It's a crime

The police department is about to be dealt a blow -- by the police union

Boston is headed for trouble. At stake is one of the city's most important advances this decade: the dramatic drop in crime, and the rise of a flexible and innovative police force. And the bad guys, ironically, are the members of the Massachusetts State Legislature and the union that represents most police officers.

For years, the Boston Police Patrolmen's Association (BPPA) has been pushing to strip Commissioner Paul Evans of his power to make certain staffing changes without union approval -- for example, decentralizing in order to salvage the force's antidrug efforts, or putting civilians on front-desk duty on weekends, a less expensive way to make the department more available to the public. This power, the union has argued, undermines its position in labor negotiations, hurting the interests of the city's rank and file police officers. In November, as the legislature was packing up to leave on vacation, it overwhelmingly passed a bill that gave the BPPA just what it wanted. It was hailed as a victory for labor.

The more honest assessment: it's a defeat for the people. The secret of Evans's success has been that he has been willing to be radical. He has pushed through major reorganizations that force his officers to be more creative and more in touch with what is happening on the streets, where things change fast. The results have been so dramatic that Boston is now a national model of crime prevention. (See "Keeping Kids Alive," News, July 4, 1997.) If it had been up to the union, community policing would probably still be just talk.

Indeed, if this bill becomes the law, it will replace the new culture of inspired innovation with bureaucratic entanglements. Every time a commissioner would want to make a change, he or she would have to negotiate with at least one, and possibly as many as four, unions. If they could not agree, the issue would then be decided by an outside arbitrator. Very quickly, the people's interests -- safe neighborhoods, and a police department that will keep them that way -- will get lost in sometimes bitter, and certainly time-consuming, negotiations, the outcome of which will be decided by someone who knows nothing about what is needed on the streets.

This bill is a case of naked power grab by an interest group that knows how to get what it wants in an election year. For most legislators, there are powerful parochial incentives to go along -- the union has pull in November, especially in the suburbs where so many officers live -- and almost no incentives (save principle) to cast a difficult nay vote. This, presumably, was the calculation of the bill's many supporters -- including House Speaker Thomas Finneran and Senate president Thomas Birmingham. State senator Lois Pines (D-Newton), a candidate for attorney general, supported the bill, which won her the endorsement of the state's biggest police union but damaged her credibility as someone willing to take on mighty foes for the public interest. Only a few Boston legislators -- including Byron Rushing (South End), Gloria Fox (Roxbury), and Shirley Owens-Hicks (Mattapan) -- resisted the tide.

Meanwhile, Mayor Menino has been energetically fighting the move. That the mayor, a long-time ally of labor, would work so passionately to defeat the bill is a sign of real courage on his part: the BPPA is easily one of the most powerful forces in city politics. It is also a sign of how dangerous the legislation truly is.

Menino was able to convince Paul Cellucci to veto the bill (one of the rare moments of late when the Phoenix found itself rooting for the acting governor), but the future still looks bleak. This month -- barring a public outcry -- the legislature is expected to override the veto.

In some ways, this is a difficult issue for liberals. The BPPA has successfully portrayed the question as one about unions, and whether they deserve support. And the police officers who risk their lives every day do indeed deserve our respect and our support -- financial and otherwise.

But intellectually honest liberals must oppose this union demand. There are few things that impede social progress -- especially for the city's disadvantaged -- more than crime. When neighborhoods collapse, dreams die. When neighborhoods collapse, the very idea of a city -- a place for all to come, where culture and commerce can prosper -- is placed in jeopardy. That is what this debate is truly about. Commissioner Evans and Mayor Menino and Governor Cellucci understand that. They've been fighting an uphill battle. So far, the public has been silent.

What can you do?

Call Thomas Birmingham, (617) 722-1500, and Thomas Finneran, (617) 722-2500.

What do you think? Send an e-mail to letters[a]phx.com.