Management by ricochet: Part 2, response
[Continued from yesterday’s Part 1.]
Facing a screaming headline criticizing its not-yet-announced plan to replace some security guards with cameras, what did the BHA do?
It folded.
As reported in the Boston Globe, it collapsed like a punctured balloon.
So much for that costs saving plan
Facing mounting criticism from senior citizens worried about their safety, the Boston Housing Authority yesterday [That is, August 21, the day after the hearing — Ed.] dropped its plan to replace some of its daytime security personnel with surveillance cameras.
BHA officials had proposed the move, saying they could enhance security and save $650,000 if they removed daytime security guards at 13 of the city’s housing developments, where about 1,800 elderly and disabled residents live, and installed cameras instead.
The BHA’s position is that taking out guards and replacing them with cameras would make security better. Perhaps so. As I discussed in yesterday’s post, the BHA has had minimal opportunity to make its case, because its recommendation was leaked to the Herald (almost certainly by someone opposed to it), and the BHA was caught completely flat-footed.
The news gets out prematurely
The Globe then weighed in with its sententious editorial:
Housing authority officials insist that humans would still be involved in keeping buildings safe. Building managers and aides would play a role in daytime security.
Which AHI recommends.
In addition, other housing authority employees would be, as they are now, in and out of buildings. Using new technology security systems would be a chance to put the authority’s limited resource to the best use, says BHA deputy administrator Bill McGonagle.
Among public housing residents who defend the proposal is Stephen Laverty, who serves on the resident advisory board. He argues that the technology system would provide protection and save money. And saving is crucial, says Laverty, because federal funding for housing authorities is drying up. He says residents can help by being floor captains or just being attentive neighbors.
Give Mr. Laverty credit for actually thinking about the problem. But evidently he is in a small minority:
Residents of the projects reacted fiercely and came by the busload to a recent public hearing –
Is it too cynical of me to ask where the buses came from?
– packing the City Council chambers and wielding signs in opposition to the proposal.
With more crowds expected at rallies today, BHA officials said they planned to withdraw its proposal.
“At the end of the day, policies implemented by government officials need to have the support of those most directly impacted,” BHA deputy administrator Bill McGonagle said in an interview last night. “Although we think our policy was a good one, we didn’t think it had sufficient support from the elderly and disabled residents to implement it.”
So there it is: a good idea, ruined by its presentation.
It seemed like a good idea at the time
The proposal would have eliminated the security guards stationed at the housing developments between
McGonagle said the agency has been running over budget and had hoped to reduce its operating deficit partly by eliminating daytime guards.
Not only has the BHA’s funding been cut, it is having difficulty controlling its expenses.
He said the agency this year will tap into reserves and next year will seek other sources of revenue or other expenses to cut.
Housing authorities around the country are running out of juice to squeeze. As I’ve written before, they are facing the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come.
The city is expected to publicly announce the decision today at the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Towers in Roxbury. Community activists had planned to meet at the development to rally against the proposal, but they got word last night that their rally would become a celebration of victory.
“This is something that has made the residents feel heard and feel more secure in their homes,” said Carolyn Villers, a community organizer at the Massachusetts Senior Action Council. “It’s great news that’s being celebrated throughout the developments.”
If there is any good come of this, it may be the flicker of increased resident participation. Will the residents take up Mr. Laverty’s suggestion of floor captains?
Earl Frost, a 64-year-old blind resident at the Frederick Douglass development in Roxbury, said the security personnel have been vital for keeping the housing developments safe. He said he recently dropped his keys and could not find them until a security guard noticed he needed help.
“We were just afraid for safety in general,” he said last night. “I’ve told some of the tenants, and they are ecstatic. They’re clapping their hands and praising the Lord and everything. I was so glad because it let us know that wherever you are, if you work together for one cause, there is power in numbers.”
Vote power. Political capital.
Mayor Thomas M. Menino also praised the decision last night.
“He always made it very clear that while he appreciated the use of technology in our housing authority, the priority must lie in the safety of the residents,” said his spokeswoman, Dot Joyce.
False dichotomy, Ms. Joyce! Technology is not safety’s opposite, it is safety’s handmaiden.
City councilors had also expressed concern that residents’ safety could have been compromised with fewer security personnel.
Councilor at Large Sam Yoon, who chairs the Council’s Committee on Housing, said: “This is a big victory for
Is it? When the cuts come, what will the residents do next year?
Taking stock, out of this remarkable reversal:
Who loses?
Sandra Henriquez loses. Ms. Henriquez never had a chance to present her case, and the instantaneous reversal can only make her look weak.
The BHA loses. It shows a complete absence of backbone.
Who wins?
The Herald wins. It got great publicity.
The leaker wins. He or she feels powerful.
The security guards win. They keep their jobs, without ever having to defend themselves.
Councilor Yoon wins. Many elderly residents now see him as their champion.
Mayor Menino wins. He looks judicious.
Leave it to the Globe to finish up with its rosy perspective:
City Councilor Sam Yoon has briefed Senator Edward Kennedy on the shortfall in funding from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. City Councilor Chuck Turner suggests that
It should. It won’t. Now what?
Fortunately, I don’t have to worry about such things
Write a comment