The Launching of a Partnership
Jane Ames
The following is a summary of Sam's comments before City Council as he introduced the Public Safety Partnership.
“…the fact remains that we are but the agents of the people, and our duty is to them alone and to none other.”
Mayor Harry Lane, July 11, 1907
(who is also credited with launching Portland as the Rose City)
City Council Item 1093 Wednesday, September 14, 2005
1. We all hear that taxpayers want us to continuously look for public
efficiencies.
2. The resolution we are now considering is a responsive call for us to seek continuous improvement in government.
3. We are tired of the current level of crime; we need more effective public safety.
4. Citizens don’t care whether or not something is a County or City service. In fact, it is only mentioned when people are confused about who does what.
5. The current overlaps and gaps in our city and county public safety system do not serve well those who work in it. I know morale is low.
6. Today’s resolution puts in motion a process to jointly design and budget for our public safety system according to:
a. Citizens’ priorities, and
b. To emphasize developing a balanced, effective and efficient crime prevention and law enforcement system.
7. I have spoken to many people in this room and beyond. The feedback has inevitably been that this is a great idea, needs to happen, and in these budgetary difficult times it must happen… But that they just weren’t sure it ever could happen, or even now, if it will actually happen.
8. Here we are, starting a new public safety partnership, and it will take all of us to get more from the $350 million the city and county spend on public safety.
9. This will be hard work. If such a partnership was easy, it would have happened long ago.
10. We must find savings, and we will use those saving to make our system more effective.
11. This public safety partnership will use a zero-based budgeting approach.
12. We will go to the citizens for direction, giving them an opportunity to identify and prioritize what they want in public safety. We will use those priorities in selecting what we budget.
13. We will design an effective and efficient overall system of public safety, researching the best practices available, and using the vast knowledge base within our stakeholder, and City and County professional ranks. We will:
a. Identify the gaps:
We do not have enough jail beds, drug treatment and police officers. We need to provide for more prevention and intervention.
b. Look for the most effective delivery
Are there economies of scale to be capitalized upon?
• Fleet purchases or maintenance,
• Are there economic or communication benefits to be gained in IT services? c. And we must make it all measurable, so we can keep track of our successes and failures.
The emerging information from this effort will be invaluable as we make budget decisions in the spring.
In the second fiscal year we will move forward with a complete budgeting partnership, pooling our resources and funding to operate the most effective and efficient system we can support.
As Harry Lane pointed out 100 years ago:
“We are but agents of the people.”
And we must be responsible to them.
Posted by Jane Ames on September 14, 2005
(2) Comments | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Filed Under Events, Front Page, Good Government, News, Our Initiatives, Public Safety, Speeches & Testimony
Comments by site visitors
Hi Sam,
I thought that this might be something Portland should consider doing, given our progressive movement on free speech. I recall having to pay a substantial fee to stand outside of City Hall when I had about 20 or so people show up to listen, as I simply declared my candidacy for Portland City Council. Free Speech? No, it cost me about $50.00. Fortunately I didn't have to buy insurance too.
From the Magic City News from Maine.
PORTLAND –- Last night, the Portland City Council voted unanimously to eliminate permit fees associated with free speech activities on public land, such as parks, sidewalks, and public squares, after months of negotiations between the city and lawyers for the Maine Civil Liberties Union.
Thanks to these changes in the Portland City Code, individuals who set up tables on public land to distribute political or religious literature will no longer need to pay onerous fees to the city for the privilege, nor will they need to obtain expensive insurance. In addition, groups of 25 or fewer will not usually not need permits when gathering for First Amendment-protected activities, such as political, religious, or artistic speech.
“Portland, Maine is now one of the most free speech-friendly cities in the country,” said MCLU Executive Director Shenna Bellows. “The City Council ought to be proud of what it has accomplished, and these changes should pave the way for a more public, more robust, exchange of ideas in the public square.”
The MCLU approached the City of Portland in the Summer of 2004 over restrictions to speech it considered overly burdensome. Portland eliminated a series of permit fees and insurance requirements associated with artistic speech in the Spring of 2005. These latest changes cover protected speech on political and religious matters. In the hierarchy of the First Amendment, artistic, political, and religious speech are the most highly protected.
“These new changes mean that an individual who wants to set up a table in Monument Square to hand out leaflets saying ‘Save the North Woods’ or ‘Pave the North Woods’, ‘Go Bush!’ or ‘Bush Must Go!’, can do so without paying the city or getting event insurance,” said MCLU Staff Attorney Zachary Heiden.
“While the MCLU is not afraid to fight for free speech in the courts, we much prefer to work with a city to eliminate restrictions that unfairly restrict our core constitutional rights,” said Heiden. “The City of Portland wanted to do the right thing, and we were happy to help them.”
The MCLU is currently engaged in litigation against the City of Augusta over permit requirements for public marches and demonstrations.
Copyright 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 by Magic City Morning Star
Posted by: Jason Newell | Sep 20, 2005 7:08:54 PM
Post your comment
Please note: your email address, although required to post, will not be visible. We remove inappropriate or offensive content, and content deemed improper by State and City election and ethics law. The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of the office or the City of Portland.
Jane Ames:
11. This public safety partnership will use a zero-based budgeting approach.
JK:
How aout zero based budget for the PDC, Planning and other growth promoting, money sucking, operations. The reality is that few taxpayers really like having high density forced down their throats. They like paying for it even less.
Why can't we have stability and concentrate on the best schools, police and fire services?
Also see:
http://www.gazette.net/stories/090905/businew183615_31890.shtml
For how traffic congestion lost a major employer back east.
Thanks
JK
Posted by: jim karlock | Sep 15, 2005 7:25:01 AM