Whose Spin, Brunner's or Tucker's?

Councilmember Jane Brunner interviewed police chief Wayne Tucker for her February 2006 newsletter to constituents.

"The Chief told me that in early January he is moving more staff to patrol, which will fill open police beats."

Since December, people have heard that the chief was abolishing patrol beats in January. Instead, patrol officers were to be thrown into a few large pools, the Police Service Areas. Has this changed? If not, moving more officers to patrol cannot fill open (unstaffed) police beats – there are no more beats! Perhaps the chief thinks huge pools that deprive every officer of familiarity with a manageable neighborhood are "beats." And unicorns are animals.

"By May, 2006, we'll have 18 new officers on patrol." The chief is talking about the 18 graduates of a police academy that started last July with 34 candidates – for a disastrous and wasteful washout rate of 47%. The chief counts these 18 added, but he makes no allowance for retirements and resignations between now and May. The net increase will be less than 18. We are paying the Measure Y taxes, but we actually have fewer officers than the 734 we had when the council wrote the measure in July 2004. That will be true in May, too.

So who engaged in spin: chief Tucker, who is said to have made these statements; councilmember Brunner, who apparently accepted his remarks on their face; or both?