It’s a start.
That’s about all one can say about a directive from the new federal bosses at the Chicago Housing Authority forbidding senior staff from using the agency’s police force as a private chauffeur service.
Acting CHA Chairman Joseph Shuldiner reportedly ordered a halt to the “perk” after two uniformed security officers showed up to drive him the six blocks from CHA headquarters to the regional offices of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The armed livery service had been standard operating procedure.
From now on, say the reformers from HUD, staff will have to hail a cab or–perish the thought–walk.
No doubt Shuldiner, HUD’s assistant secretary for public housing, is confronted daily by even worse examples of the wasteful corporate culture at CHA. But he ought not lose sight of the forest for the trees.
Consider the CHA’s annual security budget. In recent years it has soared to $74 million, or about $855 per resident. Much of the federal money has gone to hire private security guards and to train and equip the CHA’s own 440-officer police force. Serious crimes are down about 10 percent from their highs in 1990-92, but occupancy rates are also down, raising a question as to whether the improvement was caused by better security or fewer potential victims.
Now Shuldiner is poring over a consultant’s report that says the CHA would get more for its security dollar by having fewer armed guards and more gadgetry such as “interactive closed-circuit television, access controls, sensors, fencing and improved lighting.” As he thumbs through CHA security files, he will discover that a similar set of techno-fixes was recommended two years ago in a special report by the Secret Service.
All of which overlooks the crux of a dilemma: No amount of money spent on combinations of security guards and electronic devices can overcome the behavioral consequences of stacking thousands of welfare families in high-rises where they are isolated from the rest of the city.
There will be no true security for residents until the worst high-rises are torn down and the families moved to humane alternatives, be it low-rise replacement housing or private housing made affordable with government vouchers.
Obviously tenants need to be safeguarded during the transition period, but the cost of “security” cannot be allowed to sap funding needed for the one, permanent solution.
It will take years to replace the high-rises, but as with the ending of the police-chauffeurs, it’s time to start.
