Dr. Ravi Perry: The Removal of Public Pay Phones is Wrong
Saturday, September 08, 2012
Dr. Ravi Perry, GoLocalWorcester MINDSETTER™
Instead of offering comprehensive solutions, the poorly conceived idea of removing public pay phones is the answer?
Where’s the investigation? Where’s the police response to such crimes? If the alleged crime exists, why not increase patrols in that area? Why not station police near those public pay phones?
Perhaps if there weren’t so many Worcester police on unnecessary construction details, we would have the man/woman power to seriously address alleged issues such as this in a way that empowers local neighborhoods – not in a way that further disadvantages communities. The removal of phones in a neighborhood with a high percentage of lower income populations will likely increase the inability of many families to access communication.
This decision could lead to serious problems, including disparate-impact discrimination claims, and other lawsuits. On its face, the stated purpose of the pay phone removal policy is to reduce drug trafficking within the established “perimeter.” However the impact is to remove public resources around a “perimeter” that is inclusive of mostly people of color. The idea is so ill conceived, I can only hope this idea was not actually thought through. The fact that the idea is even suggested is ludicrous.
I've heard that neighborhood organizations have lobbied for the removal of the phones and councilors are simply responding to constituents with this policy. However, leadership is not only about responsiveness, effective leadership is also about educating constituents as to what actions are both legally permissible and that uphold the rights of all. The idea offered by city councilors also reeks of racialism and a lack of understanding about how to solve crime responsibly.
Meanwhile, news and ideas of councilors offers no facts, no number of calls used for alleged criminal activities, no data. Only allegations and innuendo.
The mere fact that elected councilors can recommend the removal of public resources available to tens of thousands to solve a problem that affects a significantly lower population of individuals is an embarrassment. As a result, any future “facts” will have been lost as the credibility of these councilors is called into question.
How could they make such allegations with unsubstantiated details?
Clearly, there are better ways to attempt to solve alleged drug trafficking. Removing public pay phones is not the answer.
Related Articles
- Dr. Ravi Perry: Affirmative Action Delayed is Affirmative Action Denied
- Dr. Ravi Perry: The Politics of Art and Summer Opportunity
- Dr. Ravi Perry: We Need to Celebrate Diversity in Worcester
- Dr. Ravi Perry: What’s in a Name: “Woosta” or “Worse-ster”?
- Dr. Ravi Perry: Who’s Fighting Discrimination in Worcester
- Dr. Ravi Perry: Why Worcester Must Adopt “Plan A”
- Dr. Ravi Perry: Worcester City Manager’s Budget Priorities
Comments:
Steven Barrett
7:14am on Saturday, September 08, 2012
The crack about police details was unnecessary. Dr. Perry should know that construction details are manned by off-duty officers, and are not paid for out of the WPD budget. Eliminating them all wouldn't make a single additional officer available to "to seriously address alleged issues such as this".
I have no opinion one way or the other regarding the pay phones, but when Dr. Perry makes a misleading statement like this as part of his argument, it undermines the credibility of his whole position, at least in my eyes.
Harvey Beehive
2:06pm on Saturday, September 08, 2012
Steven...you are correct when youb say that police details are not paid out of the WPD budget. However, we still pay the tab. The detail pay is calculated into the bid for the job and is ultimately reflected in higher rates. I think what Dr. Perry is saying is that there always seems to be plenty of manpower available for $30/hour detail work, but never enough for patrol cars or pfficers walking the beat. As far as the pay phones go, removing them is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. Does anyone really think the removal of a few pay phones will curb drug sales? Heck, the DEA can't even stop it. Go figure...