>>he saying this to scare more tax dollars out of the residents? <<
Yes. When liberal municipalities or states run out of OPM, (note Conservatives ones don’t) they immediately slash: NOT welfare and other entitlements but safety, fire, police, etc.
I read in a thread here about one city that won’t send police to a crime unless “blood is involved.”
liberals don’t care about people, they care about power and control=more OPM.
Normally I would automatically assume the same thing but it appears the libs really hate this guy, he has REALLY pissed them off with the suggestion that people defend themselves lol.
“Yes. When liberal municipalities or states run out of OPM, (note Conservatives ones don’t) they immediately slash: NOT welfare and other entitlements but safety, fire, police, etc.”
While as a general truth, what you say applies to state government in spades, the cities, OTOH don’t spend their money on welfare and they do have “contracts” which preclude unilateral reductions in benes to their employees. I’ve read extensively about the current spate of municipal bankruptcies here in California and the one thing that they have in common is that they “public safety” employment is at least 80% of their budgets. So, in a nutshell, when they run out of money, they have no option but to cut the cops. The firefighters are another deal because here they usually have independent FP districts that are separate from the municipal government. The real issue is what we are going to pay cops going forward, what they get in retirement, and when they retire. Now, it’s at age 50 with a full ride into eternity and that just can’t stand. I recall in Vallejo, that a police lieutenent was getting $311k per year in pay and benefits, and he could sail off into the sunset at 50 with most of that staying with him.
“Yes. When liberal municipalities or states run out of OPM, (note Conservatives ones don’t) they immediately slash: NOT welfare and other entitlements but safety, fire, police, etc.”
While as a general truth, what you say applies to state government in spades, the cities, OTOH don’t spend their money on welfare and they do have “contracts” which preclude unilateral reductions in benes to their employees. I’ve read extensively about the current spate of municipal bankruptcies here in California and the one thing that they have in common is that they “public safety” employment is at least 80% of their budgets. So, in a nutshell, when they run out of money, they have no option but to cut the cops. The firefighters are another deal because here they usually have independent FP districts that are separate from the municipal government. The real issue is what we are going to pay cops going forward, what they get in retirement, and when they retire. Now, it’s at age 50 with a full ride into eternity and that just can’t stand. I recall in Vallejo, that a police lieutenent was getting $311k per year in pay and benefits, and he could sail off into the sunset at 50 with most of that staying with him.