I think what they mean is that people who live in nice neighborhoods and never have to deal with the practical effects of high crime, are often the ones calling for defunding the police, building low barrier homeless shelters in less well-off neighborhoods, etc. Their Teslas parked in their garages in their gated communities will never get broken into or have their catalytic converters sawed off. They earn social virtue points by espousing these views.

But the middle class households living in a blue collar neighborhood are constantly getting their packages stolen, mailboxes and cars broken into, even occasional gunfire once in a while. Unfortunately, they don't have the disposable income to handle these mishaps easily.

Precisely this. In the Bay Area, the rich areas have slow streets, stop signs, and police. The poor areas should not have speeding enforcement or red light enforcement or stop sign enforcement because of racial disparity due to excess policing in poor neighborhoods. If poor neighborhoods have more stringent speeding enforcement, that means the streets there are safer!

A lot of these are defacto policy here in the Bay Area (another commenter accurately surmised I'm in SF - I am). You won't find someone making it explicit policy every time but as sibling commenter has mentioned, it is how things are done here.