urbanSTL

I should probably should sit tight and let this all get explained, but

1) It was in the news that Tishaura was meeting with groups about defunding the police
2) If these positions have been vacant for a long time the dollars were not being spent even if they were budgeted (they were likely under budget) so moving the dollars elsewhere is an actual increase in operating expense.
3) This movement better materialize fast as and have impact in reducing crime.
4) I guess having the police pull over and issue citations to the hazardous drivers who speed, run red lights etc. (and generating revenue, possibly deterring hazardous driving) is not really feasible now.

We all know crime is a major issue for us.  I am a little surprised about an action this quick without an announcement of next steps.  I do not know the  individual who tweeted this.  She would have inside info in city hall?

Imagine my shock. I totally didn’t expect Tishaura & Co. to do this. /s

Hasn't St. Louis been unable to fill these positions for years? 

If we can't fill those positions, I don't really have a huge issue with her reallocating those funds to low-income housing, 911 operations, and mental health.

KansasCitian wrote: ↑

Apr 27, 2021

Hasn't St. Louis been unable to fill these positions for years? 

If we can't fill those positions, I don't really have a huge issue with her reallocating those funds to low-income housing, 911 operations, and mental health.

I think that is part of the communication that needs to be shared.  Having all the facts is a good thing.  Is there a place to find the headcount trends of SLPD for the past 10 years?

The fact is, the department has been significantly short for years and.crime has been on the rise since, whether the stats show it or not. Those numbers can be fudged, so don’t live and die by them. Less police presence is not the answer. This summer is going to be a violent one, as we are already on pace to surpass last year’s murder rate.  As I stated earlier, I fully support front end prevention programs but there has to be policing on the backend. Police presence alone can be a great crime deterrent. No visible resistance will only embolden criminals.

STLCityMike wrote: ↑

Apr 27, 2021

KansasCitian wrote: ↑

Apr 27, 2021

Hasn't St. Louis been unable to fill these positions for years? 

If we can't fill those positions, I don't really have a huge issue with her reallocating those funds to low-income housing, 911 operations, and mental health.

I think that is part of the communication that needs to be shared.  Having all the facts is a good thing.  Is there a place to find the headcount trends of SLPD for the past 10 years?

From the annual reports on the SLMPD site:
1,309 in 2012
1,276 in 2013
1,262 in 2014
1,226 in 2015
1,187 in 2016
1,192 in 2017
1,179 in 2018
1,206 in 2019
1,220 last September (129 officers short of its authorized strength of 1,349) when the residency rule stuff was happening.

^For a City struggling with a high murder rate and high crime in general, IMO, this is not acceptable. I can assure you this number will only decrease as many officers are retiring, moving to other local departments, going into private security or  leaving the profession in general. This will only continue as police departments and police officers are targeted for defunding and targeted in general.

Something needed to change. The police department is consuming an ENORMOUS share of our annual budget. I appreciate their work but we need a new strategy and there is very little evidence to suggest 200 positions (that weren’t going to be filled) would be more impactful than investing in front end programs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^ There’s very little evidence of anything at this point other than the city has a major problem with crime. Until those programs can be fully implemented and proven effective, it cannot be assumed that defunding the police is going to fix any problems. With $500M going into the City coffers, I’m sure the City could do both.

Making a decision over a reality that was never going to happen. The city wasn’t going to fill 20 of those open positions, let alone 200. Every year the funding is spent on something else when the roles aren’t filled.

The only thing worthy of news is that Jones admin is reallocating the funding now instead of participating in a hard-on-crime charade and reallocating at the end of the fiscal year.

This isn’t defund the police.

That's right. This isn't defunding the police. 

St. Louis has a local media problem. They love to fear monger.

The push before Jones was to fill the positions. Now their is a hiring freeze. I would call that “ defunding “. The shortage of officers on the street has been mentioned as part of the problem with crime in the City from leaders to civilians.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Oh yeah… Like a social worker will help stop a criminal from stabbing someone, car jacking, mugging someone or god knows what else. When a criminal has intent, he/she will continue to do what he/she wants or will come back with a vengeance later

DogtownBnR wrote: ↑

Apr 27, 2021

The fact is, the department has been significantly short for years and.crime has been on the rise since, whether the stats show it or not. Those numbers can be fudged, so don’t live and die by them. Less police presence is not the answer. This summer is going to be a violent one, as we are already on pace to surpass last year’s murder rate.  As I stated earlier, I fully support front end prevention programs but there has to be policing on the backend. Police presence alone can be a great crime deterrent. No visible resistance will only embolden criminals.

There is zero correlation between these open positions and crime going up because those positions have been open forever, they’re just FTEs.

Last year when the state forced the City to dump the residency rule for police it was suppose to open the flood gates with applicants, guess what? The number of open positions got bigger, not smaller.  It went from 135 to 150.

So why keep these open if they’re never going to be filled?  Why not keep 50 open and use the rest of the FTE to hire more dispatchers? Mental health professionals etc?  

Real or perception (a mix of both is probably true) is that it’s not a great time to be a cop.  Part of that real/perception that I hear from my county police friends is that they don’t want to be a cop in a jurisdiction where Kim Gardner will charge them for even small mistakes and not give them a mulligan but I have no sympathy towards that,  the letting mistakes slide by police from prosecutors has gotten us in a situation where it’s hard to solve crime because community where it’s occurring won’t talk to detectives because of lack of trust

St. Louis voters have made their voice heard. They want a new approach to public safety that places an emphasis on non-police techniques. How can you blame them? Policing is proven to be a woefully inadequate solution.

Also, a 10% increase in the police force (that was never coming) isn't moving the ball in any major way on violent crime. Even if correlated with a 10% drop in murder, we're still by far the most dangerous city in America. That's a terrible ROI

^^ I don’t think it’s dumb to think that one of these “social worker officers“ could run into a bad situation. Not every situation starts out violent. How will this person be trained to handle somebody pointing a gun or a knife with them when the situation goes south? The minute one of these individuals is killed on the job, I guess the discussion will shift back to trying to police officers.

^ I agree. The very few voices who spoke by voting will have their chance to prove that policing in the city is not as necessary as some of us believe. I am a supporter of both upfront programs as well as backend policing. Guess we’ll see how it all works out.

DogtownBnR wrote:^^

^ I agree. The very few voices who spoke by voting will have their chance to prove that policing in the city is not as necessary as some of us believe. I am a supporter of both upfront programs as well as backend policing. Guess we’ll see how it all works out.

You really want this to be “Defund the Police” don’t you? This is a budget reallocation that will leave over 50% (currently 53%) of the city’s budget to public safety. Policing will be no different than it is today or would’ve been with 200 funded empty positions a year from now. It’s a small diversification in public safety that will probably help officers spend their time more effectively AND reduce 911 call times.

Also, you should probably get familiar with social workers. Many of them walk into scary situations ALONE every single day.

Don’t dismiss the election just because you’re unhappy with the result and the inevitable changes of a new administration.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Apr 27, 2021

Oh yeah… Like a social worker will help stop a criminal from stabbing someone, car jacking, mugging someone or god knows what else. When a criminal has intent, he/she will continue to do what he/she wants or will come back with a vengeance later

I mean, is a police officer? I feel like all of their important job is reactive, not proactive.  Hell, you don't even see them pulling anyone over for things they can actively witness and enforce.  Unless you have a massive force with 10 officers at a time in each ward blobbing around, they're not going to do anything.  In fact, if 911 calls can't even get through, they're not even going to get the message to respond to something even if they are able to assemble a force like that.

All of it said, programs like Cure Violence should be the sort of foundation we should be laying.  And incentivizing investment in communities that could have more power than incarceration and eventual lifetime societal and financial impact.  I'm far from a Reed supporter, but it's more of a holistic approach than spraying and praying with more public dollars that have been seen to do nothing to effect change.

^Good call on the willful neglect of traffic enforcement. Crossing the street is the most dangerous part of my day, and cops do nothing to enforce speeding, blowing lights, blowing signs, etc. 

So, by definition,  “reallocation” equates to moving money away from traditional police into other forms of prevention such as social workers. So they are moving funds or “defunding” traditional police in favor of “other programs”.  Other programs within the ‘new definition’ of public safety. The public safety pie will just be split into smaller pieces for each program, impacting currently funded programs to make room for new ones.

While many believe that police are reactive, just having a police presence can help deter criminals. When you move money away from the PD, other prevention programs such as drug and gang units, detectives and other department functions will be impacted. Of course police have to be reactive. It is impossible to be everywhere at once. I’ve lived in the City my entire life & I want police in my neighborhood. I haven’t met a neighbor that wants less police. There’s a reason many neighborhoods with people from all walks of life hire private patrols in their area. I’ve been here long enough to see the changes in my area. It is unpopular to support the PD right now, but I will not be convinced that police are not a big part of the equation.

Regarding the comment on a 3% reduction in public safety funds... what is the new definition of public safety? Doesn’t matter if the % stays the same, if the definition is changed or vastly expanded. Also, the majority of people analyzing the crime problem in recent years have cited an undermanned department as part of the wider issue. Now it’s ok because the new Mayor said so?

Ps- City PD is dysfunctional. Not the model department. But I would guess, most who support “reallocation of funds” away from traditional police departments more than likely lump most PDs into the same category. Some cities have reallocated funds back to traditional policing after moving funds away. Many in Minneapolis redirected funds back to police recruiting after a big public outcry for more police, due to increased crime and longer response times. The verdict is out in the City. We will revisit this in a few years.

All I know is that the residents of North St. Louis - those most directly affected by crime - have been publicly pleading for more cops on the street. I guess their wishes don't matter.