Reader agrees with Stenger on how Prop P funds should be spent

Letters+to+the+editor

Letter to the Editor

To the editor:
Regarding St. Louis County’s Proposition P, we all wanted this for the right reasons.
And at least our community felt it was long overdue.
As with most things, you know in your heart what’s morally right, but there are always other factors that enter into your process before the final decision.
When conversation started about how different cities might use their allocated money, I was shocked and appalled.
Potholes? That’s a stretch — safety signs, speed bumps even? OK, some of that could be considered.
But only, and I say only, after police have been paid with a structured pay scale raise and police added, if needed, and their safety issues met.
Body cameras, safer gear, and training to defuse volatile situations they encounter, that’s where the money must go first.
This brings me to the Aug. 3 article where County Executive Steve Stenger stated clearly that directing Prop P funds to anything else than police or public safety, “would violate the law,” as well as the trust of county residents. He further said that residents could recall officials who misspend those funds.
I applaud you sir, and St. Louis County Police Association President Joe Patterson, who will serve as watchdog for how the Prop P money will be spent.
Mike Jarvis
Concord