Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

jersey385 t1_j9jt1xl wrote

This is why people need to vote and stop putting up with corruption. I sometimes wonder if people are just fine with their taxes doing nothing. Except for the fire department, I feel like they do a lot.

30

Aggravating-Address6 t1_j9k584t wrote

Shea had the ability to hire and fire dispatchers at his own discretion. The same company that Shea has selected to do 3 studies on the dispatch department also conveniently offer private dispatch services.

This same company was in charge of the search and eventual hiring of Shea as the public safety director. This reeks of corruption.

25

restricteddata t1_j9krrlq wrote

Shea says that the department handles 43,000 calls per month. So that's around 1,400 per day, which comes out to almost 60 an hour, or one per minute, assuming they were evenly distributed across 24 hours, which of course is an unlikely if simplifying assumption.

From the reporting it sounded like the dispatch had two people on call for the Taqueria night, and one was late, or something like that. I don't necessarily doubt the claim that they had +200 at that moment — it's a big city and 911 is used for a lot of different services — but by his number cited, that is pretty close to the norm? Like why can their system not scale to 2X normal volume? Any reasonable system would assume that there would regularly be demand above baseline, especially for a system based around emergencies.

Shea also seems to be pitching the idea that the problem here is "government technology" lagging behind "civilian technology," and that the "modern environment" is what is "overwhelm[ing]" the system. I find this... unlikely, and a strange framing. It does not sound like an informed or accurate response.

He really doesn't seem to get that this is a vital, necessary, emergency system. Having this work reliably is not optional. It is the bare minimum.

14

Ilanaspax t1_j9lbyun wrote

Replying to jersey385 (#1,918,625)

That’s what happens when you plan a city so that it is filled with luxury rentals that families can’t afford to live in for more than a few years. Little long term investment or concern with the community and the people who’d like to stay and be involved will eventually get priced out.

2

Lebesgue_Couloir t1_j9m5p5h wrote

Replying to Ilanaspax (#1,928,653)

Also, here's a voter turnout map from 2022

Of course you're fucking wrong. Downtown had the highest voter turnout in the city. But, again, spread misinformation because you have a superficial fetish with hating downtown.

2

objectimpermanence t1_j9ml2pm wrote

Replying to Lebesgue_Couloir (#1,928,789)

Thanks, I was looking for a map like this the other day.

Certain people on here love to make up their own facts about things like this because they have an ax to grind.

By the way, it’s been well established that there’s a strong positive correlation between voter participation levels and income, so I’m not surprised to see that downtown has relatively high voter turnout levels.

Higher income people are also more likely to engage with their local elected leaders, which explains why downtown often gets “nice” things earlier than the rest of the city. Things like protected bike lanes, the pedestrian plaza, etc. are a direct result of people lobbying their council person for improvements.

It is true that homeowners tend to have higher voter participation rates than renters, but I suspect that downtown (not including Newport) also has a higher homeownership rate than other less affluent parts of the city. The Census bureau has this data, but I’m typing this on my phone and they don’t seem to have a convenient way to query this data at a census tract level using a mobile browser.

4

JournalSquire t1_j9r7eyz wrote

This FLOP mayor who thinks he’s gonna run for governor can’t even run a city well. What’s the opposite of an imposter syndrome?

1