“Funding Police” (The Columbian, Aug. 9) focused on law enforcement budgeting. However, would it benefit us to focus on more fundamental questions? When we say “public safety,” what do we really want?
For example, consider sexual assault. Which is more important to us: apprehending and jailing rapists after they’ve caused devastating harm, or a society with less sexual assault? Currently, we invest more, through policing and incarceration, on the former than the latter. What if our YWCA, with their expertise combating sexual assault, played a leading role in setting budgeting priorities?
The article also notes how the Vancouver Police Department laments policy and funding decisions to dump noncriminal social problems (mental illness, addiction, homelessness, etc.) in the lap of ill-prepared police and courts. Does VPD administration understand nearly as well as the parents of children experiencing mental illness and those experiencing homelessness that some of our budgeting is upside down? Might adequate funding of mental health care, addiction treatment, affordable housing, and paying living wages require fewer police, and bring greater public safety?
These taxing and budgeting decisions go beyond the city of Vancouver and Clark County to at least the state level. Join the questioning and the search for the best answers.
