i don’t know diddly about muni bond financing. i did notice on the latest city financial statements a footnote about “interest rate swaps”. aren’t those something where the city substituted short term borrowing with lower variable interest rates for long borrowing at fixed rates? Does Dellums mean (or does he even understand the speech he read) doing more of that? Or longer term fixed rates that push the debt repayment undo next later generations?

-len

So what happens if the City DOESN’T get the funding? In that case I find it highly unlikely the City’s going to start renegotiating with everybody, go through this process again, and do ANOTHER budget.

If this happens by then it’s too late, those Officers are gone. Unless a backup plan is put in the Budget now there probably won’t be a second chance (and unless you have some more info). OPD probably doesn’t appreciate having their jobs put at risk and, personally, neither do I.

The more I think about this, the more I agree with Marlene that this is “insanity”.
(Again, unless you have some other information about this…).

I think that quote is the crux. If Oakland adequately funded the OPD, then its officers would not be in risk of being laid off and thus the city might *not* be eligible for COPS. So by failing to fund the OPD, (Dellums hopes) the city will be eligible for COPS.

“The COPS program is designed to supplement, not replace, police jobs. That means jurisdictions are eligible only if they cannot afford to fill vacant positions or are looking to hire laid off officers or officers who would be laid off without the grant.

Dellums, who has visited Washington, D.C., a number of times to lobby for federal money for Oakland, said he has been told not to count on the COPS money as the city puts together its spending plan for the next two years.

‘We’ve been admonished to deal with our budget deficit in a very straightforward way,” Dellums said recently, “to do it in a way that assumes that the COPS program doesn’t even exist.’ ”

It sounds like this is an effort by the Feds to not upset some cities if they don’t get COPS funding, and in that case cities will have planned alternatives. Exactly what Oakland is NOT doing. A high stakes game of russian roulette. We’d better hope the Feds comply IF the City isn’t going to devise alternate plans.

Of course the City should but my guess is they don’t want to upset the unions representing the rest of the City government. Boy if they don’t get that COPS money there’s going to be a real circus come October/November.

At least we’ll get another entertainment venue without having to build a thing…

What a brilliant move. Pass the bill to the next mayor.

I (now) understand the threat to lay off 140 police officers. I just wish the city hadn’t assumed the COPS grant is a given. Does Dellums *really* plan to lay off those officers if COPS doesn’t come through? He should prepare for torch-bearing commoners storming his castle.

I wish the city had prepared two realistic budgets: one with COPS and one without.

The COPS grants only last three years. Does the new budget have a roadmap for a balanced budget and sustainable police department when the COPS grants dry up?

(I’m updating as I get information, sorry if its hard to follow.)