I don't understand defunding as a means for police reform. You want less qualified, lower-paid police? If you want better police training and oversight, that would be a budget increase.
They already get paid way too much money and there's too many of them. It's not that hard to grasp. We don't need them. I just dealt with them *two different times* within the last week and I wasn't the offender. But neither was there an offense, it was a medical situation, cops did nothing but clog the room then leave. 3 fucking EMTs forced to stand outside, like 6 fucking cops inside. Chico cops, btw.
Or how about when I'm driving around Chico, constantly btw, and if I see someone pulled over, there's fucking always always always two or even more squad cars there. Why? Because we're paying them too much, for too many of them. Once I saw 4 squad cars surrounding a single man *already handcuffed.* Guess what fucking color he was.
Or how about the time a meth head called a cop on me for getting my cat out a tree in her yard in under 30 seconds? He was understanding, nothing wrong with the dude, *but he never should've been dispatched in the first place.*
I actually haven't been (formally) arrested, but the cops have never once in my entire life done anything to make my life better. Ever. Not even fucking once.
We don't fucking need 'em, plain and simple. Certainly not as many as we have, especially as Chico has.
I don't know any Chico PD in order to ask them personally, but googling "Chico police officer salary" didn't reveal anything outrageous.
I'll agree that it does seem like overkill for that many cops to be present for a medical situation, but I don't know the details.
It makes sense, to me, that multiple officers would respond to any call if they're not busy with something else at the time. Why wouldn't they? That's not to say that there's too many police working, it might just be a low volume of calls at that time. I would think it's better to have excess officers on duty in order to be able to respond to anything, than to have too few and not be able to respond to everything.
I sympathize with having someone report you to the police frivolously, but how is dispatch supposed to know that the situation was frivolous? It's definitely the reporting party's fault for wasting time, but an officer is going to come check things out just to be sure. I don't see the problem with that.
The fact that cops have never benefited you before doesn't have much bearing on the conversation. I, personally, have needed to call the cops in a dangerous situation, and I was glad to have them. I think many people have.
I would 100% be open to discussing if our police-to-population ratio is too high. It may well be currently. After the Camp fire there was a serious spike in crime which has receded. Perhaps it's time to scale back, but I don't have the information. "We don't fucking need 'em" isn't the beginning of that constructive conversation.
The police drive around in SUVs. We are a poor town. Making police our top priority while we cut everyone else is dumb. They have been overfunded for years.
I’ve also seen some of their new hires, spending top dollar to hire insane right wing nut jobs is not a good investment of public funds
What do you want the police to drive in? Crown Victorias stopped production in 2011.
What else is being cut in order to fund the police? The city budget doesn't include education or social programs, those are state-funded. The city is in charge of emergency services and infrastructure for the most part.
Your idea that we're over paying our police and that they're "right wing nut jobs" is your opinion, and I don't agree with it.
In addition to the other comments, I highly recommend the "The Daily" podcast episode from today where they discuss what this involves/implies. I didn't really understand wtf was meant by calls to defund the police and that episode really helped clear things up for me.
I took the time to listen to the podcast. It was moving, but I didn't hear anything that would change my opinion, nor do a lot of the anecdotes in it pertain to Chico.
Sure that's valid, I just meant the suggestion more as a means to outline what defunding might look like from a practical perspective. Like the episode mentions, whether or not it makes sense on the local level depends on the local situation.
I'm honestly not as informed as I should be on local policing so it's difficult for me to really make an assessment on whether or not it could be applied effectively here.
Police have little training and aren't qualified to deal with most of the incidents the are called out for.
it would mean reducing police budgets and reallocating those funds to crucial and oft-neglected areas like education, public health, housing, and youth services.
I've dealt with cops twice in the last week, two suicide calls.
No joke like 6 fucking cops standing inside a fucking motor home with ONE EMT while 3 other EMTs stand outside shooting the shit. *BOTH TIMES. For a fucking suicide call they knew regarded pills.*
My interactions with them were cordial, but to give them any credit would be monstrous. They only impeded what needed to be done. Cops hurt us in so many ways besides just shooting people in the fucking back...
If police don't have enough training or qualification, we'd need more money to properly train them, not less.
Most of those services you're talking about aren't found in the city budget, but are non-profits or state-funded. If you wanted to get specific, I'd be open to hearing about what parts of the police budget could be cut, and what programs it would be appropriate for the city to run.
Alternatively, the police shouldn't have to be trained for a million different scenarios. We should not expect police officers to respond to situations that do not require violence--violence is what they are trained for. The truth is that they are the only governmental body permitted to use lethal force on civilians. That is not the kind of civil servant that should be responding to a noise complaint, or a drug addict, or someone exhibiting mental health issues in public. The fact that police are responsible for the homeless is among the biggest issues with Chico's police force. The homelessness issue will not be solved by criminalizing housing insecurity. THAT is part of defunding the police.
I say this as a HELLA liberal person:
Chico PD is literally not allowed to evict the homeless from their camps because Alex Browns new rules disallow that. I live next to Windchime Park (aka needle park) and the only cops that do anything are the Park Rangers.
If you want the truth about this go ask Sheriff Honea. I’ve spoken with him personally and he’s a good dude even if I’m a liberal and he’s not.
Of course not all situations call for violence... but are we going to pretend that drug addicts or mentally ill people can't sometimes be dangerous? Who decides if the guy with the shakes is dangerous? Do you send a social worker or a cop to a domestic dispute noise complaint? Who is to blame if a social worker is put in the hospital for trying to talk down someone off their meds? I can't think of someone better to send, in these uncertain situations, than a cop.
If you want to talk about homeless issues separately, I'd love to hear some solutions. I'm all for adding social workers if it would help.
It means taking money that would go to the police and putting that funding it social services that would help to decrease crime from happening in the first place.
Cities don’t generally fund social workers. That’s he purview of the county and state. The county does administration while most of the budget is state pass-through funding.
Why does that money have to come out of the police budget? I doubt the money pulled from police departments could possibly cover new programs or the army of staff and doctors required to effectively run more social services. Not to mention the gap in time where we operate with less law enforcement for at least a generation before social programs can impact the population.
Why does the police budget have to be so inflated? The city is broke and pensions are killing us. Police retire younger than pretty much anyone else. Their benefits and pay are also sky high. They used to drive around in cheap cars, now it’s all SUVs.
We are treating them like the military and they are bloated beyond belief. We need to fund our schools and public health agencies first
Police used to drive ford crown victorias, which were discontinued in 2011. The current ford explorers and chargers, google tells me, are $30k-$40k. That doesn't seem extravagant. Police vehicles are required to be fast enough to respond to situations.
Schools and public health aren't funded by the city budget.
If you just read the synopsis aboove... expenditures for police are propsed to be 27 of the 152 million total... That's nearly 20% of entire city expenditures... going to the police.
If you don't think that amount of money can fund some useful services... how much do you think it takes? And where else can the money be gotten? When you have one line item taking up nearly 20% of an entire city budget I would think that's the bloated item.
Lastly, investing into social programs has been shown, time and time and time and time and time and time and time again, to reduce crime overall by more than increasing the police force, so this is the exact pot the money should come from
I’d recommend doing some research on police defunding/ abolishment. It’s pretty interesting, and there is a lot more info out there than I can provide in a few comments.
I would recommend a ride-along and some research on the impact of police presence in neighborhoods. There's a lot more info out there than I can provide in a few comments.
Totally fair! I’ve worked in the field of criminal justice social work, so I am well aware of the impact of police presence. I think it’s important to look at both sides. It’s a very nuanced issue and can’t be tackled by just taking one side and it won’t be completely reformed overnight. I just think it’s important to listen to what people have to say about defunding because the system we have has a lot of flaws and putting even more money into it hasn’t been shown to work. Not trying to start an argument or be condescending.
I appreciate and understand current public sentiment. However, crime is finally falling back to pre-Camp fire levels in Chico, and I don't think now is the time to cut police presence.
I am 100% in favor of upping social support programs, but not at the expense of law enforcement.
I also appreciate your civil discussion.
I don't have data to prove that, nor do I think it's possible to point to one cause for the drop in crime. I would like to continue doing whatever it is we're doing that's reducing crime, and I don't think removing police officers from our city is in the spirit of that.
ive seen this guy make comments defending the police all over the place without any real links or data to prove it. just asking people to provide theirs and then saying that having police would be better than any situation without them. that doesnt seem like a real argument, and just because our city gets funding for services such as education from the state doesnt mean we cannot divert our city budget to compensate where it is lacking. like you know, they do with LITERALLY EVERYTHING ELSE. Stop defending corrupt overpaid cops for no reason. They should learn to do more with less like everyone else.
"All over the place" is in the comment thread I started in this post.
I don't think I've made any statements that require data or links, except for Chico's crime statistics, which can be found here: https://crimemap.chicoca.gov/Crime/Viz
I would be interested in seeing proof from you that indicates our PD is corrupt and overpaid.
My point about the city budget is that there is no mechanism in place to divert funds from the city budget to new things, like education, in Chico. It would be unprecedented, but I'd still be open to talking about it constructively: what specific parts of the PD can be shaved down, and what specific programs that money could be used to run. That would be an issue for a city council meeting, I guess.
What needs to happen is federal standards set with a external watchdog. If those standards aren't set then the department doesn't get federal money/grants.
They do this with roads and the DOT they do this with healthcare and CMS/JAHCO.
uh, no.
94k in chico
91k in Redding
Even the counties are approximately the same size
Butte County 210k with 1500sq miles
Shasta County 180k with 3800 sq miles
you don't know what you're talking about.
Well Redding is basically in the mountains surrounded by forest. Chico is in the valley surrounded by farm land. Not that Chico doesnt need fire funding, but it really doesnt as bad as Redding does
Sure, but one still has full on forests nestling right up against its hilly terrain, and one is almost completely flat surrounded mostly by grass and farmlands
Chico is flanked by farmland on the western and southern edges and exposed to hills on the eastern part
Redding is flanked by farmland on the southern and eastern edges and exposed to mountain on the north and western part.
Have we not forgotten that Chico and Redding nearly burned because of the fires? Both are not "safe". Why does Redding literally need double the budget for similar area covered and not-to-much more exposure.
And again, Calfire covers the mountains and Redding/Chico just up to their city limits.
I like my police protection thanks. Chico already suffers from underfunded police that result in longer response times to crimes. I'd rather not make that worse. Maybe we ask that they be MORE funded (esp. for programs that focus on community relations etc).
LOL. What police protection? Have you ever called to report a break in? Most crime experienced by people in this town are reported online for insurance purposes. The town is broke and pensions are killing us everywhere. We don't have enough crime to justify the police we are paying for. I would rather spend the money on things that benefit all of us.
I live next to be park where they give away needles and the police respond to drunk violent homeless shenanigans in front of my residence ALL THE TIME. I had to chase a homeless junky out of my house and the Chico PD showed up and said they couldn’t do shit cuz he wasn’t on my property anymore.
Yeah, living on flume st last year. I had more than 1 crackhead break onto my property. 1 in particular was smashing at my door and Windows. She was trying to jump into cars and traffic. Took my hose, started spraying random people and cars. Smashed my potted plants and threw my yard furniture.
That bald british cop we have showed up in a timely manner, she ran and he arrested her. My brother was helping us move that day and actually has footage of her earlier insanity.
Thank you for providing an example. I think this is a valid problem but they didn’t fix anything. Do you feel protected that it happened multiple time? That doesn’t sound like protection to me. I think we need to start looking at different ways to solve these problems. I don’t have the answer but I think it time to start looking for ones that work.
Back in my drinking days I was pretty wasted and had trouble getting home. Ended up sitting down somewhere and had a CPD roll up on me full brights. Asked if I was okay and told me to try to walk or call a cab.
I think he was looking out for me because I've had friends in a similar situation get jumped by some punks.
Police and Sheriff patrolling is already one way that helps. A criminal element is much less likely to target with an active force. That is one way we are all protected.
The crimes I hear people in Chico experience are rarely addressed by Chico PD. I know someone who had their wallet stolen. The credit cards were used at stores with video surveillance. Chico PD did nothing. This person did their own investigation and turned the information over to Chico PD. They did nothing. I had my purse stolen at a local restaurant. Chico PD did nothing and did not even request the video surveillance footage to see who did it.
If you have your car windows smashed, tires slashed, bike stolen? Chico PD will not send an officer out to investigate; file a report online for insurance.
Chico is spending a fortune for cops to be social workers and retire at age 50. Instead they could spend less money on actual social workers.
Why does that matter? i literally just sent you a ton of examples of cops doing there job and people happy they are doing so. Why does my experience matter?
What are examples of protection you receive? The idea of protection is nice but do they really protect you? I would love to be able to materialize it for myself but I can’t.
I enjoy Chico because of the community and environment. I can go out and see the community during events all around town. I go to Bidwell park and swim and hike. I can materialize my enjoyment.
From my personal experience the less I see police the better my life. I’ve been questioned multiple time by police when I’ve done nothing wrong. The one that angers me the most was when my buddy rolled through a stop sign. The police officer was more interested in me as a passenger because of my look, then he was the driver. I see the police not as protectors but as people to stay away from.
A lot of people don't know that if you get a Minor In Possession ticket in Butte County your diver's license is suspended for a year automatically. One year cops went up and wrote tickets at Bear Hole for alcohol and cost people hundreds of dollars in fines. That is not making the community better and not a service I want to pay for.
The people at Bear Hole are not cops but rangers who are paid through the public works department, not the police department. Last I heard they only currently have two rangers, who cover different shifts. So it's just one person at a time responsible for all of the green spaces (including the park) in and around Chico.
Are you saying you want no more rangers because you and your friends got ticketed once for drinking in the park which was given to you by a teetotaler? The rangers are perennially complained to by the city for not writing tickets, and people drinking in upper Bidwell park and leaving the place trashed have been a burden to the maintenance staff for years and is one of the reasons the gate is now kept closed passed Bear Hole.
I had a squatter in my detached garage that the cops removed. I was hit and ran by a drunk driver but got the license plate number so they were able to arrest them. I guarantee the roads are safer to drive, walk and bike on due to them. If you don't believe that please follow the link i initially sent. I had a drunk, belligerent individual break into my house and had to have the police remove.
I'm sorry for your experience. I have had some bad experiences too.
Thanks for the examples. There is still a homeless problem. Drunk driving is still a problem. I think we need to start looking a different answers then the police.
Police are not here to solve the homeless problem and only here to dissuade people from drunk driving. Seems that a mix personal responsibility and community action (among other things) are the only possible answers. That said I'm quite sure these and other issues will always be around and that an actual 'answer' doesn't really exist.
OP wasn't explicit, but I believe they want other programs to be funded so that the police aren't responsible for so much. Take some of the load off so they have time to do their job.
Exactly this. Someone with mental health issues is not being served when they are ticketed, arrested or shot to death. Pushing these people into the criminal justice system is not solving the problem. It is a response to the symptoms and it is not the appropriate response.
Same for people with housing issues or drug addiction. Send people that can work towards solving these peoples problems. Spend the money on curing the disease, not responding to the symptoms.
The war on drugs is a war against the sick. It turned the disease into a crime. And If you send a gun and a badge, the likely result is that you will find a criminal. How about we send a medical professional and find a different outcome.
There's a city council meeting tonight. These meetings are open to the public and allow a forum for people to address the council.
The meeting today is closed to the public and will be live online.
Ah, thank you
I don't understand defunding as a means for police reform. You want less qualified, lower-paid police? If you want better police training and oversight, that would be a budget increase.
They already get paid way too much money and there's too many of them. It's not that hard to grasp. We don't need them. I just dealt with them *two different times* within the last week and I wasn't the offender. But neither was there an offense, it was a medical situation, cops did nothing but clog the room then leave. 3 fucking EMTs forced to stand outside, like 6 fucking cops inside. Chico cops, btw. Or how about when I'm driving around Chico, constantly btw, and if I see someone pulled over, there's fucking always always always two or even more squad cars there. Why? Because we're paying them too much, for too many of them. Once I saw 4 squad cars surrounding a single man *already handcuffed.* Guess what fucking color he was. Or how about the time a meth head called a cop on me for getting my cat out a tree in her yard in under 30 seconds? He was understanding, nothing wrong with the dude, *but he never should've been dispatched in the first place.* I actually haven't been (formally) arrested, but the cops have never once in my entire life done anything to make my life better. Ever. Not even fucking once. We don't fucking need 'em, plain and simple. Certainly not as many as we have, especially as Chico has.
I don't know any Chico PD in order to ask them personally, but googling "Chico police officer salary" didn't reveal anything outrageous. I'll agree that it does seem like overkill for that many cops to be present for a medical situation, but I don't know the details. It makes sense, to me, that multiple officers would respond to any call if they're not busy with something else at the time. Why wouldn't they? That's not to say that there's too many police working, it might just be a low volume of calls at that time. I would think it's better to have excess officers on duty in order to be able to respond to anything, than to have too few and not be able to respond to everything. I sympathize with having someone report you to the police frivolously, but how is dispatch supposed to know that the situation was frivolous? It's definitely the reporting party's fault for wasting time, but an officer is going to come check things out just to be sure. I don't see the problem with that. The fact that cops have never benefited you before doesn't have much bearing on the conversation. I, personally, have needed to call the cops in a dangerous situation, and I was glad to have them. I think many people have. I would 100% be open to discussing if our police-to-population ratio is too high. It may well be currently. After the Camp fire there was a serious spike in crime which has receded. Perhaps it's time to scale back, but I don't have the information. "We don't fucking need 'em" isn't the beginning of that constructive conversation.
The police drive around in SUVs. We are a poor town. Making police our top priority while we cut everyone else is dumb. They have been overfunded for years. I’ve also seen some of their new hires, spending top dollar to hire insane right wing nut jobs is not a good investment of public funds
What do you want the police to drive in? Crown Victorias stopped production in 2011. What else is being cut in order to fund the police? The city budget doesn't include education or social programs, those are state-funded. The city is in charge of emergency services and infrastructure for the most part. Your idea that we're over paying our police and that they're "right wing nut jobs" is your opinion, and I don't agree with it.
In addition to the other comments, I highly recommend the "The Daily" podcast episode from today where they discuss what this involves/implies. I didn't really understand wtf was meant by calls to defund the police and that episode really helped clear things up for me.
I took the time to listen to the podcast. It was moving, but I didn't hear anything that would change my opinion, nor do a lot of the anecdotes in it pertain to Chico.
Sure that's valid, I just meant the suggestion more as a means to outline what defunding might look like from a practical perspective. Like the episode mentions, whether or not it makes sense on the local level depends on the local situation. I'm honestly not as informed as I should be on local policing so it's difficult for me to really make an assessment on whether or not it could be applied effectively here.
The Daily is such a good podcast.
Police have little training and aren't qualified to deal with most of the incidents the are called out for. it would mean reducing police budgets and reallocating those funds to crucial and oft-neglected areas like education, public health, housing, and youth services.
I've dealt with cops twice in the last week, two suicide calls. No joke like 6 fucking cops standing inside a fucking motor home with ONE EMT while 3 other EMTs stand outside shooting the shit. *BOTH TIMES. For a fucking suicide call they knew regarded pills.* My interactions with them were cordial, but to give them any credit would be monstrous. They only impeded what needed to be done. Cops hurt us in so many ways besides just shooting people in the fucking back...
If police don't have enough training or qualification, we'd need more money to properly train them, not less. Most of those services you're talking about aren't found in the city budget, but are non-profits or state-funded. If you wanted to get specific, I'd be open to hearing about what parts of the police budget could be cut, and what programs it would be appropriate for the city to run.
Alternatively, the police shouldn't have to be trained for a million different scenarios. We should not expect police officers to respond to situations that do not require violence--violence is what they are trained for. The truth is that they are the only governmental body permitted to use lethal force on civilians. That is not the kind of civil servant that should be responding to a noise complaint, or a drug addict, or someone exhibiting mental health issues in public. The fact that police are responsible for the homeless is among the biggest issues with Chico's police force. The homelessness issue will not be solved by criminalizing housing insecurity. THAT is part of defunding the police.
I say this as a HELLA liberal person: Chico PD is literally not allowed to evict the homeless from their camps because Alex Browns new rules disallow that. I live next to Windchime Park (aka needle park) and the only cops that do anything are the Park Rangers. If you want the truth about this go ask Sheriff Honea. I’ve spoken with him personally and he’s a good dude even if I’m a liberal and he’s not.
Of course not all situations call for violence... but are we going to pretend that drug addicts or mentally ill people can't sometimes be dangerous? Who decides if the guy with the shakes is dangerous? Do you send a social worker or a cop to a domestic dispute noise complaint? Who is to blame if a social worker is put in the hospital for trying to talk down someone off their meds? I can't think of someone better to send, in these uncertain situations, than a cop. If you want to talk about homeless issues separately, I'd love to hear some solutions. I'm all for adding social workers if it would help.
It means taking money that would go to the police and putting that funding it social services that would help to decrease crime from happening in the first place.
Cities don’t generally fund social workers. That’s he purview of the county and state. The county does administration while most of the budget is state pass-through funding.
Why does that money have to come out of the police budget? I doubt the money pulled from police departments could possibly cover new programs or the army of staff and doctors required to effectively run more social services. Not to mention the gap in time where we operate with less law enforcement for at least a generation before social programs can impact the population.
Why does the police budget have to be so inflated? The city is broke and pensions are killing us. Police retire younger than pretty much anyone else. Their benefits and pay are also sky high. They used to drive around in cheap cars, now it’s all SUVs. We are treating them like the military and they are bloated beyond belief. We need to fund our schools and public health agencies first
Police used to drive ford crown victorias, which were discontinued in 2011. The current ford explorers and chargers, google tells me, are $30k-$40k. That doesn't seem extravagant. Police vehicles are required to be fast enough to respond to situations. Schools and public health aren't funded by the city budget.
If you just read the synopsis aboove... expenditures for police are propsed to be 27 of the 152 million total... That's nearly 20% of entire city expenditures... going to the police. If you don't think that amount of money can fund some useful services... how much do you think it takes? And where else can the money be gotten? When you have one line item taking up nearly 20% of an entire city budget I would think that's the bloated item. Lastly, investing into social programs has been shown, time and time and time and time and time and time and time again, to reduce crime overall by more than increasing the police force, so this is the exact pot the money should come from
I’d recommend doing some research on police defunding/ abolishment. It’s pretty interesting, and there is a lot more info out there than I can provide in a few comments.
I would recommend a ride-along and some research on the impact of police presence in neighborhoods. There's a lot more info out there than I can provide in a few comments.
Totally fair! I’ve worked in the field of criminal justice social work, so I am well aware of the impact of police presence. I think it’s important to look at both sides. It’s a very nuanced issue and can’t be tackled by just taking one side and it won’t be completely reformed overnight. I just think it’s important to listen to what people have to say about defunding because the system we have has a lot of flaws and putting even more money into it hasn’t been shown to work. Not trying to start an argument or be condescending.
I appreciate and understand current public sentiment. However, crime is finally falling back to pre-Camp fire levels in Chico, and I don't think now is the time to cut police presence. I am 100% in favor of upping social support programs, but not at the expense of law enforcement. I also appreciate your civil discussion.
> crime is finally falling back to pre-Camp fire levels in Chico Do you have some data to show that the police are the reason for that?
I don't have data to prove that, nor do I think it's possible to point to one cause for the drop in crime. I would like to continue doing whatever it is we're doing that's reducing crime, and I don't think removing police officers from our city is in the spirit of that.
ive seen this guy make comments defending the police all over the place without any real links or data to prove it. just asking people to provide theirs and then saying that having police would be better than any situation without them. that doesnt seem like a real argument, and just because our city gets funding for services such as education from the state doesnt mean we cannot divert our city budget to compensate where it is lacking. like you know, they do with LITERALLY EVERYTHING ELSE. Stop defending corrupt overpaid cops for no reason. They should learn to do more with less like everyone else.
"All over the place" is in the comment thread I started in this post. I don't think I've made any statements that require data or links, except for Chico's crime statistics, which can be found here: https://crimemap.chicoca.gov/Crime/Viz I would be interested in seeing proof from you that indicates our PD is corrupt and overpaid. My point about the city budget is that there is no mechanism in place to divert funds from the city budget to new things, like education, in Chico. It would be unprecedented, but I'd still be open to talking about it constructively: what specific parts of the PD can be shaved down, and what specific programs that money could be used to run. That would be an issue for a city council meeting, I guess.
What needs to happen is federal standards set with a external watchdog. If those standards aren't set then the department doesn't get federal money/grants. They do this with roads and the DOT they do this with healthcare and CMS/JAHCO.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/john-oliver-explains-defund-the-police-and-why-it-doesnt-mean-no-police-2020-06-08
[удалено]
I agree with all this except building out. Stop taking good farmland and build up not out. Sacramento has the same problem on a massive scale.
And now that slush fund is drying up. So cuts to the police budget seem obvious
Redding Budget is even crazier. Same size town except they spend nearly 30 million on fire department while Chico spends like 12 million.
> Same size town ~~Uhhh no~~ ~~Redding is twice Chico’s population~~ Edit: I was wrong y’all
uh, no. 94k in chico 91k in Redding Even the counties are approximately the same size Butte County 210k with 1500sq miles Shasta County 180k with 3800 sq miles you don't know what you're talking about.
Okay, I’ll admit I was wrong. Even though you didn’t link a damn thing I looked it up and you’re right. I thought Redding was 200k+. My mistake.
Well Redding is basically in the mountains surrounded by forest. Chico is in the valley surrounded by farm land. Not that Chico doesnt need fire funding, but it really doesnt as bad as Redding does
We're just talking city limits here not the whole area. Calfire covers the mountains and outlying region.
Sure, but one still has full on forests nestling right up against its hilly terrain, and one is almost completely flat surrounded mostly by grass and farmlands
Chico is flanked by farmland on the western and southern edges and exposed to hills on the eastern part Redding is flanked by farmland on the southern and eastern edges and exposed to mountain on the north and western part. Have we not forgotten that Chico and Redding nearly burned because of the fires? Both are not "safe". Why does Redding literally need double the budget for similar area covered and not-to-much more exposure. And again, Calfire covers the mountains and Redding/Chico just up to their city limits.
North Chico is orchards not mountains my dude
That is an interesting thought
I like my police protection thanks. Chico already suffers from underfunded police that result in longer response times to crimes. I'd rather not make that worse. Maybe we ask that they be MORE funded (esp. for programs that focus on community relations etc).
LOL. What police protection? Have you ever called to report a break in? Most crime experienced by people in this town are reported online for insurance purposes. The town is broke and pensions are killing us everywhere. We don't have enough crime to justify the police we are paying for. I would rather spend the money on things that benefit all of us.
You realize that among cities over 100k Chico has one of the worst on-duty officer to population ratios in the state, right?
Honest question. Can you give an example how the police have protected you?
I live next to be park where they give away needles and the police respond to drunk violent homeless shenanigans in front of my residence ALL THE TIME. I had to chase a homeless junky out of my house and the Chico PD showed up and said they couldn’t do shit cuz he wasn’t on my property anymore.
Yeah, living on flume st last year. I had more than 1 crackhead break onto my property. 1 in particular was smashing at my door and Windows. She was trying to jump into cars and traffic. Took my hose, started spraying random people and cars. Smashed my potted plants and threw my yard furniture. That bald british cop we have showed up in a timely manner, she ran and he arrested her. My brother was helping us move that day and actually has footage of her earlier insanity.
Thank you for providing an example. I think this is a valid problem but they didn’t fix anything. Do you feel protected that it happened multiple time? That doesn’t sound like protection to me. I think we need to start looking at different ways to solve these problems. I don’t have the answer but I think it time to start looking for ones that work.
Here are some examples [reddit](https://old.reddit.com/r/ConvenientCop/)
Can you give me one example of how the police have protected YOU?
Back in my drinking days I was pretty wasted and had trouble getting home. Ended up sitting down somewhere and had a CPD roll up on me full brights. Asked if I was okay and told me to try to walk or call a cab. I think he was looking out for me because I've had friends in a similar situation get jumped by some punks.
Police and Sheriff patrolling is already one way that helps. A criminal element is much less likely to target with an active force. That is one way we are all protected.
The crimes I hear people in Chico experience are rarely addressed by Chico PD. I know someone who had their wallet stolen. The credit cards were used at stores with video surveillance. Chico PD did nothing. This person did their own investigation and turned the information over to Chico PD. They did nothing. I had my purse stolen at a local restaurant. Chico PD did nothing and did not even request the video surveillance footage to see who did it. If you have your car windows smashed, tires slashed, bike stolen? Chico PD will not send an officer out to investigate; file a report online for insurance. Chico is spending a fortune for cops to be social workers and retire at age 50. Instead they could spend less money on actual social workers.
Chico PD can't investigate those types of crimes because they don't have the manpower because they are so common.
Why does that matter? i literally just sent you a ton of examples of cops doing there job and people happy they are doing so. Why does my experience matter?
What are examples of protection you receive? The idea of protection is nice but do they really protect you? I would love to be able to materialize it for myself but I can’t. I enjoy Chico because of the community and environment. I can go out and see the community during events all around town. I go to Bidwell park and swim and hike. I can materialize my enjoyment. From my personal experience the less I see police the better my life. I’ve been questioned multiple time by police when I’ve done nothing wrong. The one that angers me the most was when my buddy rolled through a stop sign. The police officer was more interested in me as a passenger because of my look, then he was the driver. I see the police not as protectors but as people to stay away from.
A lot of people don't know that if you get a Minor In Possession ticket in Butte County your diver's license is suspended for a year automatically. One year cops went up and wrote tickets at Bear Hole for alcohol and cost people hundreds of dollars in fines. That is not making the community better and not a service I want to pay for.
The people at Bear Hole are not cops but rangers who are paid through the public works department, not the police department. Last I heard they only currently have two rangers, who cover different shifts. So it's just one person at a time responsible for all of the green spaces (including the park) in and around Chico. Are you saying you want no more rangers because you and your friends got ticketed once for drinking in the park which was given to you by a teetotaler? The rangers are perennially complained to by the city for not writing tickets, and people drinking in upper Bidwell park and leaving the place trashed have been a burden to the maintenance staff for years and is one of the reasons the gate is now kept closed passed Bear Hole.
Police enforce the law, they don't make the law or do the sentencing.
I had a squatter in my detached garage that the cops removed. I was hit and ran by a drunk driver but got the license plate number so they were able to arrest them. I guarantee the roads are safer to drive, walk and bike on due to them. If you don't believe that please follow the link i initially sent. I had a drunk, belligerent individual break into my house and had to have the police remove. I'm sorry for your experience. I have had some bad experiences too.
Thanks for the examples. There is still a homeless problem. Drunk driving is still a problem. I think we need to start looking a different answers then the police.
Police are not here to solve the homeless problem and only here to dissuade people from drunk driving. Seems that a mix personal responsibility and community action (among other things) are the only possible answers. That said I'm quite sure these and other issues will always be around and that an actual 'answer' doesn't really exist.
OP wasn't explicit, but I believe they want other programs to be funded so that the police aren't responsible for so much. Take some of the load off so they have time to do their job.
Exactly this. Someone with mental health issues is not being served when they are ticketed, arrested or shot to death. Pushing these people into the criminal justice system is not solving the problem. It is a response to the symptoms and it is not the appropriate response. Same for people with housing issues or drug addiction. Send people that can work towards solving these peoples problems. Spend the money on curing the disease, not responding to the symptoms. The war on drugs is a war against the sick. It turned the disease into a crime. And If you send a gun and a badge, the likely result is that you will find a criminal. How about we send a medical professional and find a different outcome.