Did you know that there are many California cites with equal or greater public intoxication arrest rates for Latinos and other ethnic groups than San Jose?

As I stated in last week’s blog, the main assertion of recent Mercury News coverage and certain special interest groups is that San Jose police are arresting Latinos for so-called “discretionary” offenses at abnormally high rates.

The dialogue surrounding public intoxication arrests stems largely from a Mercury News report published on October 18, 2008, under the headline: “Drunkenness arrests in San Jose outpace other California cities”.

According to this report, a Mercury News review “shows the department is booking Hispanics in about seven out of [every] dozen arrests — a percentage wildly out of proportion to the population that surpasses virtually every other police force in the state.”

As has been stated in a number of Protect San Jose blogs, this conclusion is wildly out of proportion with what the numbers say.  But unfortunately, the San Jose City Council, City Administration, and the general public often rely upon the Mercury News to provide factual information that they can use to help shape their perspectives and decisions.

I felt there was a need to look closer at the numbers and provide a more complete picture.  So I made a public records request to the California Department of Justice (DOJ) to obtain data for overall arrests and arrests by ethnic groups — the latter of which, according to the DOJ, is not available on their website but only via public records request.

Let’s have a look at the public intoxication arrest rates relative to the overall and ethnic populations of some local jurisdictions:

Note that once the Latino population of a city is factored into the equation, San Jose’s Latino arrest rate looks more like part of a trend than an outlier.

The Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity recently did a similar comparison study of data for nine local and comparably-sized California cities.  According to their quarterly report to City Council, they observed a consistent rate of Latino arrests for “discretionary” offenses compared to “non-discretionary” offenses in eight of nine comparison cities, including Los Angeles, Oakland, and Santa Clara.

Now, let's look at the same data for the 15 largest cities in the state:

You can click here to view a complete chart of public intoxication arrest data broken down by jurisdiction and ethnic group.

A few things to bear in mind while reviewing this data:

1.  California cities use different criteria to report crime statistics, making a wholly accurate comparison exceedingly difficult — if not impossible.  For example, Hayward reports all their public intoxication arrests under Penal Code 647(g) whereas San Diego reports 469 of its arrests under PC 647(g) and the others under PC 647(f).

2.  San Jose is a well-known regional entertainment center that daily attracts thousands of non-resident visitors who patronize downtown nightclubs, sports events, music concerts, bars/other clubs, outdoor festivals, and other special events.  At most of these events, social drinking is commonplace and even encouraged as it is quite profitable for local businesses and generates thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in related city tax revenues.  In order to study this factor, I have requested a breakout of 2007 public intoxication arrests for residents and non-residents.

Why is this important?  Well, for example, if 25% of Latinos arrested in San Jose are non-residents and 75% are residents, then our Latino resident arrest rate would stand at 42.53%.  While this is still twelve points above our Latino population, the difference is more in line with many other California cities (as evidenced by the previous charts).

3.  Up until 2004, San Jose police had the option of holding people in a County-funded sobering station instead of officially charging them with public intoxication. Prior to recent changes mandated by the City Council, arrest was the only option an officer was provided. But even before the sobering station closed, many suspects could not be sent there because they were: repeat offenders; violent, aggressive, or threatening toward the staff;  too drunk to stand; or medically impaired. These individuals were sent to jail instead.  Regardless, the sobering station was closed by the County due to budget cuts similar to those made to public safety services in recent years by the City of San Jose.

4.  Excessive and underage drinking in San Jose is not always controlled as it should be by event sponsors and businesses and the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control does not have sufficient enforcement personnel due to the state budget crisis.  Intoxicated individuals and groups can frequently be seen leaving night clubs, bars, outdoor festivals and large events, after which they sometimes engage in criminal acts such as property damage, harassment, assault, or — most commonly — driving under the influence.  This causes our residents, families, businesses, and city many problems and unnecessary financial costs.

As you can see, this is a very complex subject with many more factors at work than the sometimes one-dimensional media coverage would suggest.  One cannot simply look at the sheer volume of arrests and make an informed comment.  You have to look closer.

In a future blog, I’ll discuss driving under the influence (DUI) and how it relates to public intoxication.

Ed Rast is a statistical guru and neighborhood leader. His opinions are his alone and do not necessarily represent those of any group or organization of which he is a member.