
Facebook offers to pay Menlo Park $600k to hire a cop - bdehaaff
http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_25252305/facebook-offers-pay-menlo-park-600-000-hire
======
jcc80
"The sworn officer would focus on helping local schools increase their safety
and prevent student truancy and on working with the area's large businesses to
improve their security"

This really means harassing and arresting problem students and undesirables
who are loitering near businesses. I say that because if you want to address
the underlying issues and really "solve" the problem, you wouldn't do it with
police. It sounds like they want their own private security but one that has
police powers.

What comes to mind is cities that try and fix issues related to the homeless
with police because it's a complex human problem that some people & businesses
try to solve with punishment/enforcement. At the least, I'll venture to say
there's more effective ways to combat truancy than unleashing police on them.

~~~
lutusp
> This really means harassing and arresting problem students and undesirables
> who are loitering near businesses.

It's also probably unconstitutional, on the ground that it produces at least
the appearance of selective enforcement. This kind of goal is usually achieved
by hiring a private security guard, rather than paying a (normally) taxpayer-
funded police department to focus its attention on a specific zone.

~~~
jmccree
I'm not really not sure about the unconstitutional argument, but it's
extremely common. Normally it's done more explicitly by hiring off duty
officers. NYPD has the paid detail unit to organize private details for
businesses. Where I live in Atlanta, every neighborhood you'd want to live in
has their own privately paid force of off-duty officers patrolling. I'm more
surprised that facebook is basically offering a grant/donation than outright
hiring their own off-duty officers.

~~~
e12e
But off-duty officers are just civilians? They have no added powers to use
force against citizens?

~~~
lutusp
> But off-duty officers are just civilians? They have no added powers to use
> force against citizens?

That's correct. Police officers can only exercise police powers while on duty,
and when they go off shift, they become civilians.

~~~
jmccree
I'm not sure if you're referring to a certain jurisdiction in the US, another
country, or speaking "theoretically per your interpretation of the US
constitution if a case made it to the supreme court", but that is not accurate
for the majority of the states in the US. Most US states I'm aware of
currently grant officers police authority on and off duty per state law.

~~~
e12e
Hm, I see that police in Norway also seem to have the same authority off-duty
as while at work (and certain obligation to intervene if they happen upon
serious crime, as well as the option to intervene as if they where on duty (as
long as they are able to identify themselves as police officers, and are
sober)). They are prohibited against taking other jobs (moonlighting) without
approval from the police commissioner, however.

------
zaroth
This was in one of the comments;

> Get the gang activity under control, and it actually would be > quite nice.
> The irony is, if it became safe, it probably would > gentrify rapidly,
> housing prices would go up, and the poor people > who rent would have to
> find somewhere else to live.

Is it just me who thinks it's terribly sad there are people apologizing for
decreasing crime and therefore increasing property value?

The real answer is that housing should NOT be so scarce that the only thing
hat makes the price affordable is weekly gang shootings. Supply should be
fostered until housing can be both 'safe & affordable' using the myriad tools
cities have to foster new construction.

An increase to property value is a great service to every property owner (53%
owner occupied) in the city, but it's an attack on renters (41%). Another way
to put it, cities should be doing great things like this to increase property
value, while simultaneously fostering new construction, as a balanced approach
to serve their constituency.

~~~
harlanlewis
I absolutely agree with the sentiment, but density housing on high value
property tends to result in high rise luxury units rather than affordable
apartments.

There are worse things, but it doesn't really address the problem.

~~~
cbr
When you can only build a small number of apartments you make the most money
building luxury ones. But:

(1) If we allow more building we end up with as many luxury apartments as
there's demand for and developers switch to building more affordable ones.

(2) When a rich person moves from wherever they're living now into a luxury
apartment that opens up their previous apartment somewhere else.

------
surstroemming
They could just start paying their taxes. Like normal people.

[http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/08/facebook-
uk-...](http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/08/facebook-uk-
corporation-tax-zero-income)

~~~
dopamean
It seems they want to pay their taxes a la carte.

------
cookingrobot
Here's an alternate proposal: don't let companies donate to government, but do
raise their taxes and provide adequate policing.

~~~
jessriedel
Voluntary cash tranfers between corporations and local municipalities have
existed since time immemorial. Look at almost any town with a college.

Local government are prohibited from taking as much money as they want from
local companies by statute, e.g. they can only use property taxes by fair
market value.

Think of how bad greater discretion would be. Local governments are quirky and
idiosyncratic, and are elected by a tiny number of citizens. They are strongly
constarined in their powers by the state for a reason.

------
Shenglong
Interesting. Increased security, faster response times, and public image at
such a cheap rate is probably a no-brainer for large tech companies like
Facebook.

I feel like we're going to see more private funding for public positions in
the (perhaps distant) future, but I suppose the obvious question is: at what
point does private funding of public officials become theoretically
troublesome? Some would call this the start to an _unsettling_ change.

~~~
bane
There's a movie about this exact subject called _Robocop_.

~~~
Argorak
Privatized police forces are also one of the standard topics of cyberpunk.

~~~
nieve
It's been obvious for a while now that we're living in a dystopian cyberpunk
future, it just snuck up on us:

    
    
      * Killer drones. Ubiquitous surveillance by both government & business.  
      * Bad data that destroys one's ability to travel, get credit, find work, or avoid being thrown into jail out of nowhere. 
      * More and more armed citizens shooting each other over minor things. 
      * Flash mobs for every purpose under the sun.  
      * Samizdata.  
      * Manipulating the cops into raiding innocent targets while using software to conceal your identity. Absolute and complete lack of airships. 
      * Corporate domination of the political process with unlimited donations.  
      * Massive and growing wealth inequality.  
      * Political campaigns severally wounded by software failures. 
      * "You're not the customer, you're the product." 
      * DDOS for commercial advantage.
      * Arresting people as "terrorists" to seize embarrassing stolen information.
      * International treaties negotiated at the behest of corporations as backdoors to subverting the legislative process.  
      * No-recruit agreements for the rank & file combined with vicious competition for the top talent.  People carrying half their life in portable computer devices.  
      * Ransomware in a myriad of forms.
      * Vast government computer intrusion programs.
      * Criminalization of access and dissemination of public information.  Criminalization of downloading too much from something you've got access rights to.  Criminalization of downloading from open directories with no warnings on them.
      * New diseases, rising seas, freakish weather.
      * A resurgent, militaristic Russia invading various countries.
      * A resurgent, militaristic USA invading various countries.
    

Admittedly the cyberware is a bit slow in coming, AI is still the same 10
years off as always, self-driving cars are barely at the testing stage, sub-
orbital planes are a pipe dream, and nobod thinks the Net looks like brightly
colored blocks, but it's still unsettlingly close.

~~~
spacehome
We have more guns, but fewer armed citizens, and violence has been steadily
declining for a couple decades now.

~~~
nieve
I should have phrased that more clearly. The cyberpunk thing is that we've got
more aggressively open carrying and more dramaticly stupid shooting incidents
like the string in Florida, very much the way a lot of cyberpunk has the trope
of heavily armed idiots opening fire at the slightest excuse. We have nothing
like cyberpunk levels of violence and as you point out it's mostly getting
better, but we do have more incidents that'd fit nicely in a book than we used
to and we have more people displaying weapons. I'm thinking about the little
color bits thrown into cyberpunk to clue the audience in and things like the
Zimmerman, Dunn, and Reeves cases fit in perfectly with that (modulo actual
human tragedy).

------
zaroth
I find the negative responses quite interesting. From watching The Wire, I
assume there typical way of getting this done would be simply Facebook
contributing to members of the City Council.

Of the two, I might like the open proposal for direct funding of the position
more than an envelop of cash passed under the table at Alexander's.

While Facebook is free to donate funds for this to the city, or not, I doubt
that accepting the contribution creates any kind of enforceable contract,
rather a mutual expectation which if the city renegs they simply won't be
seeing any more deals like this in the future. I think from the city's
perspective it's free money for a cop who is going to be at the new substation
anyway.

------
ars
This sets a bad precedent IMO. Are the only people going to get security those
that will pay [extra] for it?

It just feels wrong to be able to pay government for this kind of thing -
kinda like paying the military to do something for you under the color of law.

~~~
mongol
Agree. Tax money should fund the police and democratic means determine what to
use them for.

------
yeukhon
_Facebook has committed to provide up to $600,000 over three years, enough in
the city 's estimate to cover the salary and benefits of a full-time officer._

According to this [http://jeffwongdesign.com/2010/03/nypd-officers-can-
make-6-f...](http://jeffwongdesign.com/2010/03/nypd-officers-can-
make-6-figures-salary-after-5-5-years-plus-huge-perks/#.UxLMIqj2J7M), NYPD can
make 91K after 6 years in the service.

Is Facebook paying less? I don't know the cost of benefit and insurance. I
really doubt a single police officer will receive more than $100K benefit in
three years. I would be very surprise if they do!

I am not against Facebook pays the city to hire additional security personnel.
I am all for companies and community putting a fund together to hire
additional police officers or firefighters or EMT, but this worries me:

 _" Let's say Facebook has a need of assistance, or some other large company,
and says, 'We want to have drills for an active shooter or a bomb threat. We
need you to help us put that together.' They'd have an actual person (to
assist)," Bertini said._

I am not saying we don't want to have more police officers, but right now,
rich companies can directly fund government outside of taxation.

They are directly paying to hire government employee. Why can't Facebook have
their own outreach team to work with local police public relation to carry out
such plan (to reduce student truancy). Also, consider security guards are paid
at a lower rate, why can't we help boost their salary (see
[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541541/Google-
hirin...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541541/Google-hiring-
security-guards-protect-work-buses-San-Francisco-following-protests-tech-
workers-driving-city-rents.html))?

In the case of bomb threat or shooting, I am damn sure a 911 call is enough to
get 100 county officers from MP and nearby county. A single officer will not
help much.

It seems like they are just concerned with unauthorized access rather than
defeating crime rate.

~~~
kiiski
>In the case of bomb threat or shooting, I am damn sure a 911 call is enough
to get 100 county officers from MP and nearby county. A single officer will
not help much.

A single officer in the right place is far more usefull than 100 in a nearby
county. Breivik was just one man. He could have been easily stopped by a
single officer.

~~~
yeukhon
My point is that a single cop can't defend everyone in that area; also,
security guards are really the first responder on site to be honest. IMO, FB
is trying to be cost-effective; instead of spending more money on good
security guards (I don't know how good they are at FB right now), FB is
throwing $1M total to get a few police officers.

------
neilk
A friend of mine owns a house a few blocks from Facebook. She has had to stay
in her house due to shootings and police manhunts several times over the past
few years.

The problem is real and I don't blame Facebook for being concerned. Although,
it's sadly typical of them to propose their own privately-paid-for police
force.

~~~
bertil
I’m not sure what are the other (short-term) options: Facebook encourages
employees to participate in education efforts (STEMs, mostly, for obvious
recruiting reasons) and Zuckerberg himself spends a lot there too — but that
takes time. De-criminalising drug trade is far more controversial than what
Facebook can do. I'm sure they offer well paid jobs to local people as non-
technical subsidiaries but… Short of sponsoring a cash-for-gun program, what
can they do? That’s a serious question: I’m sure any idea will be explored by
Facebook decision-makers who read this.

~~~
e12e
Paying taxes would be a start?

~~~
bertil
They don’t escape tax at a local level.

~~~
e12e
Are you aware of any documentation on this? I'm not sure how state tax works
for businesses -- surely they're not paying percentages of revenue? If that
revenue is already exported through tax loop-holes out of the country, how can
they pay taxes on it in-state?

I'm not disputing the claim, I've just never seen any discussion on state tax
(except for Amazon trying(?) to dodge it).

------
pdkl95
Add this data point to Facebook setting up their own dorm/apartment project[1]
and their efforts prevent employees from having any free time outside of
work[2] so they can undo the last century or so of social progress that gave
us stuff like "(classic) feminism" and "unions"[3].

Facebook is trying to set up their own _Company Town_. Usually, the response
to this interpretation is to dismiss the possibility, with the company town
being one of those "problems from last century we don't see anymore", and
dismissing the problem like that is _dangerous_.

The coal companies (and similar) never really lost their towns, regardless of
specifics of who's name is on the land deeds. It works out the same when
there's only the one employer in the area. Facebook is not alone as a
newcomer, either; Google has had some questionable press recently with their
buses that seen to go wherever they want like they own the place, and they've
been playing land games as well. There was even a story here recently about
their price-fixing scam to slow wage growth and prevent competition ("bidding
wars").

While current issues like the NSA has us distracted at the moment, I strongly
believe _this_ problem - where we forget about the labor issues of the past
and allow the industrial-revolution-era problems and abuses slowly creep back
in - is the longer-term fight, with stuff like the NSA's spying being more of
a symptom of the problem.

Many people have observed that some of the NSA's statements and
"interpretations" no longer seem to be tethered to any rational "legal basis"
or "social contract", as they spin yet another justification for their
behavior. Similarly, if Facebook and Google, etc, are allowed to continue
buying up bits and pieces of our country, I hope you like that kind of "making
up the law as we go" way of doing things. Once they gain that kind of _de
facto_ control over a piece of the country, they become effectively sovereign.
Any power that might stop them is too far away and dealing with their own
mess.

What do you call a form of government with a weak, basically non-existent
amount of central control, thereby letting a handful of very powerful, very
rich players to rule over their little corner of the world as they see fit?

You call it _Feudalism_ , of course.

[1] [http://mashable.com/2013/10/03/facebook-housing-
complex/](http://mashable.com/2013/10/03/facebook-housing-complex/)

[2] [http://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/feminisms-
tip...](http://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/feminisms-tipping-
point-who-wins-from-leaning-in)

[3]
[http://thebaffler.com/past/facebook_feminism_like_it_or_not](http://thebaffler.com/past/facebook_feminism_like_it_or_not)

~~~
skore
Having read Snow Crash... I'm getting used to appreciate Neal Stephensons
rather heavy handed (if only at first glance) use of Sci-Fi tropes as very dry
pragmatism.

Yes, this is feudalism, plain and simple. They're simply abusing basic
democratic institutions to obfuscate the fact.

~~~
satori99
“This is America. People do whatever the fuck they feel like doing, you got a
problem with that? Because they have a right to. And because they have guns
and no one can fucking stop them.”

― Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash

~~~
skore
"It's like, if you — people of a certain age — would make some effort to just
stay in touch with sort of basic, modern-day events, then your kids wouldn't
have to take these drastic measures."

------
ck2
It's funny how "active shooter" (aka too-common armed mass murderer) is buried
in there, when it is really their primary reason since the USA will never have
gun sanity.

They don't want the cop to do any kind of citations, so they just want the
armed presence that is licensed to kill (which I believe statistics say is
more likely to shoot a bystander).

------
sushirain
Can firms also fund a judge position in the US? An entire police station? A
prison?

------
verelo
Private police forces, or bribes. You be the judge...

------
puppetmaster3
prevent truancy. lol.

