As Minneapolis continues to see spats of criminal activity across the city, some neighborhoods have banded together to raise money for extra police patrols in an effort to help residents feel safer.
But some city officials and residents alike have raised concerns over how the program can operate given the department’s staffing woes, and whether the program creates inequity in policing for neighborhoods that can’t afford the extra patrols.
Crowdfunding public safety
The Minneapolis Police Department’s (MPD) “buyback” program is a contractual agreement between the city and an external organization or group in which the organization secures extra police presence and patrols by paying for officer overtime hours. The funding sources for the agreements have included state and federal grants, sports teams and venues wanting extra security for events, and neighborhood and business organizations. The contracts go to the city council for approval before officers can volunteer to sign up to work the extra hours.
Neighborhoods made up about 22% of the nearly 9,700 buyback hours worked by MPD officers in 2021, according to a presentation by the department to the city.
The Lowry Hill neighborhood, through a nonprofit called the Minneapolis Safety Initiative created by the neighborhood’s residents, secured a contract with the city earlier this year for $210,000 in extra police patrols at $107 per hour worked by an officer, starting Jan. 17 and running through Dec. 31. The nonprofit’s website calls the initiative a “temporary measure to address the current crime wave while MPD continues to rebuild to full staffing levels,” and suggests a donation of $220 per month for six months for the program to have its “desired impact.”
The Downtown Minneapolis Neighborhood Association (DMNA) started organizing its own fundraiser (but not a formal buyback agreement) for one off-duty officer to walk the Mill District downtown Thursday to Sunday from 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. from June 18 to Sept. 4. The GiveMN.org fundraiser, which has raised more than $4,800 of its $30,000 goal, credits Ward 3 Council Member Michael Rainville with coming up with the idea as a way to help residents feel safe while improving community relations with police by returning beat cops to busy corridors. Rainville declined to comment for this story, and the DMNA did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
What about other neighborhoods?
Paying for extra police patrols amid higher need during a crime wave may be a viable option for neighborhoods like Lowry Hill, where about 40% of residents make more than $100,000 a year, according to Minnesota Compass. But for neighborhoods like Cedar-Riverside where that number is just 5%, and more than 72% of residents make less than $35,000, it’s disappointing that a program like police buyback can be used by residents in upscale areas to gain more access to the public service that is policing, said AJ Awed, an executive director of neighborhood group the Cedar Riverside Community Council.
“I don’t believe safety should be measured or administered based on the economic tax bracket that you’re in,” Awed said. “When it comes to your safety, I don’t think money should be an object but unfortunately that seems to be the reality of the situation.”
[image_credit]MinnPost photo by Bill Lindeke[/image_credit][image_caption]The Downtown Minneapolis Neighborhood Association started organizing its own fundraiser for one off-duty officer to walk the Mill District downtown Thursday to Sunday from 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. from June 18 to Sept. 4.[/image_caption]
MPD’s staffing woes have been well known, its rank-and-file numbers still recovering from an exodus of officers due to retirements, resignations and disability leaves after the protests and civil unrest following George Floyd’s killing under the knee of former Minneapolis officer Derek Chauvin. The department has 564 active officers at all levels as of June 18, according to Interim Chief Amelia Huffman. That’s still nearly 200 short of the charter-mandated 731 based on the city’s latest census numbers.
The department cites the buyback program as a way for MPD to target crime trends and hotspots, and to expand the pool of available hours for extra patrols or security for neighborhoods, businesses and large-scale events. But, Payne said, “it is really hard to hear the consistent drumbeat of the staff shortage, paired with apparently our officers having enough open capacity to do these additional patrols.”
“I think that’s a bit of the cognitive dissonance associated with the buyback program,” Payne said.
The Ward 1 councilmember said oftentimes the neighborhoods that have the highest needs have the least resources, and by allowing wealthier neighborhoods to tap into the total capacity of the police force disproportionately through programs like buyback, that means neighborhoods that have higher needs are going to see those needs go unmet.
[image_credit]MinnPost photo by Corey Anderson[/image_credit][image_caption]AJ Awed, an executive director of neighborhood group the Cedar Riverside Community Council: “I don’t believe safety should be measured or administered based on the economic tax bracket that you’re in.”[/image_caption]
Awed said he recognizes each neighborhood has different safety needs. While extra police presence would help combat violent crime, in the meantime his group can still work to treat causes of crime through methods like youth outreach and skills training programs.
“We can’t put money where our mouth is,” he said. “But we can definitely try to empower our kids with as many investments that we can get for our neighborhood, to try to do it in a way that empowers and builds the capacity for the neighborhood to deal with some of these underlying issues of safety.”
Bingo!
The policing shortage is solved, like many things in life, by spending more on it. Time to start bidding up police compensation along with better hiring and management processes. Cops are more important than investment bankers to the functioning of our society and closing the wage gap between them is a good place to start. And it is done by a progressive tax system that identifies what we need to create a safe city / region and rounding up the money needed to get there.
Sounds like the de-fund folks got what they wanted, no-police, and now want police? Maybe those folks should start by making some gigantic apologies to the folks in blue as well as us, (sorry but the world needs policing folks) for being so impetuous and creating the crime problem we know have, last check, some humility from time to time is still a virtue.
Dollars to doughnuts none of the people who were contributing to this program were supporting the defund movement.
The point is/was, the folks paying extra cash for police aren’t the de-funders, but the folks complaining that these folks are getting extra protection on their additional expenditures probably/maybe are! On another point, there is still plenty of political activity, sound biting, editorials, shading etc. to minimize adding police, or to discourage folks from wanting to work for the MPD regardless that the de-fund movement failed in the voting booth. Hypocrisy is not limited by political affiliation.
Minneapolis police were not defunded, that proposal was rejected by the voters and citizens of Minneapolis
https://www.npr.org/2021/11/02/1051617581/minneapolis-police-vote
The “Defund Folks” had nothing to do with the present police shortage, especially with Mpls PD which have been known as thugs since I worked for the Chisago County sheriff’s office in the ’80’s. They made their own bed…they have to lie in it. Social media has revealed what has always been going on, and law enforcement, rather than purge their own ranks of racists and violent assholes, are suffering, finally, the consequences.
“Sounds like the de-fund folks got what they wanted, no-police, and now want police?”
And who exactly are these folks? Seems like the Mayor, a majority of council members and a majority of voters oppose defund. Why do you select a minority opinion and imply that they achieved anything? Noise is their only achievement.
The MPD has a shortage of officers because one of them, following the “warrior” guidance of their union chief, killed a man over a misdemeanor and all hell broke loose and we are still trying to recover. It’s not a small minority of defund true believers causing the problem, it is a mislead and mismanaged police force that needs more money and better management going forward to rebuild itself.
Payne said, “it is really hard to hear the consistent drumbeat of the staff shortage, paired with apparently our officers having enough open capacity to do these additional patrols.”
Exactly. Who approves these rent-a-cop agreements, and from what neighborhoods are they pulling resources?
Because they don’t get treated like sh_t?
You don’t think rich folks treat law enforcement like sh*t? My, how innocent you are. Trying saying no to these folks sometime, or not meet their expectations of what appropriate service is.
Seriously? I mean really… seriously? MPD is selling additional policing to neighborhoods that can afford it? This is completely bizarre.
When you examine the program–it is cops willing to work an extra job–so it does not pull from other areas. It is not ideal, but most of life is not ideal. If it were pulling cops from other areas, I would agree it’s a no, but that is not what is happening. Many employees now adays work 2nd jobs, so why not give them a chance to make extra money vs providing security at a bar. Or we could actually pay patrol cops more.
What’s bizarre is neighborhoods that voted to disband the police complaining that other neighborhoods are getting more police. Talk about cognitive dissonance.
Yeah sure… the police should only protect and serve those who didn’t vote for the public safety initiative. But how do we identify them? make them wear a star of some kind perhaps?
We own a small apartment building in Lowry Hill, housing approximately 25-30 tenants, none of whom make anywhere near $100,000 per year. I believe they felt safer because of our participation in the Lowry Hill Safety Initiative. I think the buildings on either side also participated which would add approximately another 110-120 tenants. We felt this was a super efficient way to add a layer of protection for our tenant-clients from the robberies, beatings and car jackings that are occurring in the area. I’m glad I participated.
If the city had a surplus of police and were looking to recover the cost, this _might_ be tolerable. In the current situation, with an understaffed police force, using regular duty officers as extra protection in a highly privileged neighborhood is intolerable.
That is not what it does. Reread the article. It is cops willing to work a 2nd job so it does not pull from other areas.
The city and MPD have to sign off on this, this isn’t simply cops patrolling in their spare time, they’re using department resources. And no, THOSE resources cannot be elsewhere when they are driving around Kenwood or Lowry.
They can just reduce or eliminate patrols in all those places that wanted to disband the police, thereby giving everyone what they want – essentially no police for those who wanted to disband them and more police for those who want less crime. Maybe they can divide neighborhoods up with fences and those that don’t want police can have their own Christiania-like free for all and the others can live in a world where criminals are arrested and held accountable.
Or maybe we can all face reality and recognize that defunding the police didn’t happen.
Are we going to pull the old Huey Long trick of penalizing areas that didn’t vote the way we liked?
If rich neighborhoods want extra protection, they should hire private security guards. It just looks bad when wealthy areas have a greater police presence than poor neighborhoods even if they are paying for it. Those officers are not wearing a sign around their necks saying the city is paying for their patrolling. At least with a private company people will know it isn’t the taxpayers picking up the tab.
I’m inclined to agree with you, although private hiring of police is not–so far as I know–a zero-sum game. Banks often hire off-duty police. Years ago, the not well-off Cedar-Riverside neighborhood businesses used to hire off-duty police.
Well, no… rent-a-cops aren’t really a solution for public safety in neighborhoods… if you think city cops can be a problem try holding rent-a-cops accountable.
“Why are wealthier neighborhoods recieving extra police patrols” um didn’t you just answer your own question.
Why are people complaining? Isn’t the presence of police traumatic?
Sigh… Them that has, gets. Them that don’t, don’t.
The MPD, using your favorite word, is “defunding” itself: It can’t fill the jobs it has open right now. Response time has lengthened, sometimes to forever. In his own words, here is what Payne supports to address this very real problem:
1. We do a historical review of all calls for service to identify opportunities for targeted responses (issues such as mental health, chemical dependency, homelessness, domestic abuse, etc.)
2. We invest in targeted responses to these specific issues (starting with the mental health response team my office recommended)
3. We measure the effectiveness of these targeted responses and use the pilots to refine the response protocols and capacity needed
4. We fully fund the responses that deliver the safer community we aspire to
Each step along the way is data driven and done in collaboration with the community.
https://ballotpedia.org/Elliott_Payne
Does this seem unreasonable to you?
This revelation is going to pave the way for privatizing the police function and cause the creation of private police forces, paid for by neighborhood groups. Many middleclass neighborhoods in St. Paul have organized groups (Mac-Groveland, Highland Park, etc.) who have the financial wherewithal to actually create armed, private police forces that patrol the neighborhood in marked patrol cars.
Just based on the frequency of crime-related posts in the Nextdoor app I read every day of people getting their homes broken into, their cars stolen or vandalized, armed robberies, etc., a neighborhood group could easily start a fund-raising campaign to create or hire a private security firm to do the job. To cover a 12-15 square block neighborhood 24×7 would only require a couple of cars and 4-5 officers … something the city police used to do back in the day.
This concept isn’t against state law, as there’s precedent for private companies hiring private security firms, there’s no reason an incorporated neighborhood group couldn’t do the same.
Who would sell you a nice liability policy for a Blackwater patrol in your neighborhood?
How much does it cost in premiums?
Will they pay off in the millions of dollars for their mistakes?
Is it possible to stop crime with police presence alone? Why do they call it the thin blue line?
Too many posts try to blame the rent-a-cop scheme on the people who are living in high crime areas and suffer bullets through the walls of their apartment. Yeesh! Talk about blaming a whole neighborhood of people for a shortage of patrols!
I expect to keep hearing the “de-fund” canard on every metro police story until my demise. And I also expect law enforcement to continue to be tasked with making peace among people that are so divided and the trouble-makers so well armed that we will never be able to see much more than proximate solutions to insoluble problems.
“This concept isn’t against state law, as there’s precedent for private companies hiring private security firms, there’s no reason an incorporated neighborhood group couldn’t do the same.”
News flash:
This is called a tax increase to afford the required level of policing to insure a safe neighborhood and city:
You get what you pay for and if you want more of something you spend more to get it. I can remember a day when this was about the only thing Republicans would readily accept as the reason for a tax increase.
Given that most of the electorate voted against defunding the police, you need a new talking point.
I don’t think that can be emphasized enough: the move to defund the police was defeated, by a substantial margin. It didn’t happen. Most of the city was against it. The police were not defunded, per the expressed will of the people.
How many times does that need to be said?
Thank you RB. AND it needs to be said that “defunding” was never about eliminating police presence entirely it was always about improving the quality of policing and public safety. No one was promoting crime in their neighborhoods.
The defund the police movement was supported by people who hated cops. Don’t dance around this issue. Cops quit in droves because they were terrified to do their job. So it’s a bit disingenuous for those in the defund the police zip codes to now be complaining because others want to hire cops for more protection. It’s disgusting, actually
“But the people who are complaining about the extra cops in some neighborhoods were police defunders.”
Do you have anything to back that up? Or are you just making some very blithe assumptions?
I think the best response to make is: So %$#@ing what? We don’t penalize people because we think they might have been in a demographic that we assume took a position we don’t like.
Cop’s murder and kill unarmed people… cause riots… destroy their own morale and suffer a exodus of personnel… and it’s all the fault of people who live in the city and supported a failed initiative. So now your solution is to bring in Blackwater (because we know how “cheap” and effective THEY are) to replace MPD cops with rent-a-cops? Meanwhile you drop more cops into the wealthiest and lowest crime neighborhoods in the city and then whine about car jacking and cop shortages. OK then. At least now I know why I feel so safe walking my dog around Lake of the Isles and riding my bike around the lakes.
2021 saw a record number of police officers killed in the line of duty. This includes a disturbing increase in killings categorized as ambush style.
This would be more of a concern for me than some group of nitwits shouting we should defund the police.
I’ve never gone to work thinking that I could be murdered for performing my duty. It’s an obvious and concerning sign of the disrespect that is driving people out of the profession.
Thank you Mr. Wade, I was just going to point out that COVID fact myself. And yes, we almost certainly thank anti-vaxers for the the additional 301 (out of a total of 458) police deaths that made 2021 a record year.
I’ll just add that children going to school shouldn’t have to worry about being murdered while the cops stand outside, but that’s the world we live in eh?
Police work is a dangerous job, officers know that when they put the badge on.
If you want to talk about respect or disrespect we have that conversation, but then we have to talk about what police have done to earn that disrespect.
As for defunding the police, I think someone already pointed out that these guys need to find a new talking point. The vast majority of MPD cops that left the job did so long before that initiative was announced, and then the initiative was voted down, so whatever.
Using Covid deaths is an effort to deflect from the fact that there’s been a significant increase in the number of police officers murdered in 2021 including ambush style attacks.
Apparently your overlooking the record number of 73 police officers feloniously murdered in 2021 and the fact that this was a 60% increase compared to 2020. In addition, the number of police officers murdered in 2020 was an increase of 29% vs 2019.
In 2021 there were 103 ambush style attacks that resulted in 130 officers being attacked and 30 killed.
As of April 1st, 2022 a total of 17 police officers have been murdered which is a pace that could match the record number of murders last year.
Much of this is attributed to the significant increase in violent crime police offers have faced the last two years. As the Director of the FBI Christopher Wray said, “ violence against police officers is a phenomena that does not get enough attention.”
Yes , 301 officers died of Covid in 2021. It was the leading cause of death for a lot of people and that or their vaccination status does not takeaway from the number of officers murdered in the line of duty. Unlike many others, police officers didn’t have the ability to isolate at home or receive bonus unemployment while unable to work.
Covid is another occupational hazard that many of us could avoid as a condition of our employment.
How many of the deaths in the occupations you mentioned were the result of being ambushed and murdered ?
Blaming the victim for being murdered because of their occupation is not the answer to the problem.
“…everyone who’s a taxpayer should get equal service and I’m not comfortable with wealthier neighborhoods pooling resources to get superior service,”
That’s the fallacious argument: taxpayers should indeed get equal service from tax-supported services – but the ‘superior service’ referenced is NOT being paid for by taxpayers. But it looks like a noble comment to ignorant constituents.
It’s the same old “Nobody deserves to have anything that everybody can’t afford” – nobody should have a Lexus when there are people that can only afford a Kia; nobody should have a house when others can’t afford one; nobody should enjoy a great meal unless everyone can afford one – in short, Marxism.
“It’s the same old ‘Nobody deserves to have anything that everybody can’t afford'”
It’s nothing of the kind. It’s the idea that a public good – law enforcement protection – should not depend on income but should be provided equally to everyone. Calling that idea “Marxism” is nonsense, but it looks like a profound comment to ignorant readers.
I don’t know why we keep having to point this out, since it is clearly stated in the article… but these are NOT private security officers, these are MPD cops, using MPD resources (i.e. MPD patrol cars, weapons, communications, etc.) that ARE acquired, financed, and deployed by taxpayers. If these cops need assistance or back up, they don’t call other off duty cops- they get on their MPD radios in their MPD cars, and call MPD cops who ARE on duty. The fallacy here, as usual, is that the wealthy pay for their own stuff while everyone else relies on taxpayers. The fallacy here is that when these MPD resources are deployed to wealthy neighborhoods for an additional fee, there’s no corresponding reduction of police resources elsewhere, as if MPD has a separate stash of cars, radios, weapons, etc. set aside just to rent out to off duty cops patrolling wealthy neighborhoods. AND ALL OF THIS is happening at a time when city residents are dealing with a shortage of police resources. The fact that this program even exists betrays a fundamental betrayal on behalf of city leadership. This is the first program that should have been cancelled when over a hundred officers disappeared from MPD ranks.
Thems that’s got shall have
Them that’s not shall lose . . .
The word Defund was not in the Public Safety ballot question. The concept of eliminating policing from Minneapolis was not in the Public Safety ballot question. Some Council members stood on a stage with the word Defund written across the front of it, to denounce the killing of George Floyd by a thereafter criminally convicted MPD officer. Those are the facts people and yet some of you are superiorly challenged to acknowledge and apply those facts. Why is that?
The MPD can’t hire officers because their problems run so deep and are systemic that no one wants to even apply. Many law enforcement folks who have joined police forces in other nearby locales have said so on the record. MPD officers who have retired or left have said so on the record. Many of the officers still at the MPD have discipline records themselves for major offenses and for violating the civil rights of residents of Minneapolis. Some of the residents whose civil rights they have violated are committing crimes in the city and prosecutors can’t touch them because they are unable to make a case because the MPD officers who would need to testify can’t be questioned under oath due to their own discipline records of violating civil rights. See how that works? Bad cops do bad things and then those bad things keep the bad cops from participating in prosecutions to get people committing crimes off the streets.
You can’t hire more cops if no one will apply to work there. You can’t take more criminals off the streets if they can’t be prosecuted because cops can’t be put on the stand to testify about the alleged criminal activity. We are in this mess because of the utter lack of leadership of the MPD and from Minneapolis city leadership. Frey has no idea what to do. When something is as rotten to the core as the MPD, there is nothing left to “reform” or “rebuild” onto. The Public Safety ballot question was asking the voters of Minneapolis for the ability to remake the MPD into a functional department of public safety that includes sworn police officers, mental health officers and community safety officers who each respond to specific kinds of calls for help. Too many people got a stick up their *** about the word Defund and so here we are. And here we will stay, with wealthy neighborhoods buying their public safety enhancements while other neighborhoods continue to work to build a viable Dept. of Public Safety for all of us, until people get over their need for that stick.
Thank you, Ms. Newhouse, very nicely stated.
The number of folks who wish to defund (i.e., eliminate) rather than reduce and reform traditional law enforcement can be counted on one hand, and selection of the word “defund” was a branding incompetence of a colossal order. But anyone who continues to assert that the “defund” movement sought, or seeks, elimination of traditional law enforcement, rather than addressing systemic rot and building on a reformed institution, is acting in supreme bad faith.
Yes. This. Plus, even if it were true that poorer neighborhoods wanted to “defund” the cops (which is nonsense) because they were traumatized/afraid of them, that fear/trauma is justified. The rich neighborhoods don’t have much to fear because it’s harder for a cop to get a little too frisky and get away with it when the victim (or their family) can afford to hold them accountable.
The obvious, unanswered question here is:
With the MPD officer shortage what is the regular overtime policy? Can every officer work all the overtime they desire even without these special patrols? If so, then we have a problem: MPD leadership should be deciding where scarce resources are needed and apply them there and not just to the highest bidder. If we have officers willing to work overtime and it is not available to them, we need to know that and why given the officer shortages MPD leadership does not use every available resource. The MPD is not paying lots of officers they cannot find to hire: take those $$ and spend it on overtime.
So, folks say the de-funding didn’t happen, but looking at these comments seems like demoralizing, demonizing, depopulating, etc. happened and continues. What’s the difference? Results are similar, lot fewer police on the streets, lot more crime, police afraid to pull someone over or confront a perpetrator, for fear of ending up in jail, its difficult to impossible to hire and recruit, so what you have funding, you have no applicants! The de-fund or what ever are getting pretty much what they wanted, low-no police action, and folks are keeping up the shade by beating down what ever pittance of a police force we have left, end result may be we are all on our own. Facts are facts, would you want to be on a police force that takes the kind of beating you read out here? Seems a fair amount of commentators are suggesting the remaining folks be fired for incompetence!
Dennis, the claim or perspective that the morale of the police force is more critical and important than their public safety mission is actually a militaristic mentality. When the formula for high morale is less accountability, and impunity for being a threat to public safety you just set up a circular logic of militaristic policing. So you would increase morale by letting cops murder, kill, and abuse more citizens… problem is that’s not a blanket of security for us to lay beneath… it’s Fascism.
It’s rather like when we send troops into combat and then silence dissent as if troop morale is more important than their lives and well being.
What seems to get lost in the shuffle here is that in MN there are over 10,500 working peace officers and 560 or so of those are working in Minneapolis: a little over 5% of the total. These 5% account for the vast majority of the issues being debated here. Not much from the suburban departments surrounding the Mpls. Much less even about St Paul. Same for the local departments around the state. A very good member of the MPD, Art Knight, got demoted for stating the truth about the hiring problem at the MPD:
“The same old white boys”
https://www.startribune.com/mpls-police-official-demoted-over-white-boys-comment/572804802/
Too many head knocking, butt kickers looking for a daily adrenaline rush and an early retirement, inspired by Bob Kroll and demonstrated by Derek Chauvin. Are they 10% of the force or 80%?