Strategies to consider
Here are a number of strategies to consider as you determine which functions and expenditures of the police budget to evaluate.
Reduce funding
- Reduce overtime budget, including not allowing increases if a department overdraws their overtime budget (Austin)
- Restrict and/or mandate strict oversight over exceeding projected overtime expenditures (Washington, DC)
- Reduce police recruitment budgets and bonuses (Seattle)
- Reduce the number of police officers
- Hiring freezes (Burlington, VT)
- Cancel or shrink new cadet classes (Oakland, Austin)
- Eliminate unfilled positions (Austin, Seattle)
- Eliminate positions through attrition (Milwaukee)
- Offer early retirement and buyouts for cuts through attrition
- Cut specific units and sections of the department (Seattle)
- Fire with cause and terminate the pensions of officers who repeatedly or seriously harm community members. If this action does not seem feasible in your locality, consider investing more power into your civilian review board (or creating one), including the power to discipline and fire officers. (For more information, see “Independent Oversight” metric.)
- Revise the terms of the union contract (See, Community Oversight of Police Union Contracts : A Toolkit for Public Engagement in the Negotiation of Police Collective Bargaining Agreements; Portland United’s community letter arguing for a “community-centered Portland Police Association Contract”)
- Reduce police public relations and legal defense budgets
Refuse and/or redirect federal grants
- Several localities have rejected or withdrawn their governments from soliciting COPS Hiring Program grants, which subsidize police personnel increases for a three year term that requires a local funding match and long-term maintenance of the staffing level made possible by the grant. (Antioch, CA; Minneapolis; Milwaukee) [Milwaukee: The city declined a COPS grant under the Trump administration but has recently reversed their decision, accepting the same grant.]
- Some localities have sought to utilize COPS Hiring Program grants for community safety purposes that do not involve police, which is not currently permitted by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Nevertheless, localities can attempt to seek waivers from the DOJ to utilize COPS grants for community safety programs. Here is a fact sheet and explainer about this effort.
Shrink police power
- Increase police department budget transparency. (Washington, DC, Police Department overtimeoversight legislation)
- Open police contract negotiations to public scrutiny, participation, and approval. (Portland, OR)
- Take part in statewide efforts to repeal or amend Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights. (Maryland passed repeal; Delaware and Rhode Island have ongoing efforts;)
Shrink police department scope and shift functions to other departments
- Cut units such as homeless “outreach” units, mounted and canine units, vice units, and units charged with targeting protesters or surveilling communities. (Portland, OR, Seattle, Minneapolis). Move and fund positive functions, such as homeless outreach, to other departments.
- Eliminate gang/gun violence units, which in many localities, have been rife with racially discriminatory policing and abuses, as well as ineffective at reducing gun violence. (New York City; Portland, OR) [However, Portland decided to reestablish the unit, with changes including better oversight.]
- End contracts for police in schools, parks, public transportation, and homelessness response. (Portland, OR; Milwaukee; Burlington, VT)
- End police involvement with homeless outreach/response, responses to mental health crises, youth engagement, and enforcement of public health orders. (Portland, OR; Seattle)
- End enforcement of (or repeal) public order laws and decriminalize drug possession, “quality of life” offenses (such as loitering, truancy, and disorderly conduct), and survival-based offenses, including sex work. (Oregon)
- Stop collaboration with ICE, Joint Terorrism task forces, and other surveillance structures. (See “An End to the Co-optation of Local Law Enforcement for Federal Immigration Enforcement” metric.)
- Reduce and realign police patrol divisions, which are currently primarily responsible for responding to 911 calls, to focus on responding to serious and violent incidents. Replace police responses with civilian response programs, including crisis intervention specialists, mental health workers, and street outreach workers. (CAHOOTS [Eugene, OR]; Oakland; Portland, OR; Austin; Seattle; Minneapolis)
- Move certain departments/functions out of the police department:
- Violence interruption and prevention programs (Minneapolis)
- Crime lab/forensics (Austin)
- 911 dispatch (DC; Seattle; Austin)
- Internal affairs (Austin)
- Traffic enforcement (Berkeley)
- Parking enforcement (Seattle; Minneapolis; Burlington, VT)
- Crossing guards (Oakland)
- Mental health distress calls and wellness checks (Austin)
- Other non-emergency responses
- Events and other permitting function and staff (Austin)
- Victim advocacy teams (Seattle)
- Staffing community events, parades, and First Amendment activities
Block and regulate the acquisition of police department equipment
- Block new military and surveillance equipment acquisitions or create council oversight and approval requirements. (Such as receiving equipment through the federal government’s 1033 Program. For more information see, “Demilitarization” metric.)
- Ban and cut license plate reader, facial recognition, and other surveillance equipment. (Portland, OR; see 21st Century Policing: The Rise and Reach of Surveillance Technology for more information and examples)
- Ban purchase of or use of chemical or military grade weapons. (Montana; Seattle)