Sunday, December 19, 2010

Fewer Police For Uptown?

According to the Sun-Times: "The stage is set for a confrontation over Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis’ upcoming plan to reallocate police resources from lower-crime districts to those that need more officers."

This raises a few questions:
  • Doesn't all of Chicago "need more officers," not just high-crime areas?
  • Will Uptown suffer a shortage of officers because we share our police districts with lower-crime neighborhoods that include Lincoln Park, Andersonville and Ravenswood?
  • If this plan is implemented, does that mean that Chicagoans who pay the highest property taxes to live in the most crime-free areas will now be protected by the fewest number of officers?
From our previous post about this:  "The police officer who told us this would be happening says:  "Your readership needs to contact their respective Commander, The Chief of Patrol and Aldermanic contenders. Why should hard-working, tax-paying citizens not get the police service that we deserve?"

Here's their contact information - and a reminder that this decision is being made by the brass, NOT by our local command.  Be polite and express your reasoning for opposing this decision. 
  • Superintendent of Police Jody P. Weis - 312-745-6100
  • Chief of Patrol Ernest P. Brown - 312-745-6210


  1. It would be great to have more police on patrol but I cannot see any real big difference in crime just because a few officers are relocated. With added offices you still have the gangs and shooting anyway so it just a fact of life living in Uptown Chicago anyway.

  2. You might as well add the Mayor to your list of people to contact, because if anybody thinks that something like this could possibly happen without his full knowledge and endorsement, you must be smoking something!

  3. There is definitely something good to be said about police visibility deterring crime. With fewer LEOs in an area, a perp might say yes to crime versus not if he/she does not see the fuzz.

  4. More police MIGHT help, but people are at a point where they're no longer afraid of the police anyway. If you're angry enough to want to shoot someone or desperate enough to want to sell drugs, you're not thinking of the consequences like jail or prison. Most of the police cameras throughout the city seem to be a waste of money (police cameras only seem to just take pictures, NOT prevent things from happening).

  5. Well Wiseguy this makes a big difference, the Police department is already short handed and now they want to take more Police from your neighborhood that your taxes pay for. The gangs are not dumb they know what is going on and are going to go where there are less Police officers, this means you have a greater chance of becoming a victim of a crime. It is also going to mean longer responce times when you call.

  6. They have been sending our Officers out to the westside for a while now, so whats the difference ?

  7. Under normal circumstances, in a well-run city, this would be good news because it would mean that crime has been reduced so significantly that a reduced police presence is justified. Back to reality, reducing the number of officers is grossly negligent and asking for more crime and violence. Instead of reducing their presence, the CTA should offer its blighted real estate on Wilson to the CPD at a bargain so that we can have a small department right in the neighborhood that is extremely mobile and able to follow the vermin wherever they run to hide.

  8. This is absolutely the right strategy. The complaint that this strategy ignores that there is a need for more police everywhere does not mean that this strategy is wrong. Governing is about prioritizing. There is never enough resources for any government function. And the argument that because people in Utpown may pay more taxes than people in Englewood they should get as much or more police presence also does not make sense. Under that argument, people in Lincoln Park should get all the police presence because they pay more in taxes than us in Uptown. The police should go where the crime is. And if that includes 3 or 4 beats here, then good.

  9. "the CTA should offer its blighted real estate on Wilson to the CPD at a bargain so that we can have a small department right in the neighborhood that is extremely mobile and able to follow the vermin wherever they run to hide."

    December 20, 2010 10:23 AM

    A CPD 023 District substation at Wilson and Broadway would be a wonderful thing. Designate a few parking spaces for Police Squad cars only and we are in business.
    Too bad no one will be left to staff it when they get done looting Officers and cars from the District.

  10. Samantha -- this is not the right strategy. They need a new strategy altogether, not just whack-a-mole!

  11. We got stuck in this mess because of waste, corruption and the misuse of TIFs. Until we repair these causes of the budget shortfall, we will continue to shortchange the public with more cuts.

    If you view TIFs as free money and if you expect special favors from your elected officials, then the solution is rather obvious: Transfer our police to higher areas of crime. Waste and corruption mean we deal with fewer resources, so pay up.

  12. Hmm. If he follows thru, I like this from Rahm:

    On another subject, Emanuel condemned as a “false choice” Chicago Police Superintendent Jody Weis’ upcoming plan to reallocate police resources from lower-crime districts to those that need more officers.

    Instead of robbing from Peter to pay Paul, Emanuel favors his own plan to use funds generated by Chicago’s 159 tax-increment-financing (TIF) districts to hire 250 more police officers to beef up Targeted Response Units that flood high-crime areas.

    “TIFs today — 20-plus years after the TIF program [started] — still do not have a return on investment standard. There’s $900-plus million in TIF funds that are unused. A slight reform will find…savings of $25 million that could put 250 more police on the streets,” he said.

    “Rather than take from one…neighborhood [and give] to another, which is pitting one part of the city against the other, I do not think the city should be pitted against itself. All of us have to move forward together…That type of [TIF] reform with better management will also give you the resources for more police.”

    TIF reform AND not taking police away from one part of the city to give to another. My kind of thinking. I'm neutral so far in the mayoral race, but I do like this.

  13. I agree with Samantha's comment...this plan actually worked in Philadelphia. We have to try something different because what has been done in the past has not been working.

  14. Jose, Samantha's reasoning is perfect except for one glaring issue: Our police force is already extremely understaffed.

  15. Here's the question:

    Does having more police in other, higher crime areas of the city reduce crime here in Uptown MORE THAN having those police remain here in this neighborhood?

    First, I have not doubt that crime in other parts of the city effect crime here. Drug supply lines, sources of weapons and ammunition and criminal skills (not to be discounted) all come from outside the neighborhood. I have even heard police at CAPS meetings talk about how many of the criminals in our neighborhood come from the South Side and up near Howard. My personal experience confirms this.

    What we should be concerned about is sacrificing our safety for the sake of other neighborhoods. I cannot say whether that is the case or not.

    A note on taxes: Property owners like to argue that, since they pay property taxes, they should get priority over those of us who do not. Before you argue this, you should check out what your property taxes support. Do this by looking up your property at the cook county assessor site, and checking the "taxcode."

    For example, I looked up 4315 N. Hazel St. here Ther tax code is 73001. Properties in that code pay into the following districts:

    Cook County
    Forest Preserve
    Truman College
    Board of Ed
    Chicago Finance Auth
    Park Dist.
    Water Rec.

    So, only a very small percentage of property taxes goes to the City, and only a fraction of that to the police. Being a property owner certainly does not mean you have more of a say in city affairs than us apartment dwellers.

  16. I'm not sure anyone is arguing that property owners should get priority over renters. Instead, I think it's fair to say that property owners pay property taxes and are entitled to their property's police protection, among other things, as a result. How the government ultimately allocates the revenue is pretty irrelevant (e.g. Social Security), and renters only stand to benefit from their landlords' entitlement.

  17. The bottom line is that places like 019,020,023,016 are all going to lose Police Officers. Which means that proactive policing in those areas will soon become a thing of the past. Officers that used to patrol those areas will now be simply running from paper job to paper job. I've seen it happen elsewhere. And remember,everytime you take a Police Officer and assign him a job, that Offier is down, be it an arrest or a simple report. So let's say you have five beat in the ten sector of 023. Beats 2311 through 2315(Im just using numbers here). Beats 2311 is assigned a job which requires backup so beat 2312 and if serious enough, beat 2313 are both assigned to assist. Now, more than half the cars in the ten sector are down on one job leaving only two cars for the entire ten sector. If the job is serious enough beats 2311,12 and 13can remain down for the entire tour of duty. But now you if you reduce the amount of beats in the ten sector from five to say four and you can see how serious this is getting. The response times to calls, even serious calls will be drastically increased.It can be no other way no matter what the empty suits at 35th Street tell you.
    They are robbing Peter to pay Paul. It's as simple as that.

    The real question is when will this city start doing what they need to do which is to hire more Police Officers. This plan is the product of a Police Department that is currently being run by people that don't have a clue as to what needs to be done to solve the problem of crime. There are too many non-Police personel who have no experience in law enforcement making decisions and formulating policy There are too many political hacks in the Command Staff, put there by daley, who behave as if they are inb a frat. There have been too many good,quality bosses dumped by Weis and his band of misfits. Case in point. Dan Dugan. A very knowlegable,well qualified law enforcement PROFESSIONAL, probably the only member of the command Staff that had a clue, dumped by Weis back to Lt.only to be replaced by a goof with a questionable resume. And that my friends has become the norm.
    Get used to it folks, it's not going to get any better if this plan is implemented. I wish you luck and all the rest. Me? I'm buying more ammo. b ecause I live in one of the "slower" districts that will soon seee it's Officers transferred to a busier place.

  18. I really do mean good luck. You have my sympathy. Many years ago I took oath and it bothers me that I will soon be hindered in my efforts to make your world a better place. I know that in my neck of the woods I and other Police Officers will be out and about doing what the police department cannot or will not do, that is protecting the very people who make this city work. The people that go to work everyday,earn a living and make a contribution to society. The difference between us and you is we will be armed and able to doing something about the criminal element that will soon be invading our homesteads, hence the comment about ammo. But a sincere good luck and Merry Christmas to all of you.