By the Board of the Police Commissioner’s Subcommittee to Define Defunding Police.

Executive Summary In Chapter 1, we discuss the genesis of the Subcommittee and elaborate on some of the substantive arguments that shape debates around defunding. We discuss the policy lenses we have used to produce this report, which include a health and disability lens, an Africentric lens, and an Indigenous and Mi’kmaw-led models. Chapter 2 In Chapter 2, we provide background regarding: 1. policing in HRM; 2. approaches to public safety in the HRM; and 3. the history of the movement to “defund the police” in the HRM. We explain how the police are governed, identify that our per capita spending on the HRP exceeds many other cities’ spending, and discuss how the police spend their time based on data they provided us and from Statistics Canada. Chapter 3A In Chapter 3(a), we provide the results of our public survey and our online consultation session. 2351 responses were received to the Subcommittee’s online survey, 19 individuals provided presentations, and 8 organizations provided written submissions. 56.8% of participants in our survey (1308) indicated support for the idea of defunding the police, while 43.2% of respondents (996) did not. Support for defunding was much higher amongst women and gender diverse folks than amongst men. Chapter 3B Chapter 3(b) details the results from a submission from the National Police Federation (“NPF”), which is the union that represents the RCMP around Canada. Two report authors then had a followup meeting with representatives from the NPF. While the NPF takes a strong stance against defunding, there are nonetheless shared areas of agreement and concern about the inadequate funding of social services; the use of police to fill roles that could more appropriately filled by service providers; the need for increased diversion from criminal systems for those experiencing mental health crises; and the complex problem of the police responses to unhoused people. We discuss these commonalities as well as important differences of opinion. Chapter 4 In Chapter 4, we lay out the “framework” for this report’s definition of defunding in Halifax Regional Municipality as a foundation for the rest of the report. We conclude, based on our research and consultation, that there are four “pillars” of defunding: 1. Reforms to police practices, oversight, and accountability; 2. Reforms aimed at “detasking” police and “retasking” more appropriate community service providers; 3. Legislative, regulatory, and policy reforms intended to promote community safety; and 4. Financial reforms aimed at tying police budgets to clear performance metrics and encouraging public participation in municipal budgeting, with the ultimate intention of decreasing budgetary allocations to police and increasing allocations to community-based social services. Chapter 5 In Chapter 5, we discuss reforms to police practices, oversight and accountability. Rather than recommend that the police do more training, we stress the need to evaluate existing training to see whether it’s actually working and also examine  how decisions regarding training are made. We recommend a full-scale review of all lethal and non-lethal use of force options available to police, with the aim of reducing use of force and disarming some officers (such as community response officers). We recommend that police policies be available to the public. We argue the Board is failing to adequately govern the police and make recommendations to improve this situation. We recommend that the Board abandon plans to implement body cams and push for meaningful accountability by advocating for progressive changes to the provincial Police Act. Chapter 6 In Chapter 6, we define what detasking is, then recommend that the city consider options to either partially or fully detask: 1. responding to incidents involving unhoused persons; 2. responding to incidents involving young persons; 3. responding to incidents of gender-based and intimate-partner violence; 4. responding to overdoses; and 5. responding to noise complaints. Chapter 6A In Chapter 6(a), we discuss the Mobile Mental Health Crisis Team in HRM, which pairs police and clinical staff, then overview different approaches Canadian and American municipalities are taking to move toward civilian led mental health crisis response. We recommend that Regional Council, in cooperation with the Police Board, divert the majority of crisis calls to non-police-involved teams. Chapter 6B In Chapter 6(b), we discuss different approaches municipalities are taking to remove police from the enforcement of motor vehicle offences and otherwise promote safety on the road. We recommend that the city continue to invest in public transit and traffic calming measures, advocate for the province to reduce the speed limit in residential area from 50 to 40 kilometers per hour, develop a civilian team to enforce motor vehicle offences and traffic-related bylaws and handle road closures for street events and protests and parades, and invest in speed and red light cameras. Chapter 6C In Chapter 6(c), we overview third party reporting programs around Canada, which allow those who have been impacted by sexual violence to report the assault to a non-police community organization. We recommend that the HRM create a third party reporting program and address funding gaps in sexual assault prevention and response services in the municipality through the creation of a grant program. Chapter 7 In Chapter 7, we focus our recommendations to go beyond policing and towards broader social reforms. We focus primarily on mental health and substance use services, affordable housing, and promoting public engagement in municipal budgeting. We recommend that the HRM convene a working group to provide advice on developing a health- and social equity-based approach to drug decriminalization and also establish a grant program for registered non-profit or charitable organizations in order to promote access to mental health and substance use services. In terms of housing, we recommend that HRM uses a human-rights based-approach in developing its strategy to affordable housing and homelessness, and that the Municipality also significantly increase its investment in affordable housing in line with other jurisdictions in the region. In terms of the budget, we recommend that HRM align their per capita spending on the HRP ($393 in 2020) with other peer cities such as London, Ontario ($272 in 2020), and tie the approval of the annual budget to performance metrics. Finally, we recommend that the city establish participatory budgeting processes to let the public decide how to redistribute funds taken from the police budget    

Halifax, NS, CA: The Commission, 2024. 218p.

By Noah Smith-Drelich

For all the discussion of defunding the police, far less attention has been given to how the police are funded. This Article shines a light on the wide range of sources, public and private, from which police draw their funding. This examination complicates the widely accepted notion of police as locally controlled and wholly public entities. Even when police policy-making remains ostensibly in local hands, funding from nonlocal or nonpublic sources will distort the incentives underlying policing decisions. This Article examines the significant influence of external funding on the police, articulating the role that the source of police funding plays in police control and accountability. I conclude by proposing two novel reforms, each of which could be adopted under current law. First, the distorting effects of outside funding could be countered by adopting a more dynamic remedial approach in suits for constitutional wrongdoing. Second, these distorting effects could be reduced or even eliminated entirely by barring local agencies and departments from accepting outside funding.

Ohio State Law Journal, Vol. 84:3, 2023. 55p.

By Charles Fain Lehman

In the wake of the death of George Floyd and the summer of protests and riots that followed, left-wing activists and politicians have called not simply for reforms to policing, but for its abolition. In order to eliminate the possibility of wrongful killing of civilians, these advocates say, we should defund police departments, reroute their budgets to social services, and replace beat cops with unarmed civilian alternatives wherever possible. In the first half of this brief, I outline why such proposals would be a disaster for public safety. In short, they:

• Have little basis in evidence;

• Would increase the risk posed to civilian employees;

• Would diminish the crime-reduction benefits of current police work; and

• Would have little impact on the size, and therefore effect, of social welfare spending.

While replacing the police is a misguided idea, that does not mean that lawmakers should dismiss altogether the idea of nonpolice crime-fighting tools. Indeed, there are several evidence-based, effective means to mitigate crime through channels other than more police work. These complementary tools can help relieve stress on overtaxed and understaffed police forces. In the second half of this report, I lay out the evidence behind three options:

• Reducing crime through changes to the built environment, such as cleaning up vacant lots and green public spaces;

• Using “nonpolice guardians,” such as neighborhood watches and CCTV cameras, to extend the police’s reach;

• Targeting problematic alcohol use, a major cause of crime.

New York: The Manhattan Institute, 2021. 20p.

By Nicole Gelinas

  Since mid-2020, government spending on American police departments has come under intense scrutiny nationwide. The New York Police Department (NYPD) is no exception. Leftwing critics supporting the “defund the police” movement charge that spending on police is crowding out necessary spending on civilian agencies that provide education, housing, health care, and social services. Even moderate Democrats and supposedly neutral news outlets accept the premise that police spending is either too high, relative to the rest of the city budget, or, at minimum, keeping up with the rest of the city budget. What’s missing from the “defund” argument and even from news sources is context. How large is the NYPD budget, relative to the overall city budget? How has spending on policing changed over the years and decades, relative to the entire budget? How large is uniformed-police staffing, relative to the overall city workforce? To answer these questions, this paper analyzes four decades of New York City police spending, from the recovery after the 1970s fiscal crisis through the pandemic years of the early 2020s. This paper puts spending and officer headcount in the context of the overall budget. The paper finds that operational spending on the uniformed NYPD, contrary to conventional wisdom, has shrunk substantially as a share of the city budget since the early 1980s, both in terms of spending and the size of the uniformed-officer workforce.

New York: The Manhattan Institute, 2023. 13p.

By Zach Goldberg

  After the killing of George Floyd in May 2020, a surprising number of Democrats embraced calls to “defund” the police. According to data from the 2020 Cooperative Election Survey, 35.4% of Democrats expressed support for reducing spending on law enforcement. Even as violent crime surged across the country, many Democrats remained supportive of defunding, which was supposedly necessary to achieve racial justice and equity. But support for defunding and depolicing is actually higher among white (and Asian) Democrats than among black and Hispanic Democrats. Relatively stronger support among the former, more affluent groups has led some to suggest that these attitudes are “luxury beliefs” that the privileged can afford to adopt to signal their virtue because they do not have to suffer the consequences. The luxury beliefs thesis thus suggests that socioeconomic status (SES) drives support for depolicing. But it is also possible that a genuine moral-political ideology, not affluence, plays an important role. This report is an attempt to empirically test the luxury beliefs hypothesis. It ultimately finds support for both the SES and ideology-centered accounts.

New York: Manhattan Institute, 2022. 57p.

By Michael J. D. Vermeer, Dulani Woods, Brian A. Jackson

Recent nationwide protests against police use of force and perceptions of systemic racism in law enforcement in the United States have sparked renewed conversation about problems in the U.S. criminal justice system. Much of this conversation has been focused on the idea of "defunding the police." In this Perspective, the authors describe police leaders' and practitioners' views on defunding the police — that is, budgeting less money for police and more for other public safety strategies — and explain why revisiting the role of law enforcement in society could have broader appeal than some think. To do this, the authors draw on experience in workshops held over the past seven years by the Priority Criminal Justice Needs Initiative. In these workshops, police leaders and practitioners have voiced frustration with being the default party that is expected to respond to many complex social problems, such as homelessness, substance use, and mental health crises. Practitioners argue that nonenforcement strategies are often more effective than policing in solving many of these problems. Therefore, the authors suggest that there might be significant law enforcement support for some "defunding" strategies — as long as these efforts relieve some of the unrealistic expectations on police. The authors also describe current police functions that could be reassigned to other community partners, discuss factors that communities must consider if they choose to reallocate police functions, and note evidence of broader support for such reforms in the general population.

Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2020. 20p.