Different Departments, Same Warning: What Troy’s Staff Survey Reveals About Police and Fire

In 2023, the City of Troy conducted a confidential staff survey with 385 responses and a ±3.0% margin of error. This wasn’t a casual pulse check. It was a statistically meaningful snapshot of how employees across departments experience working for the City of Troy.

The survey included numerical ratings, but it also included open-ended written responses, where employees explained why they answered the way they did. Those written responses are the most important part of the survey. They are also the part that was not transparently published.

Instead, the public only learned what employees actually said after the responses were obtained through a FOIA request. That fact alone should give residents pause.

A staff survey designed to identify problems, improve retention, and strengthen city services should not require a public records request for people to read what employees said in their own words. The charts tell one story. The written responses explain it. On the surface, the charts show familiar warning signs:

Below-average scores on pay competitiveness

• Weak confidence in long-term benefits
• Declining satisfaction with retention and growth
• Stronger ratings for direct supervisors than for city leadership

But the written responses turn those numbers into something much harder to ignore. They show:

• How close the City is to a staffing cliff
• How deeply trust has eroded
• How many employees are staying only because they are near retirement
• How many are actively planning their exit

This is especially clear in Police, and notably, the issues raised are nearly identical to what Troy firefighters have been warning about for years.

Different departments. Same diagnosis.

What Police Employees Are Warning About (In Their Own Words)

The consistency of the police responses is striking. These are not one-off grievances or emotionally charged rants. They are sober, operational assessments from people who understand staffing, training, and public safety risk. Some examples:

“We are currently unable to hold onto current employees or eligible employees. Surrounding departments offer better everything. Troy PD used to be the best and the place people wanted to work. It’s shocking and really disappointing that it’s not that way anymore.”

“The top pay rate for police officers in the city will soon no longer be competitive. Many area departments are topping out in the mid-90s to low-100s.”

“We cannot get anyone to come work here, even if we beg them.”

“Our hiring list used to have over 200 people on it. Our current list is five.”

“The applicants that we do get are of far lower quality than ever before, because this is all we have to pick from.”

“We will, without question, begin to see a mass exodus of employees if something does not seriously change.”

“The applicants that we do have are of far lower quality than ever before, because that is all we have to pick from based on what we have to offer.”

“We need a defined benefit pension for retirement. The last thing we need is a 60-year-old officer patrolling the city because they don’t have enough in their 401(k).”

“We are losing a great number of high-quality applicants and settling for lesser, which is going to affect the quality of life of residents and visitors.”

“Many officers are coming in and losing veteran officers.”

“People are staying only until they vest, and then they leave.”

“I use to be proud to work here. Now I just feel completely under appreciated.”

“People feel slighted, and as though the city took advantage of them or gambled on them staying.”

That last sentence should not be read as exaggeration. It should be read as a warning.

This is not about bad supervisors, and the survey proves that one of the most important findings in the data is what isn’t being blamed. Across departments, employees rate their direct supervisors relatively well. That tells us something critical: This is not a problem of bad sergeants, lieutenants, captains, or department heads.

The frustration is aimed higher:

• Compensation policy
• Retirement structures
• Retention promises that never materialized
• Leadership decisions made far from day-to-day operations

In other words, the people closest to the work are not the problem.

COVID didn’t create these issues, it exposed them. Several responses reference the pandemic, not as an excuse, but as a turning point. Police (and firefighters) worked in person throughout COVID. Other departments transitioned to remote or hybrid work. No structural adjustment followed, no compensation recognition, no retention recalibration, no meaningful course correction. That disparity didn’t fade with time. It hardened into resentment and distrust. Once trust erodes, it does not come back through slogans or symbolic gestures.

Police and Fire are telling the same story

What makes this survey impossible to dismiss is how closely the police responses mirror what Troy firefighters have been saying publicly and privately for years:

• Troy is no longer competitive
• Retention is failing
• Recruitment pools are shrinking
• Experience is leaving
• Promises were made, and not kept

This is not a police-only problem.
It is a public safety problem.

Which raises an obvious, uncomfortable question:

Why hasn’t the City conducted a comparable, transparent survey of its Fire Department?

Such a survey would be incredibly valuable. It would also likely confirm what many already know. And after seeing results like these, it’s not hard to understand why leadership might be reluctant to ask the question, or to publish the answers if they did.

The uncomfortable reality. The written responses do not ask for gimmicks. They do not ask for branding campaigns. They do not ask for symbolic gestures. They ask for basics:

• Competitive pay
• Real retirement security
• Adequate staffing
• Training that matches the risk of the job
• Follow-through on retention commitments

These are not unreasonable demands. They are the foundation of safe, stable public services. Ignoring written responses does not make the problem go away.

It simply delays the moment when surveys turn into resignation letters, and when staffing problems become service failures that residents can no longer ignore.