Mayor Bill Finch’s administration has heralded crime reduction. Andrew Martinez, South End resident and PhD student who dabbles in Bridgeport stats–examining demographic data, voter trends, and social issues on his website–has filtered crime information covering the mayoral administrations of Joe Ganim, John Fabrizi and Bill Finch. The city Ganim inherited was an inner city war zone that saw a dramatic drop in violent crime. But Fabs and Finch can also take credit for crime reduction efforts. Check out Andrew’s analysis.
Recently, there has been some talk about former Mayor Ganim running for office against current Mayor Finch. Looks like both have their set of supporters, but I was curious to see if there is any data out there to compare both administrations.
I usually enjoy sifting through stats and any data I can get my hands on and try to convey it in digestible ways. I thought comparing crime stats across Bridgeport’s Mayoral administrations would be of interest to the reader.
The graph above displays violent crime in Bridgeport across three mayoral administrations (Ganim, Fabrizi and Finch). The red vertical lines partition the administrations.
As displayed in the above graph, crime dipped aggressively under the Ganim administration. For example, the violent crime rate was at 2,000 when Ganim started in 1992 and decreased to 1,000 by 2003. Violent crime reduced by approximately 50%. Since then, violent crime in Bridgeport has remained relatively stable. In some ways Ganim can be credited with the drastic shift in Bridgeport’s violent crime trajectory. However, Finch can be credited with maintaining this trend. But the counter argument is that violent crime under Finch is actually similar to violent crime rates under Fabrizi. Therefore, it is likely that this trend would have probably been maintained regardless of mayoral administration. Interestingly, if one compares violent crime under Ganim for 2001 and 2002, these figures are actually comparable to violent crime under Finch during 2008 and 2012.
On the other hand, in fairness to Finch and Fabrizi, it is important to note that once statistics reach a low point they tend to experience a sort of ‘floor effect’ (similar to stocks, real estate–maybe not so much the Knicks). So these administrations can’t be really be expected to reduce crime much further because it is probably approximating a ‘floor.’
I am still examining these stats across different types of crime, but thought this would be interesting to share with the reader.
Several caveats should be noted: (1) crime reporting may shift under different police policies/practices, (2) trajectories should also be examined for other towns to see if the patterns are specific to Bridgeport or occurred elsewhere (e.g., New Haven), and (3) thus far, this comparison only applies to violent crime. It is possible that other crime stats may differ.
Crime stats based here.
Oh definitely Joe Ganim, Run Joe, Run. All of these little articles Lennie posts just make Ganim the only choice. Am I right or what??? Joe Ganim, because we just can’t get enough. The best slogan ever.
I must say, the tone of the comments on this post is encouraging. Polite, respectful of differences, and written in a thoughtful and tolerant manner. Well done.
This post should have come at the end, not in response to Steve. Many apologies.
But of course Steve, after five days testifying against Joe Ganim as the government’s lead-off witness, I’m such a big fan.
Lennie, you and Joe were extremely close. Are you telling me you don’t get together and laugh at the good old days? I am not being sarcastic. I have been blessed with many best friends in my life. Some I go for a year or two estranged. Also, get together again and laugh it off. Are you telling me you and Joe do not communicate? Are you telling me you wouldn’t want to get back and have the opportunity to reinvent yourself? You may have been a lead witness, but I am certain there are secrets the two of you share that could fill a great read. Life is short, I know I can be really mean about Joe, but truth be told, I am sure he is a nice guy and I cannot believe you guys are still estranged. Just your circle of political friends would make that almost impossible, no?
Joe and I do not communicate.
Chief Thomas Sweeney (1991-2000), hired by Mary Moran, should receive the lion’s share of the credit for getting the crime problem under control in Bridgeport. He worked with an organization, Greater Bridgeport Interfaith Action (GBIA)–composed of representation from about 20 Bridgeport-area (15 Bridgeport) religious congregations–to organize the city of Bridgeport by neighborhood (some well-defined, such as Lake Forest, Saint Mary’s, et al., some rather diffuse and ill-defined, such as The Hollow–in order to establish crime-watch sectors/community policing with neighborhood representation selected to lead crime observers/reporters to work with the BPD.
This system worked well and allowed an undermanned/underfunded BPD, over the course of the ’90s, to get a handle on an out-of-control, drug-gang-inflicted violent-crime problem in Bridgeport. (A 1995 National Geographic article described Bridgeport as the “drug supermarket off of I-95” and “New England’s murder capital.” Long-time residents will recall the terror of living in Bridgeport during the latter 1980s and early ’90s.)
Politically, Sweeney was unpopular because of his non-Bridgeport origins and his determination to change the culture of the BPD, which was known for playing fast and loose with state, federal and local law, as well as for its blatant racism.
Because of this, Sweeney had many politically-engineered impediments deliberately placed in his path toward taming Bridgeport’s crime problem. Indeed, there was a Ganim-sanctioned effort to force Sweeney to resign in 1996-1997 that was successfully countered by the intervention of GBIA et al.
Sweeney had many and deep connections to national law enforcement (he served as FBI Director Clarence Kelly’s Assistant Police Chief when the latter was the Chief of the Kansas City PD). These connections helped to drag a kicking and screaming BPD/City Hall toward 21st-Century policing methods.
So, I wouldn’t give too much credit to any City Hall administration for addressing the Bridgeport crime problem. Certainly, the Fabrizi Administration was the friendliest toward the Block Watch program and community policing, the latter of which is the sine qua non of urban-center crime control.
To the extent crime is controllable from a strictly local level, the credit for the roots of Bridgeport’s handle on violent crime should go mainly to Chief Sweeney. (Of course, some credit should be given to the politically inept but gutsy Mayor Mary Moran for looking outside the city for a chief without a history of exposure to the dysfunctional culture of the pre-Sweeney BPD.)
It should be remembered in this context to the degree Bridgeport neighborhoods are “organized” today, the credit for initiating this organization goes to Chief Sweeney. It should also be remembered only after the neighborhoods were organized did the political establishment start “reaching out” to the public for civic input, and this “outreach” was really for the purpose of controlling the political direction/leadership of these neighborhoods. This later process took on particularly obvious dimensions under the Ganim Administration, with the present administration being even more blatant in their efforts to usurp the political/development prerogatives of neighborhoods through the control of neighborhood leadership via patronage and even political intimidation.
I agree with Jeff Kohut. Charter revision of 1988 introduced a hiring process for the police and fire chiefs that allowed ‘outsiders’ to be considered. Tom Sweeney introduced many procedures and programs to address internal department issues and issues unique to urban centers.
I definitely agree about Sweeney. Probably only 20% who read this blog realize just how bad it used to be. A lot of unsung heroes put their shoulders to the wheel as well. Some of us have a lot invested, not monetarily, in Bridgeport.
Jeff. The later sentences you wrote could definitely refer to the “NRZ.”
Even the community garden program.
Jeff, thanks for your thorough and comprehensive write-up about some of Bridgeport’s history. This is the type of discussion I like to generate. I found your piece to be very informative.
Based on what you are saying, it would be interesting to do the same graph, but going back to earlier years, or also by chiefs. I also need to do the same for other cities, etc. Although I developed the graphs in this way, it is not to imply the changes are completely attributable to mayoral administrations, but rather for people to see the rates across administrations. The take-home message is more about seeing crime rates across a trajectory rather that seeing a snapshot of one year.
For example, there was an article the other day in the CT Post that crime dropped in 2013 (a 20% decrease). If this is the case, it is only reaching parity with 2011 and 2012 levels. Don’t get me wrong, this drop is still excellent, but without viewing the trajectory, people would assume this is a shift in the overall trajectory, when it is only reaching parity with previous years.
Malcom Gladwell, in “The Tipping Point” cites “Roe v Wade” as “a national trend,” regarding legalized abortion fifteen or so years before the national crime drop. Bridgeport did a “Pembroke Study” about the East Side, just before the crime drop that predicted things would get a lot worse. They did not, actually.
I’m not particularly a religious person anymore but I theorize a real uptick in church-going in Bridgeport I have witnessed during the past 20 years has helped a lot of people deal with personal problems and get a handle on their lives and that has really made a difference.
Interesting Bob, thanks. I think in communities like BPT where there is financial hardship, churches can often be instrumental in providing support and helping people with personal problems. It is sometimes the only outlet people have.
I’m familiar with the Gladwell point. I always thought it was an interesting take on the problem.
I give the credit to Joe. Not only did we see this drop in violent crime but shortly after he left office there was a significant drop in white collar crime along with various government corruption practices.
There was a time when my mother would tell me “When the church bells ring, you should be on your way home.” I could be in any part of the city and at 6:00pm on the dot, the church bells could be heard ringing everywhere. Each church served a particular demographic, on Sundays you could ride through the different areas of the city and listen to the people speaking in their native languages. I don’t believe I’ve heard a church bell ring at 6:00pm in 20 years.
Sorry Andmar for going off topic, and thank you for sharing your talents with us.
Thanks Hector, interesting points. I remember how bad crime was growing up. The gangs, the shootings, it was awful. Bridgeport still has a ways to go but it is better than the early ’90s.
Andmar, I sometimes refer to eras as pre- or before-crack and after. The late ’80s to early ’90s was when crack was at its height. Coupled with the mass relocation of jobs and the deterioration of our downtown and mall, no other drug has led to the destruction or almost destruction of communities like CRACK. Though ANGEL DUST also ravaged communities, it didn’t have the addicting qualities of CRACK. I’d appreciate an opportunity to converse with you at your convenience, (203)666-9361.
Bob; thanks for the feedback. Your perception in regard to the implications of the last sentences of my post are spot-on! The NRZ’s are an effective, planned patronage tool that have been successfully used by the present administration to derail effective leadership and actual and potential opposition to Finch Administration exploitation/abuse of neighborhoods–hence, the displacement of community gardens, location of problematic social service/penal facilities within residential neighborhoods, planned location of schools on polluted sites, location of power plants on valuable industrial land and park land, etc.
Andmar; thanks for your feedback. I would be happy to talk with you about modern Bridgeport history and the stats you have compiled in that regard. Do you have access to the stats on the net number of jobs lost/gained for the Ganim, Fabrizi and Finch Administrations? How about the same in regard to the grand list? Inflation-adjusted city expenses?
Hector, glad you mentioned crack. Very true.
Also a factor was the relocation of Father Panik Village throughout the East Side and West End. It made a lot of people flee, along with the 59 murders in one year on the upper East Side, along with the crack epidemic. Guns, even machine guns, always going off.
This got me thinking. (Always a dangerous thing.)
Credit HAS to be given to Habitat for Humanity who took over close to 200 properties no one else wanted in very bad neighborhoods and inserted an infusion of positive energy, investment of dollars, good will and good citizens in a neighborhood strategic planning format, actually targeting troubled blocks. They were very successful. Actually Ganim, Tyliszcak, Freimuth and yours truly helped them get a lot of City properties. Howard Collis especially, thank you!
In summarizing everyone’s points, it looks like crime reduction in Bridgeport over the course of the years has been attributable to a multi-faceted set of factors including police strategies, focusing on hot spots such as Father Panik, investing in neighborhoods such as through Habitat for Humanity, and policy changes such as changes in police hiring. Looks like there is a sense of relief throughout many of the comments I read, as people reflect on how bad crime was years ago. It is not perfect, but the ’80s and ’90s were very bad.
Credit for the creation of occupant-owned homes for Bridgeporters by Habitat also needs to be extended to a person named Verna Lawson who was vice-president of GBIA and Bridgeport Habitat’s president during those years. Verna acted on a tip-off from a Connecticut Post reporter (who shall remain anonymous, lest his employment situation be jeopardized) who found out connected developers were positioning to take possession (for a $1 legal conveyance charge) of many vacant/derelict residential properties throughout the city, including most of those later used for Habitat builds, through a planned, city “fire sale.”
Verna, and others of like mind, prevailed upon the city to convey many of these properties to Habitat. This mass development throughout the city by Habitat did much to neutralize the criminal activity “hot spots” identified with these properties in the neighborhoods, which in turn did much to stabilize the neighborhoods.
Not to deprive any of the people who facilitated this situation from any credit deserved, but from the city side I would particularly single out Steve Tylisczak for his work with this project and others of this time period, as a dedicated, workaholic city employee who did his job with only an eye to fulfilling his duties and bettering his city.
Check out my blog, let me know your thoughts.
socialecologicalresearch.tumblr.com/
Always more to it than meets the eye.
Andmar, I checked out your blog. I think that it is timely and complements Lennie’s essential work/purpose. We need much more independent political analysis to cover local on up through global situations. Unfortunately, no single news source can do complete justice to the public’s need to know.