Convention must change, planner says
Urban site is less likely to be chosen
The president of the Democratic National Convention's host committee and some leading Democrats predicted last week that the party will never again stage a convention in a cramped downtown area because of security concerns and difficulties maneuvering in a crowded urban core, even after a week that got high marks for organization and energy among the party faithful who gathered here.
The same elements that make cities such as Boston and New York, where Republicans will meet later this month, attractive settings for conventions make for nightmares for security and transportation planners, organizers said.
Securing the city's easy pedestrian access, restaurants, night life, and the nearby highways, train stations, and waterways sparked more disruptions than planners ever imagined.
Even the convention's biggest cheerleader, Mayor Thomas M. Menino, said that although he has no second thoughts about wooing the convention to Boston, he would urge other mayors to get a full assessment of security and transportation costs before bringing a convention into their cities.
In separate interviews with the Globe, Menino and David A. Passafaro, president of host committee Boston 2004, said they were surprised by the tight and costly security requirements laid down by the Secret Service as Boston staged the first convention since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Both were closely involved in implementing logistics that included the mandatory closure of parts of Interstate 93 during rush hour last week, the shutdown of North Station to commuters, and a fenced security zone around the FleetCenter.
''I would find it very difficult to believe that either party will go to a downtown setting again," said Passafaro, a close Menino adviser. ''I guess we never anticipated the impact of it early on."
A better alternative, Passafaro said, could be big sports arenas away from downtown, such as Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, if it had a roof. It has plenty of seats, ample open parking spaces nearby, and other facilities. It also has a much easier security perimeter to patrol because it is less crowded and there are few transportation hubs nearby that could be terrorist targets.
Neither Menino nor Passafaro would go so far as to say that the security demands would have forced them to abandon their campaign to bring the convention to Boston. Both were basking in the largely positive reviews of the event, though some business people and commuters were complaining that the city shut down for much of the week.
''The hiccups, the bumps in the road, are due to the security issues, and we have no control over it," Menino said. ''It's the first convention since 9/11. People didn't know what it would be. It's different today than it was before."
After the last Democratic convention in sprawling Los Angeles, Democrats craved a city where they could easily navigate and see the sights. But in the world of terrorism concerns, those same benefits became cause for worry.
Boston was chosen to host the convention in 2002, but it was unclear exactly what that would mean, Passafaro said. The Secret Service did not get involved until last summer, and the extent of its security planning was not made public until this spring.
''If we had that kind of front-end [knowledge], I'm not so sure whether or not we would have been successful in getting the convention," Passafaro said. ''All the things that went allegedly wrong in LA, we fixed, but we created some other problems, post-9/11."
Roughly half the convention's budget went to security, mostly because of Secret Service precautions. Those orders quadrupled the convention's security budget to more than $40 million, paid for with federal tax dollars approved by Congress in a special appropriation that included a similar amount for New York City.
Democratic National Convention Committee spokeswoman Peggy Wilhide disagreed with Passafaro's suggestion that the political parties not stage conventions in big city downtowns.
With memories of 45-minute bus rides to the
She said security planning will go more smoothly in the future, as the parties adjust to a world in which terrorism is a real concern.
Despite the worries, organizers say the convention went off well. Inside the arena, a flashy television production stayed on schedule and energized party activists on behalf of Senator John F. Kerry.
Outside, protests for the most part were tame, the predicted traffic nightmares never materialized, and most delegates said they loved the quick cab and bus rides between their hotels and convention events.
Though network coverage was down, the Democrats' convention included new technologies, with cable outlets covering it in engaging ways and ''bloggers" credentialed as media for the first time, Wilhide said.
''Everyone was so thrilled not only with the convention, but with the city," Wilhide said. ''It was such a successful convention, from every standpoint. . . . Conventions are an integral part of our political process, and I think they will continue."
But, as they have after several recent conventions, some Democrats are urging the party to rethink the basic concepts that shape the political debate. For more than a century, conventions were key for parties to choose their candidates. By 1960, that purpose was mostly eclipsed by primaries, but conventions retained their usefulness as television events that drew broad interest nationwide.
These concerns are based largely on the fear that the events are not attracting the attention Democrats are hoping for. The four nights last week drew three hours of coverage on each of the major television networks, a fact that should sound alarm bells for Democrats, said Simon Rosenberg, president and founder of the New Democrat Network, a politically moderate group.
''The model's broken," said Rosenberg, a member of the convention's platform committee who attended his fifth Democratic convention last week. ''It does not feel like a convention that absorbs the lessons of how things have changed."
Rosenberg said the party should think about smaller, simultaneously occurring regional conventions, linked via satellite. Such a system could directly involve some 200,000 voters, 10 times the FleetCenter's capacity, without overburdening any one area.
Philip W. Johnston, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the $90 million or so spent on the convention could be better spent on political advertising or on social programs for those who need them.
''We have to go back to the drawing boards," Johnston said. ''This particular convention went off without a hitch. But having said that, if you look at the way the political process has evolved over the last 30 years or so, I don't see much future for these conventions."
As for Boston, its first such event may well have been its last. The city's Byzantine politics figures to keep the Hub off Democrats' short list for the next handful of decades, and a tidal shift in Bay State political leanings would probably be necessary for the GOP to take a Boston convention bid seriously.
A weary Menino said that the city may well win another convention, but that one convention per career is enough for any mayor.
''I'm going to advocate to the site selection committee that the next time they pick a convention, that they pick a hundred-acre farm," Menino said jokingly. ''They can have next to it a campground, so we can have everybody live in a tent."
Rick Klein can be reached at rklein@globe.com.
