Council accepts state grant for gun‑involved violence work; some members oppose 'hot‑spot policing' elements

The council voted to accept a state grant intended to fund gun‑involved violence reduction activities, but members debated whether the grant's permissible uses—some of which include hot‑spot policing—could be split so councilors could support community components while rejecting policing elements.

Council Member Lupien said she could not support any effort that includes hot‑spot policing and stated, "I cannot in good conscience support any efforts to do hot spot policing in my community." She asked if elements of the grant could be separated so the council could accept some components and decline others.

Administration staff responded that the grant application was submitted by the administration and that acceptance is an up‑or‑down vote. They said council can amend legislation but cautioned that partial acceptance may limit the council's control over how funds are ultimately spent. The administration agreed to provide a written answer about splitting grant uses.

Council members asked for job descriptions and salaries for positions associated with the RIT (Regional Intervention Team) components funded by the grant. One council member noted that some items funded by the grant (for example, a neighborhood ambassador program tied to opioid settlement decisions) had been split out previously and asked whether similar separation was viable for this grant.

A roll‑call vote in committee approved acceptance and use of the grant; some council members recorded a "no for now" vote pending written responses to their questions. Administration officials said they would provide written clarifications and that the council retains the ability to request return of specific procurements or PSAs where standard thresholds apply.