[Mintwood-place] Is self policing logical?

Wed Mar 12 19:50:45 PST 2008

Shall we float the issue again about hiring someone to Patrol the Biltmore/Mintwoodd etc. area on Friday and Saturday night?

Pat Weiss
Biltmore

-----Original Message-----
From: rdonkis at aol.com
To: philip.holland at verizon.net; mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
Sent: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 6:04 pm
Subject: Re: [Mintwood-place] Is self policing logical?

Yes, you hit the nail on the head as they say. And actually, private policing was quite successful on Biltmore Street several years ago, no one can dispute that. I have serious doubts about Jim's program. I know the point is moot, but sad that we are stuck with the dumpy 18th Street strip of bars that create a neighborhood nuisance when other parts of the city are passing us by with great mixes of food, bar, retail establishments - 14th St, U St, Columbia Hghts. Sadly, we now seldom patronize establishments in our own neighborhood due to the quality of these establishments as well as the declining quality of the patrons who come to Adams Morgan and cause trouble.

Robert Donkis

Biltmore Street

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Holland <philip.holland at verizon.net>
To: 'Mintwood Place' <mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org>
Sent: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:27 am
Subject: [Mintwood-place] Is self policing logical?

It seems to me that when Mintwood place residents floated the idea of getting our own “police” the ideas fell like a lead balloon.

Council member Grahams plans to make the city safe for “our neighbors”, in effect, by the bars self policing with city police, assuring us that there is no conflict of interest.

The assumption is that the City can not afford to make the city safe.  So, it will push the cost back to the bar owners, whose business/patrons are presumably the ones making it unsafe.

I don’t really follow the logic if we are spending more money and not solving the quality of life issues experienced by the neighbors or reducing crime.  If the city can not afford to enforce and police the neighborhood so that it is safe, then it should not allow and or promote the cause of that condition, namely the overwhelming influx of people into Adams Morgan.

The root causes could be reduced or eliminated by limiting the number of bars /restaurants thereby reducing the numbers of people into the neighborhood so that it can be policed and laws enforced.

Does anyone else see this?

Phil Holland

-----Original Message-----
From: mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org [mailto:mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org] On Behalf Of Denis James
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:34 AM
To: 'Jim Graham'; 'Newsham, Peter (MPD)'
Cc: 'Mintwood Place'; 'Forman, Matthew C'
Subject: Re: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night BarHours

The point I was making, so that people would understand why it was at the expensive “overtime” or re-imbursable rate, is that it’s in ADDITION to an officer’s regular shift. There is no suggestion in my message of criticism of the program due to “exhausted” officers.

From: mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org [mailto:mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org] On Behalf Of Jim Graham
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:57 AM
To: 'Newsham, Peter (MPD)'
Cc: 'Mintwood Place'; 'Forman, Matthew C'
Subject: Re: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night BarHours

Perhaps he did misinterpret. But thanks, Chief,  for clearing that up. We don't want to give the impression tat officers must have already completed an 8 hour shift in order to go on reimbursable detail...the suggestion walked be that they are "required" to be exhausted! Bests, CM Jim Graham

From: Newsham, Peter (MPD) [mailto:peter.newsham at dc.gov] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:53 AM
To: Jim Graham
Subject: RE: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night BarHours

Mr. Graham,

A reimbursable detail will be hours that are worked in addition to the normal 40 hours that a member is scheduled to work.  It could be after their shift, before their shift or on their day off.  Perhaps, Dennis misinterpreted our conversation.

PN

From: Jim Graham [mailto:grahamwone at gmail.com]
Sent: Sun 3/2/2008 8:46 PM
To: 'Denis James'; 'Forman, Matthew C'; mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org; Newsham, Peter (MPD); Newsham, Peter (MPD)
Subject: RE: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night BarHours

I am with this email asking Chief Newsham to reply, since I am not aware of any such rule.

From: Denis James [mailto:denisjames at verizon.net] 
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 4:20 PM
To: 'Forman, Matthew C'; 'Jim Graham'; mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org; Peter Newsham (MPD)
Subject: RE: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night BarHours

Assistant Chief Peter Newsham informed me that officers can ONLY work a reimbursable detail after they have completed their regular shifts, thus the reimbursables are all at an overtime rate. 

He also said that MPD will never assign just one officer to a given location in the reimbursable program, for the officer’s protection and safety. Because of this, individual establishments who wish to participate in the program by hiring just one officer will still have to pay the same amount, but they will get two officers out of the deal.

From: mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org [mailto:mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org] On Behalf Of Forman, Matthew C
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 4:07 PM
To: Forman, Matthew C; Jim Graham; mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
Subject: Re: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night BarHours

Oh - upon re-reading, I now see that  you were saying that the non-ABC businesses can hire “directly” without going through the MPD program.  How does that work – if you’re a business, you can just see an officer on the street and hire them directly without going through MPD as middleman, i.e., the program?  And if you hire someone off the street, the rates are whatever you negotiate with the individual officer, which is on average $28 per hour?  But if you go through MPD, they charge you a 100% markup?  What’s the rationale for that?  Why would any rational non-ABC business agree to pay double? Assuming they wouldn’t, then your original posting remains essentially correct – non-ABC businesses pay $28/hour while ABC business pay $56 because of the MPD’s bureaucratic rules.  Again, this begs the question of why MPD doesn’t simply cut their own rates, instead of charging a huge markup, only to be subsidized by another agency with added bureaucracy.  Meanwhile, it’s very telling that ABC businesses can’t hire directly while non-ABC ones can.  Again, MPD appears to believe that there is inherent danger regarding ABC establishments. 

From: mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org [mailto:mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org] On Behalf Of Forman, Matthew C
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 3:20 PM
To: Jim Graham; mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
Subject: Re: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night BarHours

I don’t understand.  What do you mean that officers hired under the MPD program cost about twice as much as direct hires?  Direct hires by whom?

From: mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org [mailto:mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org] On Behalf Of Jim Graham
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 2:59 PM
To: mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
Subject: [Mintwood-place] To Clarify --- More Police at Late Night Bar Hours

Dear Friends:

We need to clarify this message (see below).

Our original email may have suggested that, under the MPD cost reimbursable program, a higher hourly rate is charged for alcohol licensees than other businesses.  Such is not the case.

The charge for ALL businesses using MPD cost reimbursable officers is $56 an hour.  However, MPD policy prohibits bars from directly hiring police.  They may only use the MPD program.  On the other hand, businesses that do not sell alcohol ARE allowed to directly hire off-duty police officers.

Officers hired under the MPD program cost about twice as much as direct hires.

Our subsidy program cuts the cost of MPD reimbursable officers in half to encourage alcohol licensees to better protect the public.

Bests, Councilmember Jim Graham

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Dear Friends:

The ABC Board and MPD have taken the final steps to implement a program to fund the deployment of more police officers to protect the public outside bars at late night hours.  The ABC Board announced the start of a subsidy program this week to encourage the use of these officers.  

I authored $1 million in the 2008 budget to fund the police reimbursable detail subsidy program.  As a result, the ABC Board will now provide up to a 50% subsidy for the use of police officers outside bars at closing times.  Rules have been established for this program's operation.

In 2005, after various violent crimes in and around bars, I had authored the initial law to allow alcohol licensees to pay MPD to deploy officers outside bars.  That law allows bars, independently or in a group, to pay for these officers through MPD.  The officers are not stationed inside the bars.  They are stationed outside in the public area.

However, these officers are expensive.  The hourly rates are almost twice (about $56 per hour) what an officer makes patrolling establishments that don't sell alcohol. 

The subsidy program will encourage the hire of officers by reducing these costs.  As a result of the program, more officers can be deployed in Adams Morgan, U Street, or other DC entertainment areas to protect the public outside bars during late night hours. 

Bars or BIDS do not directly hire the officers. Instead the hiring is done through MPD.  The officers (who would otherwise be off duty) have full police powers and are focused on the entertainment area needs. The Adams Morgan Business Improvement District has been using reimbursable details successfully.

Please let me know if you have questions or concerns.  Bests, Councilmember Jim Graham

-- 

I typically answer emails before 9 AM on weekdays. If you email me after that, it is likely that you will hear from me the next weekday. If there is a need to communicate prior to that, you may wish to call me.

Jim Graham, Councilmember, Ward One, 1350 Pa. Ave., NW, #105, Washington, DC 20004. 202-724-8181; 202-724-8109 (fax).

Chairman, Committee on Public Works and the Environment (including alcohol regulation). Main Committee Number: 202-724-8195. 1350 Pa. Ave., NW, #116, Washington, DC 20004.

Website: www.grahamwone.com 

_______________________________________________
intwood-place mailing list
intwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
ttp://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/mintwood-place

Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. 

_______________________________________________
intwood-place mailing list
intwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
ttp://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/mintwood-place

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mutualaid.org/pipermail/mintwood-place/attachments/20080312/91732c0b/attachment.html 