Cops and awnings

We didn’t have a City Council meeting this week, but there was something out of the June 17 session that I wasn’t able to tackle in our last issue. If you read Howard Hardee’s coverage of the budget portion of that meeting (see “An immodest proposal,” Newslines, June 19), you know that community-safety advocates Clean and Safe Chico proposed a four-year plan to buoy the Chico Police Department’s staffing levels from 56 officers to 83.

You can read the entire proposal at the Clean and Safe Chico website (cleanandsafechico.com). I did. A couple of things struck me. But the biggest by far was a portion that talks about how to fund the increased staffing. It will cost $3.6 million annually by year four, according to the group. Where will that money come from? One of the plan’s five ideas is “new revenue sources,” such as a waste-hauling franchise agreement. Another suggests “proactive economic growth” would generate more tax revenue. And yet another talks about a public-safety tax.

In other words, three of the five ideas involve taxation.

I hate to sound like a tea partyer, but I’m not about to advocate for new taxes. Here’s why: The city of Chico could probably staff the Chico Police Department with 83 officers if it could negotiate reasonable wages and benefits contracts with city employee unions, especially the Chico Police Officers’ Association and Chico Firefighters Association—which together account for more than 80 percent of the city’s entire operating budget.

Both unions made some concessions during the last round of negotiations, but, as was made clear during last Tuesday’s meeting, those contracts remain an obstacle to the city’s financial solvency. As Administrative Services Director Chris Constantin asked, “How do we sustain ourselves when the cost of benefits increases faster than revenues?”

Until those costs are reined in, I don’t see any reason to support such a plan.

Speaking of Chico police, by now you may have seen the video of Officer David Bailey yanking a 64-year-old man by the arms to get him out of an overturned SUV following an accident a few weeks back (see “Video sparks controversy,” by Meredith J. Graham, page 8). Footage of that scenario got picked up by the Glenn Beck-founded and -owned right-wing website TheBlaze, and has logged about 34,000 views and some pretty harsh criticism of Bailey’s actions.

But I’d urge caution before rebuking this Chico cop. For one, the video is edited. So, we haven’t seen a full picture of his interactions with that man, Joseph Rosales. What we do know is that Rosales’ vehicle struck a support beam holding up a large metal awning, damaging its structural integrity. We also can tell Bailey is concerned that the structure was going to collapse and that he tried unsuccessfully to talk Rosales into climbing out of the SUV before resorting to (literal) arm-twisting. Does it look harsh? Yes. Was there a better way to handle the situation? Probably. But, given the circumstances, I understand why Bailey used pain to motivate Rosales to exit the vehicle. What do you think?