Safe Streets

ACT II NEEDS A REWRITE

Mayor Street could not have set the scene better on Election Day if he had
tried. Marlon Magill, a 30-year-old machinist, talked about the Safe
Streets crime-fighting program when asked why he had just voted to give the
mayor four more years.

"Look at the neighborhood," said Magill, gesturing toward the area around
his polling place at Ninth and Lehigh in North Philadelphia. "There are no
drug dealers on the corners."

Magill is not alone in his praise for Safe Streets. To many
Philadelphians, it has been the saviour of their neighborhoods. Where
before they hid from drug dealing taking place on the cornier, now
neighbors sit on the steps, children play on the sidewalk.

Judging just by those achievements, Safe Streets is worth continuing.

Unfortunately, that is not the only measure. There is financial
feasibility. There is citywide effectiveness.

If Mayor Street and Police Commissioner Sylvester M. Johnson want to keep
Safe Streets rolling, they need a plan for building upon its successes
without bankrupting the city.

They need: Safe Streets, Act Two.

Act One of the antidrug initiative began in May 2002 with police officers
stationed at 300 known drug corners. The constant presence worked as the
number of crimes in many categories went down and residents let out a sigh
of relief.

Success had its price.

The city budgeted $100 million over five years for the program. Yet just
this year, police costs for Safe Streets are expected to hit at least $30
million. Fighting crime requires a strategy - and tens of millions a year
in OT is not sustainable in a city in a state in financial straits. Even
if that amount shrinks some, as officials predict, the city still will be
hard-pressed to find the money.

Crime-fighting also requires a strategy that adjusts to different
circumstances. Some crimes dropped off in the program's first 18 months.

But violent crimes, including shootings and murders, are up in 2003. While
residents in some neighborhoods hail Safe Streets, others complain drug
dealers simply have moved their operations to where there is no police
presence. The entire city deserves the best police protection possible.

Signals from city officials have been confusing. A police memo sent out on
the day of the mayor's reelection called for cutting Safe Streets overtime
costs in half this month. Yet Street reportedly said he would fire any
official who suggested big cuts in Safe Streets soon after the election, to
avoid the impression that he kept police presence high leading up to the
balloting, on to drop it afterward.

Johnson has insisted overtime costs could be cut in half for November
without hurting the program because dozens of officers were back from
vacations and less overtime was needed. Maybe. But plans must extend
beyond November.

Act Two might involve retooling Safe Streets and better blending a variety
of approaches, including an aggressive arrest and prosecution strategy. It
might involve better use of CompStat, the computerized crime-tracking
program John Timoney introduced as commissioner.

What shouldn't change in Act Two is the program's goal: safer streets and
safer neighborhoods. If that cannot be achieved throughout the city, for
more than a year or two, then officials will have to decide whether there
should be an Act Three.