The Inquirer has done some independent analysis of the recommendations in Ramsey's crime plan: specifically, it has looked at where resources are being sent and why.
One big shock: Point Breeze and five other districts with among the worst crime rates in the city last year don't get any more police or money under the plan.
Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey, who released his plan on Jan. 30, identified nine high-crime districts where he wants to shift 200 officers to patrol duty. The 17th District, which includes Point Breeze and Grays Ferry, was not among the chosen few.
The nine districts Ramsey selected for special attention are some of the city's most populous and account for nearly two-thirds of Philadelphia's homicides.
But six less-populous police districts - including the 17th - have higher crime rates than some of the districts Ramsey wants to target, according to an Inquirer analysis of the Police Department's 2007 crime statistics. Crime rates provide analysts a way to compare the number of offenses among areas with different populations - the higher the rate, the greater the likelihood someone in those areas will be a victim of a crime.
The apparent reason: Ramsey is committed to getting numbers down, and the more people who live in an area, the more cold hard crime numbers. Even if the crime rate by population is lower, as in areas like University City and Chestnut Hill--both of which are getting added resources.
Ramsey's chosen districts combined account for 55 percent of the city's population. Consequently, they have the highest number of violent crimes. And it is the total number of crimes that Ramsey is focused on reducing.
So this numbers game at least partly accounts for who is targeted for extra help, and who isn't:
Four of the districts Ramsey chose have better-than-average violent-crime rates - the city average is 1,456 incidents per 100,000 residents. They are the 14th District in Northwest Philadelphia, the 35th District straddling Broad Street in the north, and the 18th and 19th Districts in West Philadelphia. They include some of the city's most stable neighborhoods: Chestnut Hill, Mount Airy, West Oak Lane, Wynnefield, University City.
Conversely, six districts that reported some of the worst violent-crime rates last year did not make the commissioner's list: the Sixth District, which includes eastern Center City and North Philadelphia; the 16th District, including Mantua and Powelton in West Philadelphia; the 23d District in North Philadelphia; the 24th and 26th Districts, encompassing Kensington, Fishtown and Port Richmond; and the 17th.
Stepping back, most of the reforms Ramsey has proposed are great because they touch on basic policing. If they are achieved, they will help every area in the city, even those that aren't targeted for extra resources.
However, there's one thing that is agreed upon by basically everyone who cares about and pays attention to the crime problem: we need to target resources to where the problems are. This holds for stop-and-frisk (use the data we have to focus on problem corners rather than casting a broad net), as well as where to send patrol officers on their rounds and where to put the money and bodies.
When we are talking about the murder rate, numbers are people, so any drop in that rate is a good in itself. However, this is a very calculated distribution of our limited resources, and that calculation doesn't take into account the desperate need of people in places like Point Breeze, where there are less people but more destructive crime.
The District Maps
Some of the spin in the article is misleading, mostly because Philadelphia's patrol districts cover such huge and heterogeneous areas. For example, the 14th district includes Chestnut Hill, West Mount Airy, and West Oak Lane, but it also stretches out to Cheltenham and Wister Avenues, covering Nicetown, Wister, Tioga, Germantown, etc., where violent crime rates are quite high. Likewise, the 18th includes University City, but stretches out through West Philadelphia to Cobbs Creek Park. It's not out of sheer populousness that these districts see higher crime rates, including homicides -- there are corridors within these districts that are wrecked by violent crime, and the sheer size of these districts make them extremely difficult to patrol.
Point Breeze and Mantua and Kensington deserve more. I can't see under what calculus you come to a different conclusion. But this isn't exactly a case of the rich getting richer.
Yeah
it is definitely worthwhile to add that it is hard to judge these decisions without knowing something of the existing resources in each district (are the larger, more populous ones 'understaffed'?).
But I do think that the crime rate per population evades some of the problem of heterogeneity you mention: the areas including Point Breeze that don't get a bump in patrols are by that measure empirically 'more dangerous'.
One PS
I agree that it is a bit dramatic to frame it as 'Chestnut Hill is getting more resources', however, it is important I think to highlight how there are certain areas that keep getting screwed. No one is helping them. They have marginalized populations, sometimes ineffective or disengaged Council representatives, etc.
As someone who grew up in
As someone who grew up in the 14th (Germantown) before the changeover to the 39th and now again lives in the 14th (Mt. Airy), I can tell you that a lion's share of the cops are in Mt. Airy and Chestnut Hill. I always see cops in my neighborhood now. In Germantown, where my parents live, not so much. All these districts are Gerrymandered to a certain extent, but to act like the 14th is starving for resources is a little ridiculous.
I lived in the 14th for a
I lived in the 14th for a couple of years too, in Germantown, and I wholeheartedly agree that the lion's share of the cops were in Mt. Airy and Chestnut Hill. The argument I had always heard was that the violent crime in southeastern part of the district and the money and power in the northwestern part tended to stretch resources between them, leaving a vast underprotected middle in Central Germantown, Oak Lane, etc., and to a certain extent that was my experience (even though I found the individual policemen and policewomen I met to be committed and on their game). I still think the size and shape of the place makes it very hard to police.
What I would like to hear is that these new money/resources are being targeted towards specific high-crime enforcement zones, rather than just poured into the districts for local allocation. It's also key that neighboring districts work together, especially along corridors like Market St in West Philadelphia, Wister Ave, etc. Maybe messing with the district maps defeats the purpose/spirit of back-to-basics, but the biggest appeal to me of the Nutter crime emergency proposal was the addition of task forces into high-crime areas. I think Jen's concern, which I share, is that Ramsey's approach may reduce the overall crime rate -- which is fantastic -- but with a loss of focus on making neighborhoods more livable block by block. Obviously, we need more than just the police force to do that, but I do think that should be the larger goal of a broader city policy.
Mayor and Police Commissioner back to earth, in 40 days
Mayor and Police Commissioner back to earth, in 40 days
"The whole city has problems with violent crime," Ramsey said. "You've got to start somewhere."
Is the honey moon over? The leadership is coming back to earth. How quick time fly. Seems like yesterday , The city was full of hope and glee.
Ramsey said "I'm not a miracle worker," he said. "I have to work with the resources I have. But I promise people, I'm focused on the entire city of Philadelphia, not just nine districts."
Nutter: "I got elected mayor, not monarch. When the mayor was pressed for Casino answers. A month ago he would have had his superman suit on.