Political boundary objects in debates over police funding

Abstract Following the racial reckoning of 2020, officials in local governments faced demands for police transformation and antiracist action. Yet a variety of constraints hindered their ability to fundamentally change policing. I examine how city councilors navigated this terrain through the case of a progressive city where officials made commitments to reimagine public safety, followed by reinvestments in police funding. Drawing on video footage from city budget meetings and other public materials, I analyze how state actors explained their decision‐making. I find that local officials expressed shared commitments to enhancing public safety, addressing racism, representing constituents, and making data‐driven decisions. Yet their interpretations of what each of these commitments meant varied. I argue that analyzing such concepts as political boundary objects can reveal emergent divisions among similarly situated actors, map dominant and alternative meanings, and identify salient features of the institutional environment that shape decision‐making. While the majority of city councilors drew on versions of political boundary objects that recentered policing as essential to public safety and positioned organizational diversity as a remedy to racism, a minority pointed to alternative avenues for action.