By J. D. Schmechel

Research shows the costs and benefits of a take-home fleet outweigh those of a rotating fleet. After the initial cost of acquiring the additional cars to make a take-home fleet is absorbed, the operating costs of a take-home fleet are less. The take-home fleet requires the purchase of fewer cars per year and the operating costs (including maintenance and accident repair) are less.
In some departments, it has been suggested that perhaps the take-home program is too costly and should be changed or converted back to a rotating fleet. The East Peoria, IL, Police has had a take-home program in operation for two years. With the exception of eight 2000 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptors, which are currently financed, the entire fleet is paid for.
Each sworn member of the department is assigned an individual squad car. The squad car is driven to and from work and to and from court only and is stored at the officer’s residence while off duty. The officer must live within the city limits of East Peoria in order to keep the squad car at his residence. Officers are not required to take the squad car home but are encouraged to do so. Officers are not permitted to drive the squad car for personal purposes.
Currently the East Peoria Police has a fleet of 42 cars and 37 sworn officers. The extra cars are maintained as “pool cars.” Pool cars are kept at the station and used by officers when their squad cars are not operational. The pool cars are also used by Auxiliary Police Officers for their duties.
Two models of rotating fleets were used to compare against the take-home fleet. The comparisons are based on number of miles driven per vehicle under each program. The average miles driven per eight-hour shift per patrol officer is 64 miles. In order to determine how many vehicles must be purchased per year, a target replacement mileage figure must be determined.
The optimum time to replace a vehicle is when its total costs, averaged over the vehicle’s lifetime, are at a minimum. This concept, referred to as the economic life expectancy of the vehicle, includes such costs as depreciation, operating expenses, maintenance and downtime.
In addition to using software to document life-cycle costs, the program can be used to anticipate the best timing for unit replacement. The best time to replace a unit is usually near the point the cost per unit has bottomed out.
According to Peter Klopchic, Vice President of vehicle re-marketing for CitiCapital Fleet in Carrollton, TX, improved reliability and durability of late model cars have greatly reduced the occurrence of major mechanical failures below 100,000 miles. Klopchic states, “Clearly, it is not financially prudent to operate extremely high-mileage vehicles because the maintenance costs eventually exceed the cost of a new vehicle.”
To figure the ideal replacement mileage and time, I first figured the average number of miles driven per officer, per year. The results are 15,360 miles. Of the departments that I could find who had done the life-cycle analysis or survey, the target range seemed to be between 89,000 miles and 95,000 miles.
Klopchic demonstrates that the depreciation cost-per-mile will lower as the mileage rises. And as mileage rises, so do maintenance costs. When mapped on a graph, depreciation and maintenance costs level out between 80,000 and 100,000 miles. If the target mileage to replace a squad car is 90,000 miles, it would take, on average, 5.9 years to obtain that mileage using the average miles driven per year per officer in our department (15,360 miles). Using the 90,000 mile figure, of the 24 patrol cars, four cars would need to be replaced per year (24 cars divided by 5.9 years).
Rotating Fleet Models: Vehicle Replacement Criteria
I have figured two possible models for a rotating fleet. First, I examined a rotating fleet program where each vehicle is driven 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Many smaller departments operate a 24/7 rotating fleet due to limited resources and only one or two officers working at a time. The second rotating fleet model I examined is a much more relaxed model in which two officers share one car. This should allow me to examine a wide spectrum of possible rotating fleet programs in order to get a fair cost analysis.
With the 24/7 rotating fleet model, it would be necessary to have a minimum of nine patrol vehicles in the rotating fleet. This breaks down as follows: one sergeant’s car and eight patrol cars. There is a minimum shift staff requirement of one sergeant and four officers per shift. This totals five cars.
At full shift strength, as many as seven officers and one sergeant can be working a shift at the same time. This totals eight cars, leaving one extra car to cover inevitable breakdowns and special duties. In this model, the mileage driven each year per vehicle is 64,512 miles. Using target mileage for replacement as 90,000 miles, it would be necessary to replace each vehicle every 1.4 years (90,000 miles divided by 64,512 miles driven per year). This results in two special use vehicles and at the minimum, six patrol vehicles to be replaced per year for a total of eight to 11 vehicles per year.
With the two officers per squad car model it would be necessary to have a minimum of 12 vehicles in the rotating fleet. This breaks down as follows: two sergeant’s cars and 10 patrol cars (20 patrol positions). This model does not include extra cars to cover down time as it is assumed that if an extra car is needed, one will be driven during the off time. In this model, the mileage driven each year per vehicle is 43,008 miles. Using the target replacement mileage of 90,000 miles per vehicle, it would be necessary to replace each vehicle every two years (90,000 miles divided by 43,000 miles per year). This results in two special use vehicles and six patrol vehicles per year to be replaced for a total of eight cars per year.
Maintenance Costs
While researching the area of maintenance costs, I found numerous police department take-home fleet policies that all state their program saves maintenance dollars. Many police agencies point to the fact that, while having a moderately high initial cost, a take-home fleet is more efficient and will eventually save money. Take home cars accumulate fewer miles per year; they’re used just one shift per day, five days per week. That means they accumulate mileage less than one-third the rate of pool cars used three shifts per day, seven days per week. The cars will need one-third fewer oil changes, tire replacements and brake overhauls, and they will have to be replaced at far wider intervals.
A 1992 study published in LAW and ORDER showed that annual maintenance costs for a rotating fleet per vehicle were $2,305 as opposed to $523 for a take-home fleet serving the same number of officers. The extensive research was done by the University of Puget Sound in Tacoma, WA. The Takoma Sheriff’s Department in 1999 showed maintenance costs for a rotating fleet to be $16.42 per mile while take-home fleet vehicles cost only $10.86 per mile.
One possible benefit to the rotating fleet models may be the fact that the vehicle being replaced will only be one or two years old and not suffer as much depreciation. I used two different Web sites, www.NADA.com and www.KelleyBlueBook.com, to compare the used car prices of a high mileage, late model car vs. a high mileage, six-year-old car of the same make and model. Using the Ford Crown Victoria, the average value of the 2001 Crown Victoria with 90,000 miles is $5,300. The average value of the 1997 Crown Victoria with 90,000 miles is $2,875. This is a difference of $2,425.
Another possible benefit would be that these newer vehicles would get better use of the three-year or 36,000-mile manufacturer’s warranty. There would also be a limited amount of time (under two years) for serious mechanical problems to surface, as they often do in higher mileage vehicles that are several years old. Overall, a newer car may cost more money, but it can save the agency money in reduced fuel and maintenance costs.
One obvious difference between the take-home fleet and the rotating fleet that could be viewed as a benefit is the costs involved to start up a take-home fleet. First, the department must find a way to purchase the extra cars needed. For our department this meant obtaining 24 to 27 additional squad cars. In addition to this, the squad cars had to be fully upfitted and equipped, which is a significant cost addition to the unit cost.
Using our department as an example, even when purchasing the Dodge Intrepid, the least expensive of the three most popular squad cars, the unit cost for a 2003 Intrepid is $17,737.00. For 24 this totals $425,688. With the lightbar, radio equipment, in-car video camera, radar unit, and laptop computer, this adds $16,538 per unit. The grand total for our department to purchase 24 fully equipped squad cars would be $822,600. Although research shows the savings of a take-home fleet will offset the costs eventually, this is a significant issue for departments considering a take-home fleet.
Finally, replacing your fleet at least once every two years allows you to maintain a modern fleet with current technology. An agency’s image can suffer if all it uses are older cars. How safe will citizens feel when they see a 10-year-old patrol car on the streets? They may applaud the agency’s fiscal responsibility, but they also may ask why the cars are not safer and more up-to-date, i.e., ABS, side air bags, traction control, stability control, etc.
Benefits: Take Home Fleet
During this research I located numerous articles and police department policies that identify benefits to the take-home fleet over the rotating fleet. These noted benefits fall into many categories. From the IACPnet Web site, departments across the country cite many benefits, such as the increased life of the cars, greater accountability and responsibility for the cars, an improved condition of the fleet, fewer accidents, increased visibility and lower turnover rate.
Will increased visibility due to more police cars in the community have any effects? Many police departments with take-home fleets base their policies on this assumption. Most policies I found were less restrictive and allow officers limited personal use of the squad car off duty. Such policies allow the average number of officers on the road at any given time to rise above the patrol numbers, and thus increasing visibility and officer responses to criminal activity.
Residents like it because there’s a police presence in the neighborhood. Neighbors tell officers they are glad to have the patrol car in the area. But will the take-home program have an effect on crime rates due to the increased visibility? A study in Tacoma, WA, showed a direct correlation.
Since every agency with a take-home policy requires officers to handle any situations they see while in the police vehicles, the officers often handle an accident, drunk driver or other problem encountered while going on or off-duty.
And finally, by adding to the number of patrol cars in a department’s fleet and assigning these cars to all patrol officers who keep the cars at home, this dramatically increased the department’s ability to rapidly deploy officers in an emergency state. During civil disturbances or natural disasters a department only has to call its officers and they are almost immediately en route, in uniform, equipped and in their vehicle.
This research has clearly demonstrated costs and benefits to both a take-home fleet and a rotating fleet. This research clearly demonstrates that take-home fleet benefits far exceed the benefits of a rotating fleet. The same is true for the costs; absent the initial startup costs of a take-home fleet, the take-home fleet will obviously cost less to maintain than a rotating fleet. Even when considering the cost of starting a take-home fleet, the savings associated with the take-home fleet will eventually offset these costs.
The most difficult factor in considering a take-home fleet is the initial cost, i.e., the initial transition from a rotating fleet to a take-home fleet. After this initial cost, this research showed that the savings in maintenance cost, vehicle acquisition cost, and accident repair cost for a rotating fleet far outweigh the costs associated with a take-home fleet.
Benefits of a take-home fleet over a rotating fleet were just as dramatic. Crime rate reduction, deterrence of criminal activity, increased property taxes through higher property values, increased community feeling of security, increased officer presence in the community, arrests, increased officer morale, increased accountability, increased quality of care, number of available officers on duty at any given time, and increased rapid deployment capabilities are among the benefits of a take-home fleet over a rotating fleet.
 

J.D. Schmechel is currently a Sergeant with the East Peoria, IL, Police Department. He has been the fleet manager since 2002 with a 43-vehicle fleet. He can be reached via e-mail at schmec@sbcglobal.net.