This is an absolutely terrible idea. I can hardly believe that the mayor and CM Palmisano are even seriously floating it. https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-to-consider-bringing-in-outside-police-officers-amid-shortage/573021751/

These are CONTINGENCY dollars they are looking to spend. $496,800 in rainy day funds.

I don't know if folks have caught this, but we've been spending these dollars down all year. This is our rainy day fund and it has been RAINING.

Here's the fiscal note: https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/RCA/FiscalNote/7059

Rainy day funds have to be paid back. If we spend these dollars, in order to carry a healthy contingency in the future we will have to backfill them.

And it's STILL RAINING. Do we really expect covid to end soon? Shouldn't we expect huge wrongful death settlements soon?

The fiscal irresponsibility of this - from folks who like to play at being fiscal hawks - is jaw-dropping. Dipping into contingency? Right now? For THIS?

If we're willing to spend down our reserves in this moment, as winter approaches, crime and violence go down (they're cyclical and follow the weather), we have other, higher priorities.

Like our neighbors living in goddamned tents.

I'm pretty sure someone out there could figure out how to make almost $500,000 go a loooooong way towards housing unhoused folks, as the weather turns. Even just as a bridge to Indoor Villages opening.

And having seen what we got from having something like $500,000 of outside law enforcement resources effectively put in a pile and burned last week in the overreaction to the protest on I-94, I'm not even sure I would take that value in outside law enforcement services FOR FREE.

Anyway: to hell with this idea. Hard pass.

Still struggling to wrap my head around this.

What's the plan, here? Is it even to really pass this? Can they really think there are the votes for this? Is the plan for this to fail, and then say All Crime is Your Fault to the CMs who vote no?