I've never heard of this happening before -- a $15 million foundation grant to the Dallas PD, supposedly for nuts and bolts staffing and equipment needs. The money comes with strings attached, basing $10 million of the spending on the recommendations of an unnamed but all-of-a-sudden-quite-powerful consultant.
It's impossible not to applaud the generosity and good intent of the funders. Dallas has one of the highest crime rates in the country among big cities and needs the help. But the possibility of a major city becoming dependent on private foundations to pay for basic public safety expenses raises a host of questions I haven't thought through. For starters, to what extent is it appropriate for grantmakers to usurp police management authority, e.g., by insisting that a consultant, not the police department's command structure or the city council, will decide how spending should be prioritized?
My gut tells me police salaries should be paid by tax dollars, but it'd be foolhardy for the Dallas City Council to decline the money. I'm not sure how I feel about this. A lot depends on who are the consultants and how they make their decisions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
2 comments:
I agree, but that's a little different from paying for salaries of beat officers with grant money. Where that happens, e.g., with federal Byrne grants, it's caused problems.
A bond package to pay for new officers is worse than grants, BTW. You don't pay salaries with debt!! If Dallas needs more cops, IMO, it should pay for them with tax dollars. With debt, down the line you'll be obligated for both their salaries and the interest!
Debt's fine for construction, be it a homeless shelter, highways, or whatever else. Using debt for current salaries, though, is ridiculously irresponsible. If they're actually planning to borrow money for police salaries, I'd dispute that "sharp" assessment. That's just political cowardice, punting the tax increases to the next council, IMO. Best,
Post a Comment