Making (no) sense of police details
IT'S A CAUSE without a rebel - and I've set out to recruit one. So I'm on the phone with Barbara Anderson, trying to persuade her to launch a ballot-question crusade to rein in police details.
Think of it: The Citizens for Limited Taxation leader could return to glory in 2010 with a commonsensical quest that would save Massachusetts citizens tens of millions annually.
There's just one hitch: Barbara herself. Instead of saddling up, she delivers a polemic about those wascally wabbits on Beacon Hill, who froze the last stage of the 2000 income tax rollback she worked so hard on.
Egad. Is Barbara, long a feisty and indefatigable warrior, sulking?
An ill-advised question, that. There follows an e-mail flurry that fairly makes one feel the long, hot, dusty, underpaid days involved in a petition drive. Several of her notes even wander into a critique of my various faults as columnist and thinker.
Yikes! If sparring with Barbara weren't such fun, I'd almost be sorry I asked.
So what prompted my call?
On several recent occasions, work crews have been out on principal streets in Charlestown during prime driving hours. In one instance that caught my eye, a traffic light was out of commission, leaving motorists to sort their way through an occasionally busy intersection unaided, even though the street had been dug up to fix it. Drivers managed just fine, but it piqued my curiosity. Why no police detail in a situation where a little assistance with traffic - the sort a civilian flagman could have provided - might have helped?
When I called City Hall to find out why, I was told that no detail officers had been available that morning. And yet, miraculously, civic life - and the repair work - proceeded apace. Imagine!
On another recent morning, a line of orange traffic cones reduced a busy street from two same-direction lanes to one.
This time there were two detail officers - standing well off to the side, chatting amicably away. Now, other than the orange cones, drivers really didn't require any assistance. But that being the case, why have the cops there in the first place?
To make sense of these mysteries, I called Boston Police Superintendent-in-Chief Robert Dunford.
Asked about the Tale of the Troubled Traffic Light, Dunford said that if a detail has been requested but no officer has arrived, work can proceed without one, though the work crew is supposed to take reasonable measures to ensure traffic and pedestrian safety.
As for the Curious Case of the Capable Cones and Confabulating Cops, "One of the things officers learn very quickly is that benign neglect is the best way to let traffic run," Dunford said.
If so, why not extend that benignity to citizens' wallets and forgo a detail altogether?
"Their value is their presence," Dunford maintained. "That makes drivers stop at the light and slow down at the cones." Hmmmmm.
Let's give Superintendent Dunford points for sportsmanship. Stuck with the thankless task of defending details to a columnist who regards them as a colossal waste of money, he rose to the challenge with admirable courtesy - and considerable ingenuity.
Still, if you don't need details when police officers aren't available and, further, if detail officers are often most effective when they simply stay out of the way, an obvious conclusion suggests itself: It's time for Massachusetts to join the vast majority of other states by using less expensive civilian flagmen rather than police details whenever practicable.
Although the Patrick administration is said to be considering doing just that wherever it has the authority, it's extremely unlikely that lawmakers will embrace broader change. After all, one brief sign of gubernatorial hesitation several months back was all it took for the Legislature's momentary reform impulse to fade.
However, such reform could be accomplished over time with a carefully drafted ballot question that voids any local ordinances or bylaws requiring details and stipulates that no future contract on any governmental level include them, says one lawyer well-versed in the ballot process.
Now all we need is a reform-minded group ready to rise to the challenge.
Any takers?
Scot Lehigh's e-mail address is lehigh@globe.com. 