When incompetence in civic leadership appears to be policy

On NextDoor Atlanta, a neighbor reports.

On STREET ADDRESS rd NE at 305am  I had a white female with blond hair and black dress speaking what sounded to be German trying to break into my back door.  I called the police immediately.  After it rang about 50 times, the operator told me an officer would come to the address when available.  She informed me they don’t provide eta.   I asked if a unit was in the vicinity and she would not provide that info.  The operator  then hung up on me.  I called back at 311am because the woman  left the property on foot heading toward Pasadena. Again was told no eta and officer would arrive when available.  

I am still waiting and police have not shown up.

A second neighbor asks:

Is this a ‘policy,’ an attitude, an adopted procedure? If there are so many worse things going on all the time that there’s no one available when there is an attempted break-in, we’re in bad trouble, aren’t we!

These conversations happen all the time - an incident occurs, a neighbor calls and either cannot reach 911 or is put on hold or is not provided assistance.  If a police officer is dispatched, their arrival times can be hours after the incident.  Even apparently dangerous incidents.  

We are slipping into a condition where the populace is slowly being schooled into the realization that their personal security can not be trusted to the Atlanta Police Department.  

People often then ask something along the lines of the second neighbor's question.  "How has this happened?"  

Here was my reply to that question.  Crime and poor municipal services are a choice arising from the aggregate consequences of many tactical decisions.  

To answer your question, it is unintentional aggregated ineptitude.

Predicate issues

Increase in crime - We are below the peaks of the late 1990s but quite a bit above the lows of 2014.  It is highly geographically dependent such that, from a residential point of view, our neighborhood crime level is negligible in the context of the City of Atlanta.  What crime we have is materially concentrated on Cheshire Bridge Road, Piedmont, and Monroe.  Crime is flat or down in most jurisdictions of the US but up in a couple of dozen cities including Atlanta.

Increase homelessness - Also highly geographical dependent.  Homelessness has been declining over the past 20 years at a national level but rising in select jurisdictions recently.  Most homelessness increase has been in California and again, a dozen or so major cities.  And in select parts of those cities.  It has been flat or declining in most jurisdictions.

The geographical concentrations highlight that both crime and homelessness are materially affected by differing public policies.  

Atlanta specific issues

Police force staffing - Atlanta Police Department has been chronically understaffed for decades in the range of 20-30%.  Lots of plausible reasons for that condition but it has been a persistent and escalating problem.

2020 debacle - Former mayor KLB repeatedly threw APD police officers under the political bus and the City Council came within a single vote of defunding the police (multiple other big city jurisdictions went ahead and defunded and have had material increases in crime as a consequence.)  KLB and City Council exacerbated the underlying challenges of recruiting and retaining experienced police officers.

911 staffing - 911 call center has had ongoing staffing and training problems since 2020.  I don't know why.  

Ratchet effect - Example:  Too few police and too many homeless lead to increased emergencies (ex. burning bridges) which divert police and first responder resources from routine activities (such as responding to break-in calls which aren't responded to by 911).  It becomes a vicious circle.

Consequence of the above is that 911 calls aren't reliably taken; scarce police resources are concentrated in parts of the city with higher crime and are not readily transferable on short notice; there are not enough APD officers in the first place.  

Short answer 

 

It is not intentional policy or procedure.  It is basic and routine civic processes badly managed, exacerbated by ineffective/faddish public policies related to homelessness and crime, further exacerbated by chronic understaffing, and made worse by dramatically inconsistent City policies over time.

And as long as we keep voting for the same establishment candidates, we will keep having a decline in services and outcomes.  And people will once again begin leaving the city as happened in the 1970s when the population declined by 20%.

There is nothing magic here.  The resources are available.  The solutions which work are well known and documented.  All we have to do is choose to achieve the outcomes the residents seek, even if it means giving up delusional or profitable grifting ideas that are faddish among the Mandarin class.