Hey, there! Log in / Register

Police return to foot patrols to try to curb rising crime downtown and on the Common; residents, parks advocates say more work needed

Kennedy with sharps container

At hearing, mother took items out of her diaper bag: Diapers, wipes, a spare onesie and a sharps container for discarded needles on the ground.

At a hearing on public-safety issues downtown and around Boston Common today, Elizabeth Vizza had a request for suburbanite do-gooders who keep coming to the Common to feed the homeless: Stop!

Vizza, president of the Friends of the Public Garden, which also looks out for the Common, said well meaning suburban feeders who think they are "saving souls" are actually harming the Common and even the people they're trying to help: By feeding people with mental-health and substance-abuse problems on the Common, the out of towners are keeping them from seeking out meals at the well stocked kitchens at nearby places such as St. Francis House - where, unlike on the Common, the hungry could also gain access to the help that might help them get into treatment, and get them away from the sometimes violent drug dealers who menace not only them, but residents and tourists just trying to enjoy one of the city's key parks.

At today's hearing, called by City Councilors Ed Flynn, who represents downtown, and Julia Mejia, Vizza, downtown and Beacon Hill residents and city officials said that crime - and equally important, the fear of crime - has gone up over the past six months as people ejected from Mass and Cass wound up on the Common, particularly around the Brewer Fountain, and nearby areas, such as the intersection of Winter and Tremont streets, but even on the other side of Beacon Hill, such as the Appleton Footbridge to the Esplanade.

While downtown and the Common have always had populations of homeless and people with drug problems, the past year has seen an explosion in their numbers, and far worse, in the often violent drug dealers who prey on them, they said.

Flynn pointed to stabbings at the fountain and across Tremont at Winter Place and said a few months ago, a woman standing at Boylston and Tremont suffered a broken nose when somebody just went up to her and punched her in the face.

Vizza said things got so bad this summer that Berklee College pulled its students out of a performance series at the Brewer Fountain after an incident in which a woman with mental-health issues began harassing the students, then eventually took her clothes off and jumped into the fountain. Only police were able to get her out, she said.

Katherine Kennedy of Beacon Hill, who has two children, 5 and 7 months, that she filed the first of a series of 311 reports about discarded needles on Sept. 9, when she walked her oldest child to her first day at preschool. She continued: "Sept. 30. Oct. 7. Oct. 9. Oct. 11. Oct. 12. And Oct. 15." Kennedy started her statement by pulling items out of her diaper bag, which ended with her holding up the sharps container she now carries for discarded needles.

"I accept that raising a family in the city is complicated," she said. "I accept trash, cigarette butts, nip bottles and even broken glass, but this is unacceptable."

City Councilor Sharon Durkan, who said she lives just a short walk from the Common on Beacon Hill, however, said a recent series of swarms by police have restored some semblance of order and even peace to the fountain and nearby areas on the Common.

BPD Deputy Supt. Dan Humphreys said the on-foot swarming is part of a "giant pivot" by Commissioner Michael Cox to get officers out of their cruisers in general and to target certain areas particularly affected by the dismantling of the tent city at Mass and Cass: The Common, the South End and Andrew and Nubian squares.

"We are doing a very intentional redeployment of officers" into those areas, he said, adding the department is using both 311 and 911 reports to figure out where to send officers, which includes not just areas with high crime rates but where reports indicate "a fear of crime."

"This is the beginning," he said, adding officers on these patrols, known as "interaction groups," are even told to file their own 311 reports on things that are not direct police issues, but which are quality of life issues, such as discarded needles.

Humphreys added the department is also beginning to pay more attention than it once did to traffic enforcement, which can't come soon enough for Rishi Shukla, a 25-year downtown resident and co-founder of the Downtown Boston Neighborhood Association. Shukla said that in addition to the rise of open drug dealing and use across downtown, downtown's 12,000 residents now also take their lives in their hands just walking out their doors.

"We can't have mopeds, scooters and bikers running through red lights, hitting pedestrians and having near misses," he said.

Flynn repeated his call for a "zero tolerance" policy, in which criminal offenders are sent off to state prison on even their first offense, as opposed to the revolving door he said now dumps them right back on the Common to commit more crimes and get arrested. Flynn, who has also called repeatedly for cutting city budgets, also called for more police officers - and services for people with mental-health and substance-abuse issues. He also called for finding a way to restore arrest powers to city park rangers, who lost them in 2021. Nobody from the Suffolk County District Attorney's office attended the hearing.

Durkan, however, cautioned that the issue is not black and white, that the Common is not some black hole of terror and that "creating unnecessary fear" risks driving away the businesses that might want to move downtown, investing in the neighborhood, creating more eyes on the street and hiring local residents.

Flynn, who in August demanded an end to all events on the Common, denied fearmongering and also said that he does so represents downtown, after council President Ruthzee Louijeune said Durkan represented the area.

Both councilors and other officials agreed that the homeless need help and caring and that much of the problem is the dealers, especially of fentanyl, who prey on them.

Shukla said he agreed on that point, and with Flynn that the DA and the courts need to simply stop letting people back out onto the street, that downtown residents shouldn't have to walk in fear and that parents in particular shouldn't have to worry about their children "bearing witness to violence."

"How many times can our officers arrest a person only to see them back on the street?" he asked.

Shukla said he appreciated the hearing, but noted it's not the first and said he doesn't want to be asked in six months to attend another one with nothing getting done. Instead, he said, if he had his druthers, he'd assemble city and state officials, police, representatives from local social-services agencies and colleges, then lock them in a room for a few hours until they came up with three or four key actions they would commit to take.

"We all have to do more and we all have to do better," he said.

Michael Nichols, president of the Downtown Boston Alliance - until recently the Downtown Business Improvement District - also called for more work to get drug dealers out of the area.

"Criminal drug dealing has tainted many of the jewels of our city, including Downtown Crossing," he said.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

I'd like to see crime stats on the Common distinct from those at Downtown Crossing. They are generally combined and used in reference to the Common. We use Park Street every day to and from school and I don't see the war zone that others describe.

up
46

What time are you using park street? I agree with everything that woman said and I am a 35 year old black male from the inner city. Park St and that area is a disgrace. I am not sure what you are seeing but the problems are many. It is very unsafe.

up
77

Just passing the problem to other neighborhoods.

up
28

But Humphreys said there was one benefit to dispersing Mass and Cass: That area had become such a large, violent and seething area that counselors, housing advocates and others trying to help people break their personal cycles were so scared for their own lives that they were increasingly reluctant to go in. Now, with smaller groups, things are more manageable and people trying to help those in need can try to, well, help them.

up
46

When you have a statement from someone with no lived experience in a matter, the responsible thing to do is to not promote that view, and to seek out insight from people with lived experience to see whether the person is amplifying a mainstream view of people with lived experience, or whether they're saying something that doesn't mesh up. If they're saying something that contradicts what people with lived experience tend to share, it's nonsense that doesn't bear repeating. If people with lived experience are fairly divided, then you report that.

People experiencing chronic homelessness and chronic mental illness will generally tell you that it has been helpful to receive food and other resources with no strings attached and will tell you about all the legitimate reasons they have to run far far away from systems. They'll rarely tell you that receiving food or shelter is "enabling." Hell, most people who are human won't say things like that feeding people is bad. Really, think before reporting these things.

up
44

“…. and will tell you about all the legitimate reasons they have to run far far away from systems. ”

This is true but mostly ignored.
Thanks for pointing it out.

up
13

There are clear differences between helping and enabling. Oftentimes, the "help" being offered is more about the "helper" than it is about anyone else.

What a bunch of phonies.

Makes me want to go hand out some watercress sandwiches and napkins to the great unwashed on the Common.

up
28

Pearl clutching sounds like a sexist trope, Lee. Police yourself.

She is also involved, engaged, and lives in the area. She isn't saying people should starve, she's saying contact should come with some chance of access to services.

up
73

.

up
19

You are so privileged.

Have you ever been close to being homeless? Be honest now. I have - it sucks. I didn't inherit income generating property or get to spend years in Italy on my parents' dime, though, so yeah, that.

is like saying someone is close to being pregnant. It means nothing. Most Americans have lived paycheck to paycheck at some point in our lives. Chronic homelessness is a completely different experience.

I grew up living hand to mouth. Don't recommend it. I've managed to avoid homelessness, but only barely by couch surfing and stepping up to do odd jobs in lieu of rent.

The veil between the two is much thinner now. However, drifting into homelessness is a continuum, not a binary state (unlike pregnancy). This is why the data I've been working with is being reclassified to represent degrees of homelessness.

But I was replying to someone who I sincerely doubt has ever known poverty or even close to it, given their tales of a Beacon Hill childhood and living abroad.

We have tried using prison for drug and insanity issues for decades.

If it worked we wouldn't have those issues.

They need treatment for drugs and for the underlying mental illness conditions that often drive their behavior and dependence. That doesn't happen in jail.

Perhaps he should talk with people who know these things sometime? Naw. Too much like work. Too confusing!

up
39

But at the same time letting them go with nothing more then a finger wag isn't working either. They OD get revied and come back the next day to shoot up again. If the fear of death isn't going to stop them then maybe consequences might remove them from society for a time.

up
40

They're talking about sending people who keep shooting up into treatment and sending people who are selling the drugs and causing the crime to prison.

Sometimes, those two circles will intersect, but not all of the time.

up
51

Some of it does happen in correctional settings. Nothing cures all. I think we can do better in how we run some of our correctional facilities, but the issue isn't black and white and some people need to be taken out of mainstream society for periods of time. Ray Flynn knows addiction from lived experience and, as a former probation officer, has walked the walk. Unlike a lot of the armchair quarterbacks here.

The state and county governments have gotten legal rulings that say they don't have to do rehabilitation or continue medically assisted treatment. Activists and DPH have pushed this and gotten money to implement, but it is still not required.

Never mind that DPH found years ago that the biggest risk factor for OD and death was recent release from lockup.

MA correctional facilities engage in treatment and reentry programming and many find recovery through the criminal justice system. I've seen it, firsthand.

"We can't have mopeds, scooters and bikers running through red lights, hitting pedestrians and having near misses," he said.

What about the cars and trucks speeding and running reds? Still OK I guess.

up
61

... but SCARY BIKES are the "problem". LOL.

up
44

Yes cars can kill. AND yes mopeds, scooters, and electric bikes can also be a nuisance and injure people if they are hit by them.

They're certainly a nuisance when they are driving through pedestrian areas or on sidewalks, or are driving down bus and train platforms - places you wouldn't expect to be seeing a fast moving - albeit small - vehicle.

I was going into CVS on Washington Street in Downtown last week, and paused as a woman carrying a small child was coming out. We were all nearly hit by a person on a scooter driving up onto the sidewalk there (presumably to pick up meal delivery at the McDonalds next door??). I am pretty sure that would have hurt if we had been hit, and quite possibly injured us all.

For reference - I am a non-driver, someone who biked for transit for many years (until a bad injury stopped this), and am most definitely not pro-car.

up
57

Yes cars can kill. AND yes mopeds, scooters, and electric bikes can also be a nuisance and injure people if they are hit by them.

Fair, but what has Shukla had to say about cars and trucks hitting and killing people? Has he called for a crackdown on dangerous driving in the city?

up
13

By and large cars obey the law and stay on the roadways and the norm, with notable exceptions, is for cars to obey the traffic controls, or proceed through with caution, whereas the commercial/ indentured contractors on motor scooters are living by their own rules, degrading norms and companies like Uber and their ilk (and public tax coffers) gain from this degeneration of public safety.

I don’t know if “filtering”/ lane-splitting is legal in Ma, but these guys do this as a rule. Unpredictably weaving through traffic lanes, bike lanes, squeezing between parked cars and zipping on and off sidewalks risking the life and limb of themselves and bystanders all for their de facto bosses: Uber and Lyft, &c..

The apathy is all connected.

The exception- cars running fully red lights- with the rule- mopeds running fully red lights.

up
15

Are comparing the dangerous to life with the nuisance.

In the past week I have been nearly hit (as in close enough that I could have touched the car) at least 4 times, while crossing in crosswalks, by drivers running red lights or stop signs. I have been nearly hit zero times by someone using a bicycle, scooter, moped, etc. (Not to mention countless drivers blocking the crosswalks and ramps - I am lucky that I can walk around the blockages easily, but a lot of people can't.)

There's a chance I've seen more scooter etc users run red lights and stop signs, but they don't get so close as to nearly hit me, and if they did would do much less damage because their vehicles weigh less and don't have 6 foot high hoods.

up
20

The exception- cars running fully red lights

NOT an exception even though it has been normalized. I see it happening at virtually every light change during my commute. You can also trust the ones that do stop to roll forward to block pedestrians trying to use the crosswalks.

up
31

… at a crosswalk. I actually rarely see moped riders running red lights and cutting off pedestrians. Even though there are many in my neighborhood.

As you put it-

I see it happening at virtually every light change during my commute.

Now, I could outright troll and say that you were talking about mopeds, but we all know that mopeds will go through red lights long after the change, whereas cars try to beat the light.

And I'll throw this on for others- are you really going to claim that you've been downtown or in the Back Bay and never seen a moped pay as much attention to crosswalks than that do to lights, which is to say they ignore them altogether? Because in the Back Bay, while cars might try to make a red light, mopeds just pretend that don't understand the laws.

ME ME ME seems to be normalized. Red lights are in special people's way now on a regular basis. Same people likely drive up on sidewalks to park across store entrances.

Insane narcissism is normalized without consequences. Get out and about sometime - you'll see this. I've been rear ended for stopping at a red.

Will be to evict the homeless and the mentally ill off the Common and ship them down onto the red line platforms at Park Street and Downtown Crossing.

up
18

Every time he opens his mouth

up
24

Sharon Durkan is going around taking credit for all of this and you go after Flynn for saying perhaps things are not good on the Common?

Your anti-Boston raised person bias is more naked than 1990's Ibiza.

up
48

I'm a little bit country and I'm a little bit rock n' roll

up
21

…. be disturbing. Not enjoying this fond memory of yours.

No time for words, meetings, paying consultants, and pretty portfolio action plan graphics to be printed. Action now. Get rid of the root of this problem which is more powerful than Teflon Trump. And that is cocaine, heroin, needles, crack pipes, crack, and the judges, judicial system, and blind eyed people who are afraid to get rid of this root of the problem. Until then, this will never improve even slightly. Stupid enablers.

up
24

Sounds like a Duterte style vigilante murder everybody "solution". If I'm way off then explain.

Don't you think that if it was as easy as pointing the finger at something then taking action against (or for) it, it would have been done long ago.

The 'war on drugs' isn't working. Its never worked. All the money we've spent on this 'war' that coulda been used for treatment instead.People abusing substances has been around since man has been on this earth, it's not going away. And you can't police it away.

Of course, this isn't going to stop Moron Trump who seems to think putting tariffs between Mexico and China will force the governments of those countries to 'help stop the flow of drugs to this country". Pea brain doesn't understand that the drug dealers don't care about 'government' or laws. Its a supply chain, wherever there is an addict in need, the drug dealers will be there. And in the end these tariffs will be passed on to the consumer, the countries do not pay these tariffs. they are passed onto the consumers (us).

That's why treatment and good public health is needed to 'get to the root' of the problem. When there's less customers, the dealers aren't moving their crap, so they won't sell it anymore. Of course, something new will take its place eventually... so its whack a mole really. As I said above, people abusing substances has been around as long as man has been on this earth. It's not going away too easily, so its best to prevent it from starting to begin with. (And treatment and outreach are key here)

up
18

They’re aimed at the Canadian and Mexican governments to force them to do a better job of preventing said drugs from crossing the border. It’s always funny how quickly governments can get things accomplished when money’s on the line.

up
13

Who do you think pays for the tariffs? The way tariffs operate is by making the item so expensive that consumers are "supposed" to stop buying it, thus reducing the amount of money flowing into these countries. There's a reason tariffs are usually used to protect domestic industries - if it's cheaper to buy domestically-made products, people will (theoretically) prefer them to more expensive imports.

Nobody creating the product is paying the tariffs, let alone the government of those countries. WE pay the tariffs.

up
11

Having "imported" specialty lab equipment from China, which isn't manufactured by anyone in the US, I had to make the tariff payment myself for it to be released from Customs for final delivery to me.

If you want me to buy American, get someone to make the products I need here in the US. Of course, the proposed tariffs we are discussing right now have zero intention of increasing domestic manufacturing; the intended purpose, whether it will be effective or not, has been clearly started by those proposing it.

up
20

Costs $200. You’re going to think twice or look for alternatives. Who does that hurt? The manufacturer. How do countries get their money? Through taxes. If you stop buying product X from a Canadian manufacturer, the Canadian government is collecting less taxes then they would have without that tariff. If the Canadian government waits long enough, someone might start making that product in the US and maybe they can’t make it for $100, but they certainly can make it for less than $200 and now the Canadian government has a big problem on their hand.

There are already tons of stories from people who worked in industries hit by tariffs during Trump 1.0. What you're describing only happens in high school economics textbooks these days. What actually happens is that the import price suddenly becomes "market price" and the domestic product (if there is one) raises its price to match.

Think for two seconds about where everything you touch on a daily basis comes from. Where does your toilet paper come from? Your food? Did you have coffee today? How about strawberries? How about gas? Canada's biggest export to the US is oil. It exports a lot of cooking oil, too. The vanilla in your ice cream is about to either get a lot more expensive, or it'll be artificial vanilla derived from wood pulp, since Mexico is a major producer of vanilla.

This isn't going to make life better for us, but it will make life a lot better for the people at the top who own the companies jacking up the prices.

up
11

I’m ok paying more for goods to save a mother or a father from losing their child to a fentanyl overdose. Are you? Seems like all you want is cheap Chinese garbage.

For what it’s worth, almost all the things we consume comes from the US. I’ll happily pay 2 or 3x to support local farmers/producers.

The statistics have been showing a steady decline in US OD deaths for more than a year.

My bet is that Trump's going to come into office, screw the economy with tariffs and then point to the continuation of that exact same OD trend and say, "Look! My perfect plan is perfectly working to perfection!!"

In 2022, Boston recorded 352 opioid-related deaths, the most ever, marking a 36% increase since 2019. This surge in opioid-related fatalities in Boston is more than double the state-wide rate.

Directly from the source - https://www.boston.gov/government/cabinets/boston-public-health-commissi....

while statewide there was a 10% decline.

Globe article from June: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/06/14/metro/opioids-overdose-boston-mas...

BUT you were responding to a comment that stated there was a decline of deaths in the US.

U.S. Overdose Deaths Decrease in 2023, First Time Since 2018

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2024/20240515.htm

n/t

The numbers do begin leveling off...at least for a while.

Harm reduction works. This is a national trend where harm reduction has been employed.

Funny how the same people who say that guns can't be controlled because illegal guns will "always" make their way into people's hands are so often the people saying that illegal drugs can be stopped. It's a heck of a lot easier to smuggle drugs than guns, just saying.

up
16

How the people that say the war on drugs doesn’t work (I agree with this, fyi), but a war on guns will work.

And didn’t win.
We’ve yet to win the war on poverty.

But we haven’t really tried the second one. So we need to try it first because we may win the other two if we win this one.

Is it 100% effective? No, nothing is. However, gun deaths are lower per capita in states with stronger gun control laws (in particular, rates including accidents and suicides, not just homicides).

up
17

400 million+ firearms in the country. More coming across the border. Your plan is what?

There was a group called Food Not Bombs that often had free food for the homeless on Saturdays over in Central Square in Cambridge. Perhaps they decided to move to the Common after complaints from the residents there (and I think the businesses have homeless-proofed themselves - the Portland Loo has been locked for the past few months, and you can't use the bathroom at Cafe Nero unless you buy something, and they're almost always intentionally short-staffed).

Nevertheless, Vizza has a good point. You can try to be a savior and attempt to ameliorate the homeless' problems, but it is only superficial, performative, and subversive help, not the type of help that is far more extensive and intensive that can help break the homeless cycle. Most of the homeless should want to have that choice of a free meal, warm bed, etc. but most choose the streets because they don't trust the in-house programs.

The best way to help the homeless, and anyone who is in danger of homelessness (i.e. nearly everyone, especially those who rent), is to make sure there's an adequate supply of homes in the places people want to be.

You can't transition someone from homelessness to being housed if there aren't any homes for them to move into.

You can't move to a cheaper apartment when your landlord raises your rent if there are no empty apartments.

Obviously there are other issues at play, and other steps to be taken, but allowing people to build dense housing is incredibly important if we want to help.

up
13

It doesn't take a lot to become homeless, even without addiction factoring into the mix. Let's count just a small sampling of the ways:
- Moved to a new city and lost your housing/job
- Kicked out by a dirtbag landlord/partner/family member
- Left an abusive relationship
- Lost a job where you were just making rent
- Simply priced out of the area without the ability to travel to/from an affordable area to where you work (working homeless is a thing!)

The list can keep going, but it all comes down to one thing - we need more affordable housing. You can't get a job without an address. It's hard to provide consistent services (like addiction support or mental health) to someone who's constantly on the move around the city.

up
14

are homeless for other reasons. But tight housing markets don't help.

Commissioner Cox. This should have been happening a long time ago for a lot of reasons. Unfortunately, I think it will be difficult to expand due to the staffing shortages.