zlacker

>>pseudo+(OP)
The last 40 years of austerity politics in the US have starved the beast [0] so greatly that the only remaining public infrastructure that functions as it's intended to is policing. For example, in the city of LA, 53% of the city's unrestricted general fund budget went to the LAPD.

For everything else, there are parallel infrastructures for the haves - private education, private healthcare, privatized transit, etc. It's something I've thought about a lot in the last few weeks.

On top of that, there is some research that suggests communities rate smaller police forces better than larger ones [1].

> To test this, Ostrom worked with the Indianapolis government and her students to measure the quality of policing. Surprisingly, against common assumptions, they found that the smaller the police force, the more positively residents evaluated the police services they got.

> "Increasing the size of [the police force] consistently had a negative impact on the level of output generated as well as on efficiency of service provision… smaller police departments … consistently outperformed their better trained and better financed larger neighbors.”

> But why did this happen? To explain this, Elinor Ostrom argued that in small communities with small police forces, citizens are more active in community safety. Officers in smaller police forces also have more knowledge of the local area & more trust from people.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

[1] https://twitter.com/a_vansi/status/1270406823158468614

>>pizza+At
And this is exactly where the "Defund the Police" movement comes from and seems like an extremely good movement to pursue - shift that budget balance back in favor of specialized agencies that can better support social needs rather than forcing it all onto the police force. I really just wish it had gotten a better name since that title for the idea really divides people before they even open their minds.

>>munk-a+Vu
Defunding the police is generally unpopular where I live. My big city is growing at about 22% decade over decade and will likely surpass San Jose in population over the next 10 years. It is also the lowest density big city in the US. In order to support the growing population the police force must continue to grow as well. The fastest growing area of the city is also the least policed. This not result of negligence from the city but just the geographic direction the city is growing towards and the funding limitations to meet the growing needs of the community. There are plans to put a precinct in my area of the city, which is strongly wanted, but it won’t happen if the police are defunded.

>>austin+cC
What are the current home zoning vs planned updates/build for this area?

San Jose has issue with single family units over dominating the area; the need for denser housing options hasn't abated, nor for the surrounding county and the greater bay area. That has to be planned with local Transpo options, and now you enter the quagmire of 4 transportation agencies systems in the South Bay at least across several modes.

>>plusse+6G
The land area of my big city is massive, so there is no risk of running out of land. The problem with that is the increases of traffic and commute times. The area where I live is also absolutely dominated by single family residences. Developers have been building 500+ houses per year in the 5 mile radius of my house over the last decade and space for more single family residences in this location is running out. Developers are turning from single family dwellings towards apartment complexes. The current residents in the area are strongly opposed to the development of multi family units that will only further congest already unbearable traffic conditions. The city had to widen roads to accommodate the rapidly growing population but keeps putting it off.