At a recent Tucson City Council meeting, community activists were vocal in their discontent with the proposed FY 2025 city budget. Specifically, they took issue with what they see as an imbalance in funding: a hefty $228 million earmarked for the Tucson Police and a comparatively meager $9.9 million for Housing and Community Development. According to AZPM, voices from Community Care Tucson and the Tucson Tenants Union led the chorus of concern, positing the budget as a statement of priorities that leans towards penalization over assistance.
During the discussion on June 4, Ronnie Wollenzier, a member of both Community Care Tucson and Tucson Tenants Union, suggested that the city's budget is reflective of a deeper issue. "The budget reflects that criminalization, that prioritization and [the] tendency to criminalize over centering care. And I wish we would shift away from that and I wish that our city council and mayor would choose to not stay willfully ignorant, but would instead try some of the solutions that community members and people who have experienced displacement are suggesting," Wollenzier told AZPM.
On the flip side, arguing that the police need even more support to address issues like homelessness and general public safety, were members of the Tucson Crime Free Coalition. These divergent viewpoints underscore a community divided on how to effectively allocate resources for pressing issues.
In response to the concerns raised, Mayor Regina Romero and City Manager Tim Thomure expressed commitment to housing initiatives — a focus on Housing First services, emergency housing vouchers, and street outreach programs were highlighted. City Manager Thomure detailed the underway projects: "a number of different housing projects and I know they take some time to complete. But we have about 1,200 new housing units under construction or in development in the city, which will help move the needle on that. And about 750 units of rehabilitation or affordable housing," Thomure said, as per AZPM. Nevertheless, ardent advocates argue that their pleas for a rebalance in funding priorities seem to be sounding on deaf ears.
