The proposed labor agreement with the Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis, which is currently on the agenda for discussion and likely an up or down vote at the upcoming Minneapolis City Council meeting March 22, includes a $7,000 sign-on and retention bonus for new recruits and existing officers alike. This bonus exists because of a court ruling requiring Minneapolis to get the number of officers on the police force up to the city charter requirement by June 2022.
On March 14, an appeals court reversed this decision, ruling that while the City Council is obligated to fund the police force sufficiently for 17 officers per 10,000 residents, the actual number of officers hired is at the discretion of the mayor ("Court says mayor decides number of cops," March 15). With this ruling there is no longer an urgency or even a mandate to hire more officers, and therefore, the rationale for the $7,000 sign-on and retention bonus is no longer valid.
While it is presumably likely that the majority of the community agrees that staffing levels are considerably lower than ideal within the Minneapolis Police Department (651 sworn officers as of April 2021 compared to funding provided by the City Council for 888), we no longer find ourselves with our backs against the wall, needing to take hasty, poorly thought-out actions to meet a court-imposed mandate.
Indeed, the task before us — to hire over 200 new officers — is a unique opportunity for the city to reimagine what the police force looks like, what the culture is. With this appeals court ruling, the city should remove the sign-on bonus from the new contract. The city should also slow down and take time to invest in the hiring process. How do we attract good candidates? How do we define good candidates? We could bring over 200 new officers into the ranks who all receive reformed training and orientation.
There is a great opportunity before us. Let's not blow it by throwing money at a problem to hire as fast as we can.
Ben Auckenthaler, Minneapolis
•••
For the sake of brevity, I will focus on only one of the fascist narratives that riddle last Wednesday's article about the most recent police intrusion into public privacy and safety: GPS tracking ("Suburban police battle car thefts with trackers," March 9). This article promotes the biased viewpoint that "illegal" is equivalent to "wrong," and therefore anyone committing a crime is a "bad guy," deserving of whatever punishment the police and the courts choose for them. This narrative is omnipresent in police mythos because it dehumanizes "criminals" enough to allow the police to feel justified in subjecting them to the atrocities of incarceration. Here is a contrasting and more hopeful narrative: "Crime" is not a monolith, and the "crimes" that police prosecute often arise from situations of poverty or trauma. If a given criminalized behavior negatively affects people, and not all of them do (see: smoking marijuana), then a systematic approach based in healing poverty and trauma will be far more effective than one that uses punishment and fear of further traumatization as a deterrent.