Austin
Sponsored by

Prop A question

4,565 Views | 53 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by BenFiasco14
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So I've seen the literature around the city on it, and I understand it helps fund more police, more community policing, and better training for them.

My question on it though is the price tag. They are saying $54 million a year. So what happened to all the money from "defunding" (whatever technical name you want to use, I don't care) the police department last year?

I understand and support the idea, but effectively are we being screwed over by the city council by this? As in they take a bunch of money from the police last year, redirect it in their pet grift programs, and what a surprise, crime went up, so it will now cost $54 million/year for them to do exactly what they were doing in their jobs pre-Covid?
Martin Cash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Champ Bailey said:

So I've seen the literature around the city on it, and I understand it helps fund more police, more community policing, and better training for them.

My question on it though is the price tag. They are saying $54 million a year. So what happened to all the money from "defunding" (whatever technical name you want to use, I don't care) the police department last year?

I understand and support the idea, but effectively are we being screwed over by the city council by this? As in they take a bunch of money from the police last year, redirect it in their pet grift programs, and what a surprise, crime went up, so it will now cost $54 million/year for them to do exactly what they were doing in their jobs pre-Covid?

How long have you lived in Austin?
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Martin Cash said:

Champ Bailey said:

So I've seen the literature around the city on it, and I understand it helps fund more police, more community policing, and better training for them.

My question on it though is the price tag. They are saying $54 million a year. So what happened to all the money from "defunding" (whatever technical name you want to use, I don't care) the police department last year?

I understand and support the idea, but effectively are we being screwed over by the city council by this? As in they take a bunch of money from the police last year, redirect it in their pet grift programs, and what a surprise, crime went up, so it will now cost $54 million/year for them to do exactly what they were doing in their jobs pre-Covid?

How long have you lived in Austin?


Long enough to be pretty sure we are, but wanting confirmation from someone who is more in the know.
stamper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And why do the Anti Prop A signs say something about supporting parks and libraries? Is that where the funding for extra police comes from?

All of the yards with Anti Prop A signs in my neighborhood are the ones with BLM signs, Biden signs, and "in this house we believe..." signs so I guess I am pretty much in favor of Prop A.
op_06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The money that was removed from the APD budget and dispersed into the various "money buckets" Adler talked about was reinstated into the budget pursuant to state laws that were passed last legislative session.

I don't think any amount of budget increase would get services where they were pre-Covid/pre-defund anytime soon. But, increases are necessary.

They removed 150 vacancies from the budget that weren't returned when they "returned the money" that was originally defunded. The dept used the funding for those vacant positions to fund OT to staff patrol and other various things.

The council took the position that, since they cancelled cadet classes, the dept didn't need 150 vacancies funded with no way to fill them in the foreseeable future. I think the dept. currently has ~175 vacancies with only ~80 in a cadet class that is set to graduate in January. I've heard the dept is losing ~15/month for various reasons (retirements/resignations/suspensions.

So if you consider the 150 vacancies the dept. lost, the more accurate vacancy rate would be +300 officers compared to where the authorized staffing strength was prior to defunding. Prop A is an attempt to mandate the city fall in line with FBI recommendations, which is 2.0 officers/1,000 population.

This can be compared with fire dept. recommended staffing levels. Minimums per national standards are 3 FF/engine with a recommendation of 4 FFs/engine. AFD staffs their engines with 4 FFs for obvious reasons. Prop A is an attempt for the APD to do the same.

The animosity and rhetoric against the department caused a huge increase in retirements and resignations. This, combined with the cancelation of 3 cadet classes, caused the dept to be greatly understaffed. It will take years of non-stop cadet classes at max capacity to catch up. I've heard estimates to be in the range of ~5yrs minimum.

I know the dollar amount added to the ballot language was drafted by the city. The city council and various anti-police groups are vehemently opposed to prop a and already lost in court with their original, intentionally bias wording. I'm not sure what all the 54million gets the voter, but I highly doubt it's an accurate representation considering the city came up with the number.
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Got you. Thanks for your response.
op_06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
stamper said:

And why do the Anti Prop A signs say something about supporting parks and libraries? Is that where the funding for extra police comes from?

All of the yards with Anti Prop A signs in my neighborhood are the ones with BLM signs, Biden signs, and "in this house we believe..." signs so I guess I am pretty much in favor of Prop A.


Your assessment is pretty spot on. The narrative being pushed by the opponents is that a vote in support of prop a will close all the parks, shut down libraries, and cause FFs/EMTs to be laid off.

The AFD union president is a a very vocal opponent of prop a. The AFD union also opened their union hall to the Democratic socialist/DSA groups as a HQ during their push against reinstating the camping ban. It's pretty clear where his loyalty lies. It's despicable that the council has dangled fire trucks and fire stations over the heads of their union in exchange for being an advocate against prop a.
evan_aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Funny....When they wanted to vote on the cap metro rail system they didn't flaunt the $7B price tag or even the estimated $350 yearly annual increase in property taxes on the ballot.
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
op_06 said:

stamper said:

And why do the Anti Prop A signs say something about supporting parks and libraries? Is that where the funding for extra police comes from?

All of the yards with Anti Prop A signs in my neighborhood are the ones with BLM signs, Biden signs, and "in this house we believe..." signs so I guess I am pretty much in favor of Prop A.


Your assessment is pretty spot on. The narrative being pushed by the opponents is that a vote in support of prop a will close all the parks, shut down libraries, and cause FFs/EMTs to be laid off.

The AFD union president is a a very vocal opponent of prop a. The AFD union also opened their union hall to the Democratic socialist/DSA groups as a HQ during their push against reinstating the camping ban. It's pretty clear where his loyalty lies. It's despicable that the council has dangled fire trucks and fire stations over the heads of their union in exchange for being an advocate against prop a.


The dangling doesn't even make sense to me. Would you rather get shot and no ambulance shows up (which lol, the absurdity of that scenario happening)? Or would you rather not get shot because the guy knows he will probably get caught by the police?
op_06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
None of it makes sense. You're applying logic to the situation. I stopped doing that last year because I was proven wrong every step of the way. Every decision that's been made is illogical.
Schrute Farms
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Champ Bailey said:

op_06 said:

stamper said:

And why do the Anti Prop A signs say something about supporting parks and libraries? Is that where the funding for extra police comes from?

All of the yards with Anti Prop A signs in my neighborhood are the ones with BLM signs, Biden signs, and "in this house we believe..." signs so I guess I am pretty much in favor of Prop A.


Your assessment is pretty spot on. The narrative being pushed by the opponents is that a vote in support of prop a will close all the parks, shut down libraries, and cause FFs/EMTs to be laid off.

The AFD union president is a a very vocal opponent of prop a. The AFD union also opened their union hall to the Democratic socialist/DSA groups as a HQ during their push against reinstating the camping ban. It's pretty clear where his loyalty lies. It's despicable that the council has dangled fire trucks and fire stations over the heads of their union in exchange for being an advocate against prop a.


The dangling doesn't even make sense to me. Would you rather get shot and no ambulance shows up (which lol, the absurdity of that scenario happening)? Or would you rather not get shot because the guy knows he will probably get caught by the police?


That's not how it works in Austin. In a high priority event, you'll have LE show up en masse.

Unfortunately, some low priority events have no units available. This is most egregious with sexual assaults.

Prop A does create downstream budget issues. It's poorly written and will cost the other public safety agencies.

The reality is that the City Council did the emotional defunding, the Save Austin Now folks saw a political opening, and the APD staffing issue got caught in the middle.
Wahoo82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Schrute Farms said:

Champ Bailey said:

op_06 said:

stamper said:

And why do the Anti Prop A signs say something about supporting parks and libraries? Is that where the funding for extra police comes from?

All of the yards with Anti Prop A signs in my neighborhood are the ones with BLM signs, Biden signs, and "in this house we believe..." signs so I guess I am pretty much in favor of Prop A.


Your assessment is pretty spot on. The narrative being pushed by the opponents is that a vote in support of prop a will close all the parks, shut down libraries, and cause FFs/EMTs to be laid off.

The AFD union president is a a very vocal opponent of prop a. The AFD union also opened their union hall to the Democratic socialist/DSA groups as a HQ during their push against reinstating the camping ban. It's pretty clear where his loyalty lies. It's despicable that the council has dangled fire trucks and fire stations over the heads of their union in exchange for being an advocate against prop a.


The dangling doesn't even make sense to me. Would you rather get shot and no ambulance shows up (which lol, the absurdity of that scenario happening)? Or would you rather not get shot because the guy knows he will probably get caught by the police?


That's not how it works in Austin. In a high priority event, you'll have LE show up en masse.

Unfortunately, some low priority events have no units available. This is most egregious with sexual assaults.

Prop A does create downstream budget issues. It's poorly written and will cost the other public safety agencies.

The reality is that the City Council did the emotional defunding, the Save Austin Now folks saw a political opening, and the APD staffing issue got caught in the middle.
I really don't care about issues like this, if you are even correct in your assessment. The Mayor and council created this problem with their kneejerk feelgood reactions to events that were of no bearing to Austin and they should have to work their way out of if. Mayor Addled is a disaster.
Bitter Old Man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Everything I need to know about whether to support Prop A or not comes from this...

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2021/10/01/billionaire-george-soros-donation-opposes-austin-police-ballot-measure/5953645001/
210
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Firefighters Association is against it.

Quote:

Opponents of Prop A say that it would force cuts to the Austin Fire Department, EMS, 911 call takers, mental health care and more in order to increase Austin police staffing.
https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/prop-a-austin-firefighters-association-police-staffing/269-a7ce3ff6-a6f9-4d84-a809-3da9c60b6bac
Martin Cash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
210 said:

Firefighters Association is against it.

Quote:

Opponents of Prop A say that it would force cuts to the Austin Fire Department, EMS, 911 call takers, mental health care and more in order to increase Austin police staffing.
https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/prop-a-austin-firefighters-association-police-staffing/269-a7ce3ff6-a6f9-4d84-a809-3da9c60b6bac
Absolutely no reason for this to happen, unless the city council wants to be petty and bitter.

On second thought, that probably will happen.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2
210
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Looks like the AAS editorial endorsements came out today as well.

https://www.statesman.com/story/opinion/editorials/2021/10/18/statesman-editorial-board-endorsements-texas-november-2021-election/8469862002/

Quote:

City of Austin ballot propositions
Recommendation: AGAINST Proposition A
Prop A would require the Austin Police Department to hire two officers per 1,000 city residents and ensure officers spend 35% of their time engaging with the community instead of responding to 911 calls. This would mean hiring hundreds of officers at a city-estimated cost of at least $54 million a year triggering cuts to other important city services. Worse, this costly staffing mandate is totally arbitrary: The police chief has said two officers per 1,000 residents is "a random number," and experts have found no connection between such staffing ratios and crime rates. The key to addressing APD's current staffing shortage is resuming the police academies which the city has done not adopting a made-up staffing mandate.
Martin Cash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Best endorsement for Prop A: The Unamerican Misstatesman is against it.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2
chet98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
210 said:

Quote:

city-estimated cost of at least $54 million a year triggering cuts to other important city services.

"Other important city services". Uh huh. Its called living within your means and doing what gov't is supposed to do (fund the police and protect your citizenry). IMO this outcry about taking $ from the fire dept or parks is disingenuous to say the least.

That said I do think its a bit dangerous to ask the citizens to decide staffing levels. I haven't read the piece about the ratio of cops to citizens but theoretically the police chief should be able to decide these things and not have them dictated to him by the citizens or the city council.

Color me undecided on this one.
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

experts have found no connection between such staffing ratios and crime rates.


Im sure there isn't a perfect ratio to get crime to go away, but how could anyone seriously argue that having less cops doesn't necessarily equate to more crime? Especially after the past year here.
Martin Cash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
chet98 said:

210 said:

Quote:

city-estimated cost of at least $54 million a year triggering cuts to other important city services.

"Other important city services". Uh huh. Its called living within your means and doing what gov't is supposed to do (fund the police and protect your citizenry). IMO this outcry about taking $ from the fire dept or parks is disingenuous to say the least.

That said I do think its a bit dangerous to ask the citizens to decide staffing levels. I haven't read the piece about the ratio of cops to citizens but theoretically the police chief should be able to decide these things and not have them dictated to him by the citizens or the city council.

Color me undecided on this one.
Better the citizens than the imbeciles on the city council.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2
chet98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Martin Cash said:

chet98 said:

210 said:

Quote:

city-estimated cost of at least $54 million a year triggering cuts to other important city services.

"Other important city services". Uh huh. Its called living within your means and doing what gov't is supposed to do (fund the police and protect your citizenry). IMO this outcry about taking $ from the fire dept or parks is disingenuous to say the least.

That said I do think its a bit dangerous to ask the citizens to decide staffing levels. I haven't read the piece about the ratio of cops to citizens but theoretically the police chief should be able to decide these things and not have them dictated to him by the citizens or the city council.

Color me undecided on this one.
Better the citizens than the imbeciles on the city council.
Lots of imbecile citizens too. And these propositions in off-cycle years usually only bring out the super motivated voters (left wing crazies anyone?) I plan to vote but if I don't get around to it I won't be too broken up about it.
KT 90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
chet98 said:

Martin Cash said:

chet98 said:

210 said:

Quote:

city-estimated cost of at least $54 million a year triggering cuts to other important city services.

"Other important city services". Uh huh. Its called living within your means and doing what gov't is supposed to do (fund the police and protect your citizenry). IMO this outcry about taking $ from the fire dept or parks is disingenuous to say the least.

That said I do think its a bit dangerous to ask the citizens to decide staffing levels. I haven't read the piece about the ratio of cops to citizens but theoretically the police chief should be able to decide these things and not have them dictated to him by the citizens or the city council.

Color me undecided on this one.
Better the citizens than the imbeciles on the city council.
Lots of imbecile citizens too. And these propositions in off-cycle years usually only bring out the super motivated voters (left wing crazies anyone?) I plan to vote but if I don't get around to it I won't be too broken up about it.
If Soros is against it, that pretty much means any sane person should be for it. But apparently there are quite a few insane people residing in Austin these days. Or at least paid off and/or too dumb to see what is happening to Austin the past few years.
chet98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This is true. Soros and other carpetbaggers should stay out of local issues like this.
stardustag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
City council spends enough money every year on some sort of wacky study that they out-sourced to out-of-state companies.

Fire Fighter association is opposing this because they are being threatened of funding issue.

The major oppositions of Prop A is dangling Parks and such... also threatening funding issues.

Someone needs to seriously look at the CoA budget...
Martin Cash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
stardustag said:

City council spends enough money every year on some sort of wacky study that they out-sourced to out-of-state companies.

Fire Fighter association is opposing this because they are being threatened of funding issue.

The major oppositions of Prop A is dangling Parks and such... also threatening funding issues.

Someone needs to seriously look at the CoA budget...
The morons who live in Austin voted against a city budget audit a year or two ago.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2
KT 90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Martin Cash said:

stardustag said:

City council spends enough money every year on some sort of wacky study that they out-sourced to out-of-state companies.

Fire Fighter association is opposing this because they are being threatened of funding issue.

The major oppositions of Prop A is dangling Parks and such... also threatening funding issues.

Someone needs to seriously look at the CoA budget...
The morons who live in Austin voted against a city budget audit a year or two ago.

Yes, this was mind-blowingly dumb. OF course Adler and his cronies all thought it was an "unnecessary waste of money" or something to that affect. Yeah right, he just didn't want anyone shining a light on all the waste and abuse going on.

evan_aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
As I said before: they will word the cost of the city audit as $4M, rather than $4 per person, with the likelihood of finding $4+ of waste.

On the other hand the $7B project connect + $10B in federal aid which is $400+ per house hold is an increase of .072 per $100 valuation (I don't remember the exact number)

Who thinks it would have passed if they phrased the total cost for the project?
chet98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://nextdoor.com/p/RwBjwg6jq4wh?utm_source=share&extras=NDk3NjM3Mg%3D%3D

Not sure if this link will come through but this is in Allandale, near my old neighborhood of Crestview. Not here is a story from Brentwood reported by trustworthy friends where a dog walker was robbed at gun point recently. Not sure if the fuzz bothered to come out and take his report or not.

Nextdoor link doesn't seem to work unless you're a member or whatever so pasted below...Petticoat Fair is a lingerie store in Allandale (a classy / functional / granny panty one, its not Tabu lingerie).

TLDR they've been robbed multiple times including last week when someone shot out their window then smashed & grabbed all the granny panties they could carry.



I am the owner of Petticoat Fair and would like to pass on what has happened here - I see that this post has the entire sign and the boarded up window - so, this was taken after Saturday morning.

On Thursday October 2nd, we had a male shoplift from our store during business hours. We have him on video, from several angles, and were able to get his license plate number. 911 was called within 1 minute and I was instructed to call 311. 311 took my information and said I would get a call back in order to actually file a report - but could not tell me when that would be. On October the 13 I received that call and the details of the incident were given and they were informed that we had video and a license plate number. Later that day, I received an email that informed me that the case was suspended because there was not enough information to identify the suspect. I called them back and was able to speak with a detective. I was told that there was not enough man power to track down these types of shoplifters and he told me the best thing we could do was to lock our doors and let people in.

On October 16th at 6:12 AM, we had a man shoot two shots through our window - hence the boarded up window in the picture. We have the entire event on tape, the two shots fired, the man then busting through the broken window, taking a rack of items, and then driving off. I called 911. 911 contacted an area supervisor since shots had been fired, and the area supervisor told 911 that no officer would be sent out due to pandemic restrictions. The 911 operator then told me how to collect evidence (gun casing, etc) if we found them. Again, I called 311 to make a report and was told I would get a call back in order to file a police report. They told me that call back shouldn't take the week that the last call back took since a gun was involved. I have yet to receive that call.

Prior to these two incidents, we have had 2 others over the past 3 months and it is getting more frequent and blatant.

As far as other businesses in the area, the company that boarded up our window informed me that it is happening all over the area. In fact, while they were here Saturday, they got another call of a break in down on Burnet Rd that needed boarding up.

Currently we are having buzz in locks put on our doors and will move forward with this system in order to protect our staff and customers.

We are not trying to be political. We are trying to inform our customers what we are doing to ensure our safety and the safety of our customers.

We have been in business since 1964 and have been in Northcross Center since 1992 and have never had 4 instances like this, much less in a 3 month period.

I am just passing on the facts pertaining to instances in our store. Citizens can draw their own conclusion about causes and solutions.


ByrdEWhiteTrash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
An email from one of my Austin neighbors:

(I have been seeing signs all over my Circle C neighborhood to vote no to Prop A because it will take money from parks and give to police so I asked him what's up with that.)

"I was surprised by the ballot language.

When a petition is made to refund the police, the city will rewrite the petition as defund parks.

I think they had to go to court to stop the city from wording it that way.

However, no one went to court on Prop B,
Prop B is the city wants to sell park land along town lake to a secret buyer.
The city worded the ballot measure as increase park land. What the city means is that with money they get by selling park land to their secret buyer they can maybe use that money to buy park land.


The city can not be trusted to run elections. I remember in the last election when the ballot measure was to reestablish the previous ordinance that did not allow public camping.
The city tried to change the ballot language to "Do you want the police to beat up stab and kill homeless people."



Martin Cash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Now these childish fools want the city to buy a bar to train bartenders and musicians.

I swear, these morons are absolutely insane.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2
tlepoC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Creepy texts from Save Austin Now letting me know that my neighbor, by name, supported Prop A and voter rolls show they have already voted. These idiots marketing strategy is making it really hard to support the prop.
chet98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Martin Cash said:

Now these childish fools want the city to buy a bar to train bartenders and musicians.

I swear, these morons are absolutely insane.


Where did you see that craziness?
Martin Cash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
chet98 said:

Martin Cash said:

Now these childish fools want the city to buy a bar to train bartenders and musicians.

I swear, these morons are absolutely insane.


Where did you see that craziness?
Todd and Don were talking about it this morning on KLBJ. Quoted Adler, so I assume it's true.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2
Wahoo82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tlepoC said:

Creepy texts from Save Austin Now letting me know that my neighbor, by name, supported Prop A and voter rolls show they have already voted. These idiots marketing strategy is making it really hard to support the prop.
Maybe try ignoring all that bs and vote on the issue.
HTownAg98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ByrdEWhiteTrash said:

An email from one of my Austin neighbors:

(I have been seeing signs all over my Circle C neighborhood to vote no to Prop A because it will take money from parks and give to police so I asked him what's up with that.)

"I was surprised by the ballot language.

When a petition is made to refund the police, the city will rewrite the petition as defund parks.

I think they had to go to court to stop the city from wording it that way.

However, no one went to court on Prop B,
Prop B is the city wants to sell park land along town lake to a secret buyer.
The city worded the ballot measure as increase park land. What the city means is that with money they get by selling park land to their secret buyer they can maybe use that money to buy park land.


The city can not be trusted to run elections. I remember in the last election when the ballot measure was to reestablish the previous ordinance that did not allow public camping.
The city tried to change the ballot language to "Do you want the police to beat up stab and kill homeless people."





The City isn't selling park land; they're selling a maintenance yard operated by the Parks Department.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.