It was conceived as a way to supplement services already provided by government in urban areas whose residents and commercial tenants agreed to pay an extra “tax” or assessment for extra attention in matters of marketing, social services, infrastructure maintenance and improvement, sanitation and policing.

Yes, policing. And that, we believe, creates bad public policy, implicating issues concerning fairness to the city’s low-paid police officers and risks to public safety may arise.

Just who are these unarmed and minimally-trained security personnel, who are often paid less than the minimum wage? And is their employment just another symptom of a city committed to policing on the cheap?

Admittedly, the BID is a global phenomenon that serves some useful purpose. And we don’t expect them to be abolished based on our concerns. But we do believe that it’s time to spotlight and re-evaluate the security aspects of the city’s more than 45 BIDs — a figure, by the way, that makes New York the world leader in their use.

The connections among city government, its police department and the BIDS are inextricably close. The New York City Department of Small Business Services actively promotes BID formations, going so far as to provide a step-by-step guide on how to set them up.

One of the Downtown Alliance's "public safety officer' in action.

Their creation, operation and taxation are authorized and regulated under the state General Law and the city Administrative Code. Their boards, overseen by one director elected by residents and another by commercial tenants, also include representatives of the mayor, comptroller and local city council member.

And — a fact of particular interest to PBA members — many BIDS are managed by former high-ranking NYPD officials, giving them, according to one critic, “a unique level of access to Police Department resources and personnel.”

A graphic illustration of the incestuous relationship between the NYPD and the BIDs is provided by the location of security headquarters for the Downtown Alliance, the BID that covers Lower Manhattan.

The Downtown Alliance’s red-coated “public safety officers” muster out of a facility on Washington Street (see photo below), and its red-striped security vans line the streets outside the so-called NYPD Downtown Center.

The Downtown Alliance’s red-skyline logo and the block letters of NYPD, side by side on Washington Street.

That center, according to the alliance’s web site, was jointly created by the department and the alliance in 1995 to “restore a police presence below Chambers Street” that had been missing since 1973, when “the former First Precinct left its historic home at 100 Old Slip and moved into the Fourth Precinct’s stationhouse on Canal Street,” creating a new First Precinct. One side of the Washington Street facility houses the First Precinct’s Scooter Task Force and the other side the alliance’s security operation. The NYPD Transit Division’s Homeless Outreach Unit also has offices in the building.

BID critics question their effectiveness, lack of oversight, high costs and treatment of workers, including “public safety officers.” Questions have also been raised about the BIDs’ exercise of police and juridical powers that overstep their training standards and legal mandate.

One organization has complained that BIDS infringe on street artists’ and vendors’ First Amendment rights. In an article about BIDs, a knowledgeable source says arrested vendors are often subjected to BID courts instead of municipal tribunals. BIDs “have their own police and sanitation services (often paid less than the minimum wage) and are establishing a self-administered court system in which to try ‘quality of life’ offenders more efficiently.” The writer notes that the Fifth Avenue and Times Square BIDs operate a “community court” to handle such offenses committed in their territories.

“Convicted defendants, or those coerced into pleading guilty, are put to work within the BID doing ‘community service,’ which generally consists of cleaning the streets for the BIDs.” (It looks like the Uniformed Sanitation Workers Association might also have problems with the BID concept.)

In the context of the New York City PBA’s struggle to win its members the salary increase they deserve and that the city needs to pay to correct the insupportable pay disparity between its police officers and those in neighboring areas and nationwide, the employment of BID “public safety officers” raises these and other troubling questions. BID proponents cite the increased security “omnipresence” that they provide. One could also interpret this as a misguided tactic to mask the NYPD’s low-salary-induced recruitment and retention crisis.

One avenue to consider might be to allow active NYPD officers to benefit from the arrangement by offering them the opportunity to work overtime for the BIDs, similar to the city council’s proposal for bar/cabaret enforcement. At any rate, the issues raised in this article merit further discussion in the media and other public forums.

The next time you see one of those BID security vans streaking through our streets with lights and sirens going full blast, consider whether they’re providing any real public-safety service or just giving the city another excuse not to provide New Yorkers with the real police presence they deserve.