionals, but are led by law enforcement
    2. Support for alternative response teams that involve mental health professionals led by other departments within local government
    3. Support for alternative response teams that involve mental health professionals administered by independent community groups, and do not include police
    4. Opposition to co-responder or alternative responder programs

43. 1. Alternative crisis response options could save the jurisdiction money
    2. Civilian responders would not be safe responding to emergency calls
    3. Trust in 9-1-1 dispatchers to determine which professional should respond to an emergency
    4. Funding for co-responders or alternative responders will leave less funding for our primary law enforcement agency
    5. An alternative responder program would help address law enforcement staffing challenges
    6. People in community would like another option to call in a crisis beyond law enforcement
    7. Too many 9-1-1 calls for police that do not require law enforcement attention
    8. Availability of mental health professionals for implementing a co-responder or alternative responder model

44. Assessment of difficulty for implementing local co-responder or alternative responder program

46. Impact of additional funding on consideration of co-responder or alternative responder program

Trust in sources of information on policing strategies

47. 1. Trust in examples from law enforcement agencies in neighboring or similar communities
    2. Trust in Michigan law enforcement associations (e.g., Michigan Sheriffs Association, Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police)
    3. Trust in National law enforcement associations (e.g., National Police Association, International Association of Chiefs of Police)
    4. Trust in non-profits or advocacy organizations (e.g., Center for Policing Equity, ACLU, MADD)
    5. Trust in universities or academic research
    6. Trust in feedback from residents
    7. Trust in policing technology manufacturers for information on policing strategies

« Back to Michigan Public Policy Survey Home