Some people think Sacramento is liberal. The city budget says otherwise | Opinion
Sacramento’s city council is debating what city resources should be cut to have a balanced budget. What has emerged from the past two meetings is a conversation about public safety and how each council member defines it.
Take Council member Mai Vang, for instance. During Tuesday’s council meeting, she implored the council to cut funding for police to reach the budget goal.
“I encourage my colleagues to make budget decisions driven by real people who need our help in this critical moment, and not based on fear,” Vang said.
Council member Rick Jennings expressed support for a $254 million allocation for the police department, the biggest line item in Sacramento’s proposed $1.65 billion spending plan for the coming fiscal year.
“I believe a city that’s not safe is not a city that people want to live in,” Jennings said.
Jennings and Vang reflect the two sides of public safety that clash in Sacramento.
Different views of public safety
For some, public safety is about dialing 911 when they see a suspicious person. Their idea of safety is centered on an individualistic perspective of protecting themselves, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that.
And with others, public safety is seen as a collective effort that just doesn’t begin with a phone call to police. It’s about supporting resources like youth event programs and non-violence initiatives that can set our young adults and members of vulnerable communities on a path that steers them away from confrontations with police.
The budget deficit pits supporting police and alternative safety initiatives against each other because, to Vang’s point, some people in the community have an aggressively negative view about public safety measures that seek to prevent crime and violence so that a 911 call is unnecessary.
I recently wrote a piece about Measure L, which funnels cannabis tax money into youth programs, and why it’s so important that its funding doesn’t get decreased. I was flabbergasted by the emails I received from people calling this type of initiative racist and even corrupt.
Both policing and youth initiatives are important investments to Sacramento and any other city, for that matter. Wanting more funding for youth services or figuring out a way for those funds not to be touched should not be met with a fear-mongering mentality.
We’re dealing with two sensitive subjects, police and kids. The rational way of thinking, at least from my perspective, is to look at what is given for both. The police budget is currently at $246.5 million, and it’s set to increase by just under $8 million to $254 million in the next fiscal year.
Cutting some funds from the police department will not prevent the city or the department from devising strategies to protect people. Sacramento should look beyond just one means of public safety to improve the livelihood of our community.
‘A Venn Diagram of commonality’
The council has its work cut out for it in trying to find the best way forward with the budget.
Mayor Kevin McCarty said this week that he sees a “Venn diagram with lots of commonality” regarding the council’s budget desires. The challenge will be getting to that common ground and by the looks of this past council meeting, there might be some tough conversations and some losers.
Policing is not the only way to look at public safety. Helping kids see college as a viable option can help save lives. Having summer programs where they have places to go can prevent bad decisions. What’s missing in Sacramento right now is rational thinking about what a safe community means and where city resources should be invested to realize it.
This story was originally published May 24, 2025 at 5:00 AM.
