3 ms·

There are people on the Seattle city council who explicitly support defunding the police and they have done so in some instances. This article[1] describes a m

There are people on the Seattle city council who explicitly support defunding the police and they have done so in some instances. This article[1] describes a measure to cut the police budget for the third year in a row. The vote was 8-1 with the sole dissenting vote from the (self-described) socialist Kshama Sawant who wanted significantly larger cuts. In the past they've defunded specific teams and cut a former police chief's salary to the point she resigned. It's far from accurate to say that "defund the police" types aren't on the city council. In Seattle the city council is composed of nobody but "defund the police" types. Police prevent crimes, violent and not, by two mechanisms. First, by increasing the probability that offenders will be punished. A potential offender who thinks they are going to be caught and punished will be less likely to offend - and the police are a part of that system. Second, by imprisoning people who have offended the police limit the extent to which those people can commit subsequent crimes against the general population by incarcerating the offender for a substantial length of time. Small government may, in some cases, mean less policing. That seems like a non-sequitur though. People who think Seattle has a crime problem (I am one) aren't calling for smaller government. We are calling for law enforcement. 1 - https://www.wsj.com/articles/seattle-city-council-defunds-the-police-again-11638572886 https://www.wsj.com/articles/seattle-city-council-defunds-th...

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
Note that the defunding in that vote simply comes from the SPD being unable to hire enough people (they are allowed to hire, but can’t find enough people qualified and willing to take the job). So the SPD is spending less money because they are understaffed. What the council voted for was not feeding back that money not spent due to labor shortages into hiring bonuses and other incentives. The city council is mainly guilty of not throwing some money at fixing that staffing problem, though I bet they will eventually relent on allowing overtime again (which did get out of control, but what choice do we have?). Here is a better article that doesn’t require a subscription to read: https://komonews.com/news/local/seattle-police-budget-shrinks-after-city-councils-final-approval https://komonews.com/news/local/seattle-police-budget-shrink...
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  According to the article you've cited the SPD budget was 401, 363, and 355 for the years 2020, 2021, and 2022 respectively. That seems like three years of successive cuts to me. Your article mentions that the council says "there are no cuts functionally for SPD". So, on the one hand, we have the steadily declining raw number, and, on the other hand, we have the preferred phrasing of some politicians. To me, the number seems more significant.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    Again, the number arises based on how many police the SPD was able to hire and their realistic hiring targets for 2022 (that they could still fail to meet). If the council allowed for more incentives with the money they aren’t spending on people they haven’t been able to hire (the real gist of this bill), then they could probably hire more. That they’ve been losing people for three years is the problem.
    - ALittleLight 5y ago
      It's possible that what you're saying is true, but that doesn't change the basic facts from my original comment. Members of the Seattle City Council espouse the "Defund the police" idea and they are acting on it - to wit, they have decreased the SPD budget at least three years in a row. They have caused the dissolution of the Navigation team and caused a recent police chief to resign by cutting her salary. I suspect a contributing reason to SPD losing and not being able to recruit people is the openly hostile attitude of city leadership towards law enforcement. Ineffective criminal justice in the city likely contributes as well.
      - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
        First, when it was proposed to eliminate some of the open head count for the police, it was soundly defeated by a SCC vote. They aren’t going to defund the police so explicitly, even if their support has a lacking. Second, if you haven’t noticed, everyone is having trouble hiring right now. The negative vibes for the job are definitely significant, but this is also part of a more broad labor shortage.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago

Note that the defunding in that vote simply comes from the SPD being unable to hire enough people (they are allowed to hire, but can’t find enough people qualified and willing to take the job). So the SPD is spending less money because they are understaffed. What the council voted for was not feeding back that money not spent due to labor shortages into hiring bonuses and other incentives. The city council is mainly guilty of not throwing some money at fixing that staffing problem, though I bet they will eventually relent on allowing overtime again (which did get out of control, but what choice do we have?). Here is a better article that doesn’t require a subscription to read: https://komonews.com/news/local/seattle-police-budget-shrinks-after-city-councils-final-approval https://komonews.com/news/local/seattle-police-budget-shrink...

ALittleLight 5y ago
According to the article you've cited the SPD budget was 401, 363, and 355 for the years 2020, 2021, and 2022 respectively. That seems like three years of successive cuts to me. Your article mentions that the council says "there are no cuts functionally for SPD". So, on the one hand, we have the steadily declining raw number, and, on the other hand, we have the preferred phrasing of some politicians. To me, the number seems more significant.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  Again, the number arises based on how many police the SPD was able to hire and their realistic hiring targets for 2022 (that they could still fail to meet). If the council allowed for more incentives with the money they aren’t spending on people they haven’t been able to hire (the real gist of this bill), then they could probably hire more. That they’ve been losing people for three years is the problem.
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    It's possible that what you're saying is true, but that doesn't change the basic facts from my original comment. Members of the Seattle City Council espouse the "Defund the police" idea and they are acting on it - to wit, they have decreased the SPD budget at least three years in a row. They have caused the dissolution of the Navigation team and caused a recent police chief to resign by cutting her salary. I suspect a contributing reason to SPD losing and not being able to recruit people is the openly hostile attitude of city leadership towards law enforcement. Ineffective criminal justice in the city likely contributes as well.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      First, when it was proposed to eliminate some of the open head count for the police, it was soundly defeated by a SCC vote. They aren’t going to defund the police so explicitly, even if their support has a lacking. Second, if you haven’t noticed, everyone is having trouble hiring right now. The negative vibes for the job are definitely significant, but this is also part of a more broad labor shortage.