Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council accepts GIVE grant and related public‑safety funding amid divided debate
Summary
The council approved acceptance of a Gun Involved Violence Elimination (GIVE) grant and other public‑safety funding; votes were divided, with councilors debating hotspot policing versus prevention strategies and the proper use of restricted forfeiture funds.
Rochester City Council on Aug. 21 approved acceptance of GIVE (Gun Involved Violence Elimination) grant funds and other public‑safety appropriations after extended debate. Proponents described the GIVE initiative as one piece of a broader violence‑prevention strategy; opponents criticized specific elements such as hotspot policing and the allocation of restricted funds for militarized equipment.
Council members spoke for and against elements of the grants package. Council member Lupien said the package contained valuable items but criticized hotspot policing funding and urged greater investment in youth initiatives. “Hot spot policing ... is not nearly as effective as, you know, we could have used that $100,000 for youth initiatives or violence prevention,” she said.
Council member Martin said he could not support hotspot policing because of its impact on Black and Brown communities: “We know that means stop and frisk. We know that means occupying black and brown neighborhoods.” Council member Patterson, who supported acceptance, said the funding supports neighborhood safety where residents “live under the fear of the gun,” and argued GIVE had produced measurable reductions in homicides when paired with prevention work.
Separately, the council approved an appropriation of restricted forfeiture funds for an armored rescue vehicle (Introductory 3‑23). Council member Patterson questioned whether restricted funds permit that use and administration confirmed they are restricted to specific uses associated with forfeiture rules. Council member Monroe strongly defended the vote for the armored vehicle and framed opposition as a threat to neighborhood safety: “I will no longer sit quietly by while members of this council continue to work to defund, disarm, and leave my community exposed,” Monroe said.
The council recorded roll‑call votes on the GIVE acceptance and on the use of forfeiture funds for equipment; both measures passed. Several council members said they would push for separating future grant elements to allow more granular votes on hotspot policing and prevention expenditures.
Councilors also requested more detailed reporting on the expected uses of grant funds and the evaluation data that will track outcomes.
