Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Speakers split over public safety spending as committee readies vote on public-safety sales tax
Summary
Public commenters and advocates used the hearing to press two competing frames: some urged divestment from surveillance and more investment in community-led services; at least one commenter accused prior budget choices of enabling crime and called for more aggressive shelter siting. Chair Strauss said the committee will vote on the public-safety sales-tax proposal the next day.
Public testimony at the Oct. 7 Select Budget Committee hearing reflected sharp disagreement over the city's approach to public safety and community investment.
Several faith leaders, nonprofit directors and service providers urged the council to "divest from surveillance and punitive systems and invest in community led housing," framing public safety as housing stability, mental-health care and violence-prevention services rather than expanded surveillance technology. Demontris Bigham (community organizer, Church Council) said investing in housing and community safety "actually work" compared with increased spending on cameras and patrols.
By contrast, David Haines, a public commenter, urged a Department of Justice-style review of prior budgeting decisions and framed past policy choices as contributing to public-safety harms; his remarks included strong political language about protest-related spending and nonprofit contractors. The claim was presented as an allegation and was not substantiated with documentary evidence during the hearing.
Chair Dan Strauss noted that the committee would vote on the public-safety sales-tax proposal the following day and that public comment will continue to be allowed at the start of each section of budget deliberations. Committee members did not vote during this session.
