Bill Overview
Title: Project Safe Neighborhoods Reauthorization Act of 2022
Description: This bill reauthorizes through FY2026 the Project Safe Neighborhoods Block Grant Program within the Department of Justice. The bill also allows funds under the program to be used for hiring crime analysts to assist with violent crime reduction efforts; the cost of overtime for law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and law enforcement assistants who assist with the program; purchasing, implementing, and using technology to assist with violent crime reduction efforts; and supporting multijurisdictional task forces.
Sponsors: Rep. Neguse, Joe [D-CO-2]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in communities affected by violent crime both directly and indirectly
Estimated Size: 10000000
- The Project Safe Neighborhoods program focuses on reducing violent crime through federal, state, and local partnerships, therefore it impacts communities affected by violent crime.
- The funding can go towards hiring crime analysts and paying overtime for law enforcement, potentially affecting individuals working in law enforcement and related fields.
- The program supports technology use in crime reduction, impacting tech developers and agencies providing these solutions.
- Multijurisdictional task forces will involve multiple local and possibly state jurisdictions; thus affecting broader sections of the community involved in interagency collaboration.
Reasoning
- The key impact of this policy is intended on communities with high levels of violent crime, often urban areas with significant socioeconomic challenges.
- Law enforcement personnel and agencies will likely see direct benefits in terms of resources and support, resulting in changes to their operational effectiveness and job satisfaction.
- Communities as a whole may experience changes in public safety, potentially impacting residents' sense of security and overall quality of life.
- The policy might indirectly impact those involved in technology and data analytics sectors that support law enforcement efforts—this extends to their economic and job security.
- Given the budget constraints, sizeable yet not exhaustive reach is expected; hence, effects may be concentrated in the most crime-afflicted areas first.
Simulated Interviews
Police Officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will provide much-needed resources to help tackle violent crime, especially gang-related issues.
- Overtime support will improve operational efficiency and reduce burnout among officers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Community Organizer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am hopeful that the reduction in crime will lead to safer streets and improved community trust.
- However, resources could also be directed towards preventive measures like education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Technology Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The uptick in tech funding is beneficial for innovation in crime reduction tools.
- It could increase demand for our services and promote job growth in our sector.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Public Defender (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased law enforcement budgets could lead to more arrests, but not necessarily address root causes.
- I worry about the emphasis on punitive measures over rehabilitation and prevention.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cybersecurity Specialist (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy may create more opportunities in cybersecurity for public safety sectors.
- I'm optimistic about contributing to safer communities through my work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
High School Teacher (St. Louis, MO)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope for improved safety which may lead to better learning environments.
- More funding should also go toward addressing poverty and education as root causes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Nurse (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate efforts to improve safety but worry about unintended consequences like increased police presence.
- Community-driven solutions might be more effective long-term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Data Scientist (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could enable better data collection and analysis, improving understanding of crime dynamics.
- There is a need for measured approaches that integrate data with community needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Law Enforcement Analyst (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy may enhance collaboration across jurisdictions, making our work more impactful.
- This collaboration will ideally lead to more cohesive strategies and fewer overlapping issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Criminal Justice Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Educational institutions could benefit from closer ties to law enforcement efforts through data and strategy evaluations.
- Emphasizing education in reform and reduction strategies is crucial alongside enforcement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $18000000, High: $22000000)
Year 2: $21000000 (Low: $19000000, High: $23000000)
Year 3: $22000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $24000000)
Year 5: $23000000 (Low: $21000000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $25000000 (Low: $23000000, High: $27000000)
Year 100: $27000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $29000000)
Key Considerations
- Projected impacts on crime rates which are the primary target of the funding.
- The dependence on effective coordination between federal, state, and local agencies.
- Long-term sustainability of crime reduction beyond the program duration.