What is the best way to keep our neighborhoods safe? For decades, conventional wisdom said to hire more police officers. That’s what LA did, even if it meant cutting everything else in the budget, and even if it meant lots of people — particularly African Americans — felt unsafe.

LA is waking up to a better, smarter approach, one that asks not “how many more cops do we need?” but “what is the best way to provide public safety, public health and emergency response?”

If we were going to design a public safety system from scratch, no one would say that the appropriate and necessary response to mental health crises, traffic collisions, or reports of loud parties should be armed agents with the authority to use deadly force.

But that’s exactly the system we have in Los Angeles, where residents call the same agency to report off-leash dogs as they do to report a homicide. That doesn’t make sense.

It doesn’t make sense if you’re the victim of a violent crime and are angry that an overburdened LAPD took so long to respond to your 911 call.

It doesn’t make sense if you have a family member suffering a mental health episode and you’re afraid an armed response will escalate the situation, with violent results.

And it doesn’t make sense if you’re a young Black man who has been pulled over in traffic stops more times than you can count, fearful for your life each time.

The neighborhoods I represent agree -- and when I surveyed thousands of constituents, they overwhelmingly said they want a police response for violent crimes, but strongly prefer non-LAPD responses to most situations for which police officers are routinely called. Such as:

They prefer a non-LAPD response for calls about people having a mental health episode.

They prefer a non-LAPD response for calls about people experiencing homelessness.

They prefer a non-LAPD response for calls about loud interpersonal disputes in public.

They prefer a non-LAPD response for calls about loud parties and noise.

They prefer a non-LAPD response for calls about a drug overdose..

They prefer a non-LAPD response for calls about automobile collisions.

They prefer that someone other than police provide security at our schools.

They prefer that someone other than police enforce fare evasion rules on public transit.

They prefer that someone other than police provide security at our parks.

They prefer that someone other than police handle speeding tickets and moving violations.

They prefer that someone other than police provide traffic control and crowd control at large public events.

They prefer that someone other than police handle enforcement of rules about wearing a mask or social distancing.

They prefer that someone other than police take reports of collisions, burglaries, vandalism and more.

We can provide better, smarter, more appropriate and less expensive neighborhood safety by investing more in all of these other services -- and to do that, we can, we should and we must spend less on LAPD.

The unacceptable alternative is a budget that gives LAPD more money and cuts services people demand (emergency preparedness, street resurfacing, parks, traffic lights) and programs people need to survive this pandemic (senior meal programs, renter assistance, small biz support.)

. @BLMLA and #PeoplesBudgetLA movement are insisting Los Angeles reimagine public safety and invest in its people, its neighborhoods, its future. They are not alone. Residents in every neighborhood want the same thing. I agree and I support them -- and now is the time to do it.