When governments sell land always put in clawback provisions

DC sold many school buildings in the 1980s and 1990s, mostly to nonprofit organizations.  The city's building inventory was large because segregation meant duplication of facilities.  Over time, many of these organizations sold the buildings off, to great profit.  But there was no provision in the sales contracts for the DC Public School System to get a portion of the increased sales price.

For example, Wormley School was sold to Georgetown University which eventually sold it to a developer for more than 5x what it paid ("University to Sell Wormley Property," Georgetown Hoya).

Although to be fair, partly they took advantage of new market conditions.  When the property sold first, DC was just about ready to take off in the c. 2000 change of consumer attitudes towards urban living which again favored cities.  

It makes sense then that the building is now condos but DC should have gained more from the transaction ("Apartment in Georgetown’s Wormley School Lists for $2.8 Million," Mansion Global).

Another building sold to the DC Teachers Credit Union, and they had offices there for awhile, has long since been converted to in-demand Capitol Hill condominiums.

Parkland, Florida is dealing with that now.  Decades ago they sold for $850,000 a piece of property to the county school system for an elementary school to be built in their community.  But the school was never built and the school system recently sold the same property for $14 million to the Broward Health hospital system ("Parkland seeks $850,000 refund from school district after land sale to Broward Health," Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel).

Parkland wants their money back.  But they, like DC, didn't put provisions in the contract that the property should revert back to them if never used, or to be paid back the cost of the property if it were to be sold to a third party.

Traditionally, land bequests to governments and nonprofits most often include this provision of giving land with conditions that the property revert back to the original owners if the use changes.  

A D.C. streetcar passes the Douglas Memorial United Methodist Church near the H Street Corridor in Washington on March 7, 2018. (Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington Post)

That's why the United Methodist Church on H Street NE in DC, formerly a "white" church, decided to integrate as the neighborhood changed.  They didn't see a future as a "white church" and wanted to sell the property but the conditions of the bequest made them change course ("This H Street church was a hub of the community in the 1960s, then came the riots. It never thrived again.," Washington Post).

Cy Pres Review.  I am not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt, but in some states, the State Attorney General's office is active in overseeing land sales and other dissolution acts involving nonprofits.  Such sales are supposed to be made with the continuation of the  property or monies still being used by nonprofits.

This is called Cy Pres Doctrine ("An Historical and Empirical Analysis of the Cy-Près Doctrine," University of Louisville School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 2023-3) and the funds involved, Cy Pres Funds  In Pennsylvania this is in the news because of the closure of the University of the Arts.  A bunch of buildings were sold off by the bankruptcy court, not necessarily for non profit uses.  And a number of schools agreed to take their students.  

The Moore College of Art, the only independent private school of art in the city, argues it should get the bulk of the money, because it's closest organizationally to what UAS was institutionally ("Who should get the $63M endowment money of UArts? Depends on who you ask," WHYY/NPR, "University of the Arts’ $77 million endowment remains mired in court proceedings two years after the school closed," Philadelphia Inquirer) and New York AGs have been particularly active.

Among others, the AG was involved in the selling of Girard College and the move of the Barnes Institution ("Changing Donor-Imposed Restrictions: Cy Pres and Equitable Deviation," New York Community Trust) from Lower Merion Township to Philadelphia.  

Speculative ventures such as constructing this building without having tenants lined up put Cooper-Union at financial risk ("The Indicator: Cooper Union, I Love You but You’re Bringing Me Down," ArchDaily).

In New York State, a major case concerned Cooper-Union College, owner of the land under the Chrysler Building, the lease funds free tuition for the school, but the school wanted to start charging tuition because of financial exigency.  

They were allowed to do this, but with strict conditions ("A Second Chance for Cooper Union").

DC's AG hasn't been particularly proactive in these situations ("DC's Source Theater sold: cause for a cy pres review?").  I argued review should have occurred with the sale of the YWCA in Downtown and the Corcoran Gallery--its collection to the National Gallery, its building and art school to George Washington University ("When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review").

The YMCA at Rhode Island and 17th Street NW as another example.  I never got around to writing about a similar experience  with the YMCA in Dupont Circle. They sold their property to a developer and the recreation use at that site was abandoned.

YMCA said they didn't have experience with a facility serving both workers and residents and that they tried their best to increase membership but were unsuccessful ("Downtown YMCA to close amid rising competition from upscale gyms," Post; "Akridge to redevelop YMCA at 1711 Rhode Island as boutique office," Washington Business Journal).  From the Post:

The YMCA approved a deal to sell the hulking, 1970s concrete building to Akridge, a big local developer, for an undisclosed amount. At 100,000 square feet, it’s the YMCA’s biggest facility in the region, and the property, according to the D.C. Office of Tax and Revenue, has an assessed taxable value of $27.2 million. ...

The National Capital facility was never a typical one for the YMCA. The nonprofit organization traditionally serves neighborhoods, not business districts, and Reese-Hawkins said the money from the sale of the building will boost the organization’s community, after-school and summer programs throughout the region.

She hopes to eventually open another full-service YMCA in the city and is in talks with community leaders to assess the best fit. There are no gyms in the District east of the Anacostia River, and Reese-Hawkins said it is possible that one could land there.

The building that will replace the YMCA.

They never opened another full-service YMCA in DC.

The AG got involved in some cases but didn't meaningfully shape the outcome.  

For me, except DC City Government also lacks the imagination, Corcoran Galley should have been transferred to the city creating its first locally controlled arts museum--the other museums in the city are run by the federal government.  And the Corcoran School of Art and Design should have been merged into UDC ("Should community culture master plans include elements on higher education arts programs?").

With the sale of the YW and the YM the organizations argued that the money received would support their programs generally.  But the sale of these properties came at the expense of the availability of recreational resources made available to residents in the center city, and they had received membership fees and donations for years from patrons of these facilities, making the argument for there being a clear DC citizen interest.  

Both the YW and YM should have been "forced" to put some of that money towards the creation of a new city recreation facility serving those areas--if the city's Department of Parks and Recreation had a clue.  A proactive AG and some consultants could have shifted the dialog.

Parkland and cy pres?  With the Parkland case, I'd argue that the State AG could step in and do a cy pres review, and as part of a settlement, make the City of Parkland whole.

Automated speed camera data from Toronto shows the value of this traffic speed enforcement mechanism

Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, uses provincial powers a lot to preempt local government action, especially in Toronto.  One example is his elimination of the use of automatic speed cameras over "freedom etc." plus other measures can do just as well, such as oversize speed limit signs.

Guess what?  Tickets work.  Since the elimination of cameras, speeding has increased 235% in the Parkdale neighborhood, based on data collection associated with the speed limit counter signs, which collect data, they aren't limited to just saying "slow down" ("We all have one thing to say about Doug Ford’s ban on automated speed cameras: We told you so," Toronto Star).  From the article:

That’s based on data reported from one of the city’s digital “Watch your Speed” signs. You’ve seen them around. They’re typically posted near schools. They flash with your car’s speed as you pass by, hopefully serving as a visual reminder, when necessary, that you should slow the heck down. They also, it turns out, keep a permanent record of speeds.

These signs can be set up to collect data in both directions.  Yellow signs are typically placed near schools.  White signs elsewhere.  Photo: TrafficLogix.

Using the same basic methodology as Safe Parkside, I looked at data from more than 800 sites with these digital signs. In October 2025, the last full month before Ford’s ban on speed cameras took effect, the digital signs collectively recorded 626,137 vehicles exceeding the posted speed limit by at least 20 km/h. In April, with no more fear of speed cameras, the number nearly doubled, to more than one million.

Of 837 sites I looked at with data from both before and after the speed camera ban, the number of drivers doing 20 clicks over the limit increased at 476 of them. (Before the program was put on ice, the city had 150 speed cameras that rotated through locations like these.)

Tickets are "controversial."  They cost money so people don't like them, without acknowledging that if they followed the laws they wouldn't be ticketed.  

In the Douglas Shoup parking universe, parking tickets are a source of revenue for commercial district public space improvements.  But to me there is a fine line between encouraging and discouraging people to visit traditional commercial districts.  You have to balance parking concerns, bad behavior of parking--which is why Shoup encouraged low or no cost parking in garages, and high prices for street parking--and encouraging return passenger.

The recent director of the Philadelphia Parking Authority, Richard Lazar, made the point that rather than focusing on the revenue generating capacity of tickets, he prefers to think of them as "education devices" that people use to change their behavior ("Rich Lazer Would Like You to Love the PPA. No, Seriously.," Philadelphia Magazine).

Lazer recognizes that increased enforcement isn’t viewed positively across much of the city. He doesn’t look at enforcement as a revenue generator — a claim you can hear muttered at expired meters across Philadelphia — but rather as a behavioral change. If you’re blocking a crosswalk or parking on a sidewalk or jamming up a bike lane, yes, you’ll have to pay a fine. And maybe next time, you won’t do it (or at least will think twice about doing it).

“It’s about curb management and enforcing quality-of-life issues so they don’t happen anymore,” Lazer says. “And maybe that’s putting yourself out of business, because you want people to follow the rules. But at the end of the day, we don’t want to be looked at as somebody who just wants to generate revenue, because that’s not the mission. Our operation is not out to just crush people.”

I imagine he believes that parking scofflaws, who don't care about tickets--a problem in DC with out of state license plate users of the streets because it's hard to penalize them, that they should get their cars impounded, as another form of education.

Anyway, the Toronto findings are a sad but good example of real life experimentation to prove or disprove various approaches to public policy, in this case traffic enforcement.

Fourth of July | US 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence

There's far too much going on for me to be able to write something pithy and searing about the state of American Democracy, other than my contribution to a Utah commemoration of the anniversary last week at the opening of the Museum of Utah History.

Below, it's the last of the line of red bars.

There is an article in the Toronto Star, "How does former foreign affairs minister John Manley see America today?," interviewing John Manley, former minister, about Canada's relationship now with the US.  Which has deteriorated in so many ways ("Trump threatens not to renew USMCA as Carney talks trade strategy with premiers," "North American free trade is gone, dead and buried," Toronto Globe & Mail).

It's not very good.  

One example is Trump holding Canada hostage over the new Gordie Howe International Bridge.  Canada paid for it because the US wouldn't contribute and the Detroit-Windsor crossing is key to trade between the two countries, the auto industry, and Canada-Michigan, Canada being Michigan's largest trading power ("For people in Detroit and Windsor, Gordie Howe bridge delay fits a familiar – and frustrating – pattern," "Canada built the Gordie Howe bridge. Trump weaponized it," "Donald Trump can’t open the Strait of Hormuz, so instead he’s blocking the Strait of Detroit," Toronto Globe & Mail).  

The new bridge will correct transportational bottlenecks that result from the current set up.

The owner of the private Ambassador Bridge, which is the major above-ground link between the two nations, but the bridge dumps its traffic into a neighborhood not set up to facilitate very well the movement of the truck traffic towards the freeways, has made lots of donations to Trump ("Trump keeping Gordie Howe bridge closed to help donor, Michigan senate candidate claims in ad," AP).

The Gordie Howe International Bridge in Windsor on Thursday. Canada picked up the tab for the recently-completed bridge, but it still hasn’t opened because Trump doesn’t want it open, writes Tony Keller. Photo: Dax Melmer/The Globe and Mail

From the interview:

How truly democratic is the U.S. today?

We need to remember that every institution has some fragility to it. And that it requires all of us to remain vigilant. Democracy is not something to be taken for granted. It takes work. We have to inform people. We have to educate people. Literacy is a prime requirement in a democracy. We have to preserve the independence of voices that can be critical of what those in power are doing, holding them to account. I think (journalist) Anne Applebaum uses the analogy that we tend to think of democracy like we go to the tape in the kitchen and pour ourselves a glass of water. It’s way more complicated than that. It’s like when we had to go up the hill to the well and pump some water out in order to get a drink. That’s what democracy is. It requires work.

This is so true.  As despondent I am about the state of the nation today, especially how Republicans put party before country, how they have abdicated their responsibility as co-equal members of the Legislative Branch to be lapdogs of the President, how the rule of law is disregarded ("Electing a Federal Attorney General and a Chief Inspector General | Expanding Democracy") and how the conservative majority of the Supreme Court is overtly Republican in many of its rulings, we still have to try to work Democracy, to improve it, to push back against the transgressions.

=======

"American flags are everywhere this weekend. But the symbol has become politicized to a degree unseen before," Boston Globe.

Partisans at each end of the political spectrum use the flag to disparage the patriotism of the other side. Politicians on the right literally wrap themselves in the banner to proclaim their love of country. And protesters on the left wave the flag at mass demonstrations as a rallying cry to protect or expand American rights.

... For many at that time, the flag symbolized a transcendent sense of broad national purpose, even if large swaths of the population still struggled to claim their rights or bitterly criticized the government. This Fourth of July, even flying the flag at home can have political, demographic, and racial overtones.

About 70 percent of Republicans, and 60 percent of Americans ages 60 and older, fly the flag at least during national holidays, according to an April survey by The Associated Press and the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago.

Conversely, about 60 percent of Democrats and independents said they never fly the flag, including about 75 percent of Democrats under 45, the survey showed. In addition, only about 30 percent of Black adults said they ever display the banner.

I'm more with Zohran Mamdani in his speech on Friday ("Zohran Mamdani rebukes Trumpism with pro-immigrant speech for US’s 250th birthday," Guardian). 

“Patriotism has never been about pretending our nation is without flaws,” the New York mayor said. “Patriotism is every act of righteous dissent. It is every march led under the heavy sun. It is every protest held a decade before its time. It is precisely because we love this nation that we will not leave it.”

Back from the Brink, an oral history of the introduction and implementation of Broken Windows theory policing in New York City

I have been remiss in reviewing Back from the Brink, the book by Peter Moskos that is an oral history of the New York City Police Department during the Bratton period, where new strategies and tactics were introduced to suppress crime in significantly measurable ways.  (I first mentioned the book last September, in "Murder rate in Chicago is bad: "correct" applications of broken window policing.")

Unfortuately, I have a bad habit of if I don't write the review as soon as I read the book, I'm not likely to get back to it, partly because I have another bad habit of writing my notes on various different pieces of paper, some get mislaid etc.

But the review of the book by Michael Fortner, a professor at Claremont McKenna College in Washington Monthly, "How New York City Got Safe: A historical reconstruction of the Big Apple’s crime decline, told from inside the institutions responsible for public safety," reminds me that it is important to do so.

A New York Subway car before Broken Windows policing practice was introduced in the late 1980s.

Fortner covers the book pretty well, but I think he misses some points.  

I lived in DC during the bad times in the 80s and 90s, and am a fervent believer in broken windows policing theory.  

In general, especially in progressive academia, it has a bad rep because most departments interpreted it as "zero tolerance policing" with a lack of focus on major crimes and the creation of a siege mentality by arresting people for the least transgression, like an unbuckled seatbelt (also see "Looking Through Broken Windows: The Impact of Neighborhood Disorder on Aggression and Fear of Crime Is an Artifact of Research Design" Annual Review of Criminology, "Why the Fraudulent 'Broken Windows' Theory of Policing Refuses to Die," Current Affairs).

What I got out of Moskos book are a few key things.  

First, the interviews make clear that Bratton and the top people believed that crime could be suppressed.  CompStat was about (re)focusing police time towards proactiveness.  "Cops on Dots" -- putting cops where crime is occurring--as some people called it.

Although as Fortner quotes one commander, it was a philosophy.  Moskos cites a cop talking about how they had a problem with bike-based robberies in his precinct and how it was addressed.  But others took out of CompStat meetings about their approach that they should "arrest more bicyclists" rather than analyze whether or not bicycles were used repetitively in perpetrating crime.

Bratton's team believed that by addressing pattern crime, and arresting perpetrators crime would drop.  

While generally, the police department wasn't focused on "broken windows" or improving public spaces per se, the application of focused policing on the subway system was complemented by a refurbishment of subway stations and subway cars--not just buying new equipment--but by addressing graffiti, etc.

The book gives you a great picture of the effort and how it was incremental, building on each success, or adjusting after failure.  I really got a sense of the breadth and depth of the effort and the spirit of experimentation.  

The idea of "moving the success of broken windows from underground/the subways" to above ground wasn't just about the CompStat tracking system and delving deeply into crime patterns, precinct by precinct.  It was about making improvements in crime reduction and physical improvements very visible, which in turn led to more support for the Broken Windows Approach.

Two stories in particular cover the integration of policing with public space improvement were the campaigns to significantly improve the  Port Authority Bus Terminal and Bryant Park (although the program to improve BP began before the Bratton period of policing).  

People didn't used to go to Bryant Park, day or night.  Now it hums with activity.

But as the president of the subway system told Bratton during his interview "if we don't fix stations and subway trains in association with better policing people won't take the train," the success of Bryant Park likely would have taken much longer to come to fruition without better, focused policing in public parks and Bryant Park in particular.

Another element of public space improvement at the time had nothing to do with policing, but with the creation of business improvement districts, funded by local property tax surcharges, these groups provided extranormal cleaning services, public space improvements and monitoring (Jane Jacobs style "eyes on the street") in places like Times Square and around Penn Station.

And the proof is in the pudding.  Sure multiple cities had significant crime drops starting in the late 1990s.  But eg DC versus NYC.  NYC had a 75% drop in homicides, DC 38%.  I'm sure this quantum difference in results between NYC and other cities was across the board in other crime categories.

Living in DC at the time, there weren't many broken windows approaches, but there was a focus on involving neighborhood groups, the way that Patrick Sharkey in Uneasy Peace attributes some of the fall in crime during that period to civic and collective action ("George Kelling, co-creator of the "Broken WIndows" thesis, dies," 2019).

I myself participated in one such neighborhood group that was started in response to a major drug distribution area, and over (a long) time the problem was cured.  

Cops came to monthly meetings, problems were discussed, there were occasional walks with police and elected officials, etc.  (I also did small BW experiments in my neighborhood, with litter pick up and measurement of its impact on certain streets and in bus shelters.)

A blog reader once made the point that as crime dropped, maybe stop and frisk was in part a response of needing something to do, but with the lack of restraints applied during the post Bratton Guiliani years (although Bratton in his later stint did support stop and frisk; later he recanted) it became a big problem.  

Obviously, Stop and Frisk was proven to be not productive.  Unlike the value of arresting fare jumpers and checking them for outstanding warrants, an early initiative of Bratton's on the subway system, less than 2% of the people stopped under Stop and Frisk had outstanding warrants.  

They were stopping people without reasonable suspicion or probable cause and it showed in the data.  Whereas fare jumping is a crime, and jumpers often perpetrate other crimes, on the subway system and off it.

So for me, the biggest issue with BW is that it hasn't really been applied in a true fashion in very many places.  And with how the Bratton people were pushed out by Giuliani, my lesson from DC is that you can't ever stop being vigilant when it comes to crime and order versus disorder.  Once disorder returns it's hard to reverse.

The rise in social justice concerns, deserved somewhat in response to structural racism, as crime dropped and fewer elected officials and academics had direct experience of the mess of disorder during the worst of 1990s, did lead to a rise in crime in places like DC ("The Coming D.C. Crime Boomerang," Atlantic), as crime decriminalization was seen by perpetrators not as a social justice move to help them because they were "driven to crime because of life circumstances," but as a signal to commit more crime (see the argument, by extension here, "The role of physical environment in the ‘broken windows’ theory," University of Chicago)

BART's new fare gates, seen at the Coliseum station in 2025, have generated more money for the transit agency. Lea Suzuki/S.F. Chronicle

BART and fare gates. Recently there was a super interesting BW finding in SF with BART stations with new fare evasion resistant gates ("BART’s long fight against fare evasion is finally paying off. Here’s how much," San Francisco Chronicle).  

Not only did rider attitudes improve, ridership and fare revenue grew, and instances of vandalism dropped significantly.  Like Bratton said, turnstile jumpers commit other crimes.  If they aren't on the subway because they didn't pay, well, then there is less likelihood for vandalism of subway infrastructure.

Note that NYC and DC subways ("Metro’s new, higher faregates reducing fare evasion by more than 70 percent"), and St. Louis and Minneapolis light rail ("Transit safety and security: Broken Windows theory and reality | and the state of transit safety today," 2023) are also implementing new fare gates to reduce fare evasion.

Playgrounds and cafes were some of the positive use spaces added to the area.   Photo:  Jessie Cooper and Justin Roth embrace on a swing at a playground at Civic Center in San Francisco, California, on Sunday, Oct. 21, 2018. Gabrielle Lurie / The Chronicle

Revival of BART's Civic Center station.  Predating the fare gate program, the BART Civic Center Station became a center for nuisance and crime including drug dealing, where the main two block "entryway" to the station became a gauntlet where drug dealing, loitering, and quality of life offenses blossomed..  

Above-ground, the City of San Francisco invested in improving the public realm on those two blocks and beyond, adding new facilities and refurbishment to encourage more positive use of the space, while below ground BART made complementary station-specific improvements.  

Media coverage of the project makes clear that the effort involved police and multiple other partners including philanthropy, physical interventions and ongoing programming ("SF Civic Center’s new vision: soccer fields, shaded gardens and people," "SF Civic Center — cleaner and safer — now a place to play and have a bite," "Rejuvenating SF Civic Center Plaza: a challenge beyond design," San Francisco Chronicle). 

While the area’s transformation remains a work in progress, the differences are stark. In addition to two new playgrounds that cost $10 million, the space hosts a growing number of public events, including outdoor concerts, art installations and food-truck gatherings. A winter park — complete with a 6,000-square-foot ice rink — is set to open next month.

BART has developed a station modernization program equally focused on reducing public safety issues.

The Station Modernization Program focuses on increasing safety, capacity, sustainability, appearance, and enhancing the customer experience: 

• Vibrancy-- Reflect the energy of the surrounding community and enhance the station’s existing strengths 
• Connectivity – Strengthen multi-modal and universal access to the station and promote a safe and comfortable customer experience 
•  Sustainability – Incorporate sustainable materials and technologies into the station to increase the life-cycle value of the station’s infrastructure and to conserve natural resources and protect the public investment. 

Residents hope a similar program can be developed to improve the environment and public safety elements at the 16th Street-Mission Station ("Can BART bring a Civic Center-style revival to another dilapidated S.F. station?," SFC).   But in contrast to the Civic Center project, they seem to be focusing more on BART, and less on engaging other agencies into creating a broader response.

There not thinking either multiplicatively, nor in terms of below ground versus above-ground improvements.

 “If you really think about it, this is the living room of the Mission,” he said. “And the BART station is the front door. The first impression you have of the neighborhood is coming through the fare gate and up that escalator.”

As discussed in the 2013 entry "Transit, stations, and placemaking: stations as entrypoints into neighborhoods," transit stations are entry points--porches or living rooms--to neighborhoods.  While transit systems typically don't plan them that way, it is a responsibility that goes beyond the transit agency, and should require ongoing coordination and planning with the local jurisdiction.

Managing to prevent disorder is an ongoing process.  The final lesson with BW in NYC is that it requires constant vigilance too.  That it's hard to maintain because people get burned out.  But also when elected officials want the credit, they push out the top cops who bring the changes about.  That definitely happened in NYC.  Most of the top implementers of BW at NYPD were gone within a few years of Bratton's departure.  Although fortunately, further down the ranks were commanders, inspectors, and captains who had been (re)trained to the approach, embedded the precepts, and continued to implement the BW approach of proactive crime suppression.

Covid-related uptick in crime.  Although yes, things tipped the other way during the covid pandemic, in NYC and nationally "Explaining the COVID Violence Spike and the Roaring Crime Decline").  Although today, in most places reported crime including murders, has dropped significantly.

Police officers and detectives enter the crime scene area where a 9-year-old boy was fatally shot. Photo: John J. Kim, Chicago Tribune

Chicago.  Chicago is an outlier nationally, in that the city that has continued to have high murder rates, although they are dropping, despite purportedly adopting BW approaches ("End-of-Year Analysis: Chicago Crime Trends," U of Chicago Crime Lab).   More recently, the city has had success with crime reductions in association with community intervention programs.

In a past blog entry, I opined that they probably aren't doing BW very well, have many high profile negative incidents that indicate systemic problems with management, and that a high rate of financial settlements for police misconduct, fatal errors, etc. indicates, from a risk management standpoint, that they have a serious crime problem.  Although more recently, like Baltimore ("Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott discusses how the city has brought violent crime down," NPR, "Baltimore has cut homicides by almost 60 percent in five years," Washington Post) they seem to be having effect with violence interruption programs.

Also see:

"The federal help Chicago really needs," Crain's Chicago Business

At the University of Chicago Crime Lab, we have spent over fifteen years studying which interventions actually reduce gun violence and maximize the impact of government spending. We think we’ve found a clear path forward: Build the capacity of police commanders managing jurisdictions with the highest rates of violence. The Policing Leadership Academy has a simple premise — treat policing as a profession using the formula that has had tremendous success for private sector companies: investing in people’s leadership and management skills.

Also see "Policing and management," NBER, which makes the point about how the use of management time shapes outcomes positively or negatively.

Holy f***: Trump policy kills a woman in Minneapolis

Photo: Mathieu Louis-Rolland, Getty Images.

Protestors in Portland have been making fun of the extreme statements about Portland being out of control by wearing costumes at protests ("Portland’s Theater-of-the-Absurd Protests Reflect the Ridiculousness of Trump’s Lies," The Nation).

There's been a lot written about Trump using the National Guard as a tool to terrorize "Democrat cities" ("Trump’s use of National Guard troops on American streets is bad enough. This could be worse," Rhode Island Current), like Portland, Los Angeles, and Chicago.  

Ostensibly, the troops have been sent to cities “overrun” with crime. Yet data shows that has not been the case. Troops have been sent to largely Democratic-run cities in Democratic-led states.

The case for political theater being the real reason behind the deployment certainly was strengthened when largely Republican Mississippi sent troops to Washington D.C., even though crime in Mississippi cities like Jackson is higher than in D.C. Additionally, there is an even more dangerous purpose to the troop presence — that of normalizing the idea of troops on the streets, a key facet of authoritarian rule.

There are fundamental differences in training and mission between military troops and civilian law enforcement, with troop presence raising the potential for escalation and excessive force, and the erosion of both civil liberties and military readiness.

The Supreme Court recently ruled that the justification used by the Administration was flawed, and ordered them to stop ("Supreme Court rejects Trump’s effort to deploy National Guard in Illinois," SCOTus blog, "The Supreme Court has taken the National Guard away from Donald Trump," Economist).  Separately, as DC is subordinate to the federal government, NG troops are still in the city.

Of the many objections to the entry of federal law enforcement personnel into cities is their lack of training on urban policing, nor in de-escalation.  Armed troops are by definition escalatory.  It doesn't help that the Administration lies about what happens in their various engagements with protestors.

Another objection is that putting such forces in cities provides reputational risk to the military, because it's not what they are supposed to do.  In a way, although a bit different, it's not unlike how the British, during the Revolutionary War, forced residents to billet soldiers, at their own expense.  Here, it's a city being forced to take the brunt of the action by the military.

We know about the Administration's multi-faceted anti-immigrant program ("Protecting The American People Against Invasion" White House) with overtones of White Christian Nationalism ("The wrath of Stephen Miller," Atlantic), which has resulted in the imprisonment and/or deportation of many thousands of people.  It's not uncommon for US citizens to be swept up in the actions, and imprisoned ("We Found That More Than 170 U.S. Citizens Have Been Held by Immigration Agents. They’ve Been Kicked, Dragged and Detained for Days," ProPublica).

Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel are able to operate in cities independent of the court judgements about the National Guard.

Chicago: A federal immigration enforcement agent points a crowd control weapon at a protester at East 105th Street and South Avenue N in the East Side on Oct. 14. Protesters gathered as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers awaited the removal of their vehicle after it crashed during a pursuit.Anthony Vazquez/Sun-Times

And they are armed and aggressive.  Armed, not well trained Guardsman killed protestors at Kent State University in 1970 ("Kent State University marks 55th anniversary of May 4 shootings," Ideastream/NPR) but before that at the Historically Black College, Orangeburg State College in South Carolina, in 1968 where three students were killed ("Feb. 8, 1968: Orangeburg Massacre," Zinn Education Project).

One particularly egregious aggression was the raiding of an apartment building in Chicago ("“I Lost Everything”: Venezuelans Were Rounded Up in a Dramatic Midnight Raid but Never Charged With a Crime," ProPublica, "Stories from the federal siege of Chicago," Chicago Sun-Times).

Community members pray at the scene where a federal agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, 37, of the Twin Cities earlier on Portland Avenue in Minneapolis on Wednesday, Jan. 7. (Alex Kormann/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

That's escalated.  Today, we have the killing of an American citizen in Minneapolis ("Eyewitness describes ICE shooting that killed woman in Minneapolis," NBC).

With the director of ICE as part of the operation!

The Boston Globe has a video link of the engagement, and there is no question the ICE agent murdered the driver, a 37 year old woman.  ICE agents too, aren't well trained, for urban incursions.  This is the result.

U.S. Border Patrol Cmdr. Gregory Bovino joins federal agents at the scene of a shooting in Minneapolis on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026. (Ellen Schmidt/MinnPost via AP) Ellen Schmidt/AP

Ironically it's 5 years plus one day since the Trump-inspired violent protests at the US Capitol ("Jan. 6 insurrection," Washington Post).  The Administration just put up a webpage lying about what happened ("White House unveils Jan. 6 webpage saying Democrats ‘staged the real insurrection,’ criticizing Capitol Police," The Hill). 

One protestor, Ashlii Babbitt, was shot and killed by a member of the Capitol Police.  She's been made a martyr of the hard right, and under Trump, her family got a payout ("Trump administration to pay nearly $5M in wrongful death lawsuit of Jan. 6 rioter shot by police," Politico).  She was rioting.  Rioting isn't protected speech.  She was a criminal.  Trump also pardoned most of the people found guilty of rioting that day.

A bullet hole is seen in the windshield as law enforcement officers work at the scene of a shooting involving federal law enforcement agents, Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026, in Minneapolis. Tom Baker/AP

Not the lady in Minneapolis, Renee Nicole Good, she's just dead.  Say her name... ("‘She was an amazing human being’: Mother identifies woman shot, killed by ICE agent," Minneapolis Star-Tribune).

The Administration is justifying the murder ("Live updates: Hundreds protest in Minneapolis after ICE officer kills woman," AP).  Calling the person driving away a "domestic terrorist" ("DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s comments in wake of woman’s fatal shooting by ICE agent," MST).

“He’s been in situations like this before, and he certainly has been out there and followed his training today,” said Noem at the evening news conference in Minneapolis.

A federal agent sprays a protester with a chemical agent at the scene of a shooting in Minneapolis on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026. (Ellen Schmidt/MinnPost via AP) Ellen Schmidt/AP

Noem appeared to reference the same officer when she said that, back in June, he’d been rammed and dragged by an “anti-ICE” motorist.

Emergency medical technicians carry a person on a stretcher at the scene of a shooting in Minneapolis on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026. (Ellen Schmidt/MinnPost via AP) Ellen Schmidt/AP

The Republicans in Congress are supine in the face of the Administration's aggressions not just against the Constitution, but of the American People.

You would think this killing would be a moment comparable to when Senator Joe McCarthy's lies were challenged by Joseph Welch, the U.S. Army's chief counsel at one of McCarthy's many hearings about communists in government.  

He said: "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"

That was the moment of McCarthy's downfall.  Were this to be a similar moment.

Sanctioned state violence.  The Trump Administration is one of the most violent in terms of how it deals with citizens and immigrants.  But this is not unique to the nation's history, with raids against "communists" in the 1870s and 1920s, anarchists (1910s), labor unions (1890s-1930), and the treatment of certain immigrant groups throughout history (Chinese, Mexicans, Jews).

But today it seems the US is taking its cues from Hungary and Russia, where the media is controlled and universities are subjugated, and countries like Chile under Pinochet, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel, China--Israel ("Watched, Tracked, and Targeted Life in Gaza under Israel’s all-encompassing surveillance regime," New York Magazine) and China are probably the most developed surveillance states in the world, more intricate than the Apartheid period of South Africa.  

Trump constantly threatens to stop elections and interfere with elections ("Trump’s Jokes About Canceling Midterm Elections Aren’t So Funny Anymore," Esquire), which is front and center in Erdoğan's regime in Turkey.

Plus there is the prosecution of Trump "opponents" such as James Comey (former director of the FBI) and Letitia Wilson (State Attorney General of New York).

Poland is an example that had degraded in terms of freedoms of citizens but is on a turnaround, with the election as president of Donald Tusk.  So it can be reversed.

It's incredible though that the US has reached this nadir.  I never thought that when I studied Latin America in political science courses in college, that the readings foreshadowed today's United States of America.

Murder rate in Chicago is bad: "correct" applications of broken window policing

 

I can't remember where I came across a mention of the new book by Peter Moskos, a professor at CUNY's John Jay College, Back from the Brink, which is an oral history interviewing various police and other people involved in developing in the early 1990s, "the system" of focused policing on improving place and suppressing crime in New York City, which became a national best practice for reduction in crime and policing, and a shining light leading to the resurgence in interest in urban living--most major cities began adding population in the 2000s because city living was perceived to be cool, but also safe.

I was so intrigued I bought a copy right away, forgetting I could probably get a review copy for free.

It's a slow read only because there are so many lessons to be drawn from the examples of what people did to bring down crime, and how they improved quality of life in New York City, leading to the city's "revival" in rising population, commerce, new construction, and tourism.

I used to say, after reading William Bratton's second autobiography, The Profession: A Memoir of Policing in America, that the New York City subway system was the only place that true "broken windows" policing ("Broken Windows," Atlantic) was implemented, to great success.

Many academics and advocates deride the theory, saying it didn't improve places, that it led to over-incarceration, etc.  

The reality is that what most people call "broken windows" is effectuated by police departments as "zero tolerance policing" where they arrest people for the most minor crimes.  By contrast, BW arrests when the effect can be multiplicative, in that turnstile jumpers tend to commit other crimes, when people not wearing their seatbelts tends to not be associated with criminal activity.

More and more research finds the "broken windows" approach to be successful.

So I'm reading the book, slowly, preparing to write a blog entry about lessons, but it's spurring me to buy more "old books" on the topic such as Crime Fighter about Jack Maple, Disorder and Deviance--after the BW theory was devised this book looks to better define what disorder looks like, and Bleeding Out. by a University of Maryland professor, about community organization ground up initiatives aimed at reducing violence.

Maybe I'll include them all in one big entry, maybe not.

Once the NYC subway was "cleaned up," police and stakeholders wanted to bring the concept of place-based improvement policing "up to the surface."  Bryant Park was first.  Then the Port Authority Bus Terminal.  Then Times Square.  These were the anchors that helped to create a critical mass of improvement, developing critical mass, leading to even more widespread improvements.

When I was in the process of buying other books, I noticed that the author of the book on disorder, who is based at Northwestern, has a lot of books about the "success" of community policing in Chicago.  I'd say that the number of police-involved killings, the hundred millions of dollars of judgements the city pays out each year, and the persistent level of crime indicates that community policing hasn't worked.

National Guard federal law enforcement accosting a guy on a bench in a park, Washington, DC.  Reddit photo.

Bloomberg reports, "Eight Dead, 58 Shot in Chicago Fuel Trump’s Troop Threats," on an especially high rate of violence in Chicago over Labor Day weekend, and how it gives Trump justification for his threats to put "federal law enforcement" in the city, the way he has in DC ("What a great headline (about Trump's takeover of the city police department in Washington DC) | and more on disorder").  

(Note that federal court ruled that the entry of federal law enforcement in Los Angeles, was illegal, "Trump deployment of military troops to Los Angeles was illegal, judge rules in blistering opinion, Los Angeles Times).

The fact is that DC and Chicago are great examples of not applying broken windows principles to policing and/or public safety, and having persistent crime as a result.  

In DC, it's a failure to focus on youth, their participation in crime including murder, car jacking, armed robberies, assaults, and what precipitates it ("Empty desks: How the District’s failure to curb truancy in middle schools fueled the biggest youth crime surge in a generation.," Washington Post).  FWIW, Washington Post columnist Colbert King has been writing about this problem since the 1990s.

Another book in my queue to read, Unforgiving Places The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence. I learned about it from the Atlantic article, "Are We Thinking About Gun Violence All Wrong?."  Also see, "What We Get Wrong About Violent Crime," New Yorker.

Decades ago in the 1990s I was thinking about moving to Chicago, so I subscribed to Chicago Magazine for a bit.  

I remember a couple articles focusing on crime in that city, on the areas where it was worst, and how a relatively small number of perpetrators were responsible for a preponderance of crime.  (These articles are more recent: "The Truth About Chicago’s Crime Rates," "The Truth About Chicago's Crime Rates: Part 2," "New Tricks," Chicago Magazine).

I can't find that article without going to a place with a microfilm copy, but the New Yorker review of the book discusses that concept:

... research—from criminologists like David Weisburd and Lawrence W. Sherman—showed that, in city after city, crime was hyperconcentrated. A handful of blocks accounted for a disproportionate share of violence, and those blocks stayed violent, year after year. In other words, the problem wasn’t people. It was place.

Recognition that there were high crime areas, and the need to focus on those areas, while developing effective strategies for reducing crime, not just reacting to it, is the basis of broken windows policing.

I'm not sure what's happening in Chicago.  When I was on grand jury duty a decade ago, one of the people on the jury was from Chicago and she opined that the closure of various housing projects redistributed criminal activity into different areas, leading to turf wars.

Clearly Chicago isn't doing it, and their community policing strategy wasn't focused on the most important elements ("Civic heavyweights push CPD to rethink community policing strategy," Crain's Chicago Business)., Operationalizing Community Policing Within The Chicago Police Department, CP Solutions, "Homicide, Social Efficacy, and Poverty in Chicago," Chicago Magazine).

Also see:

-- "Chicago's Poor Neighborhoods: Everything Deserts," Chicago Magazine
-- "Is Chicago an Outlier? Organizational Density in Poor Urban Neighborhoods," University of Chicago

======

Also see, included within many links to past entries, "Redefining what public safety means: Community Safety Partnership, Los Angeles."

======

-- Restore the Core: A citizen's guide to building a livable Washington, DC

I lived in DC for almost 15 years before I started getting involved in civic affairs.  I did so believing if I didn't, nothing would change.  

I did have good timing.  Around then a desire to live in cities began to build.  And crime was dropping.  Neighborhood specifics was one of my foci.  

The other, "smart growth," and the report from the local Sierra Club chapter that I picked up at the Adams Morgan Festival definitely spurred me into involvement.  Before that I had been interested in urban issues, bought and read books, read the Washington Post and the New York Times, etc.  But I was an observer.

One of my first involvements was a local community group that was focused on the community sure, but especially on crime.  

The group was called Near Northeast Citizens Against Crime and Drugs and it was spearheaded by a firebrand "old lady," Loree Murray ("A Woman who won't sit still for it" and "Fought D.C. Cocaine Epidemic" Washington Post).  This area was right in the center of Rayful Edmond's crack distribution operation ("Rayful Edmond was no victim," Washington Post).  She lived around the corner from it, while I lived about 5 blocks away, in an area still affected by it.

This was the kind of community organization that Patrick Sharkey says in Uneasy Peace: The Great Crime Decline, the Renewal of City Life, and the Next War on Violence, that helped to bring crime down.

In 2003, I ended up getting featured in the Post, "on a slow news day," on the overconcentration of liquor stores in my neighborhood ("Neighbors fight single beer sales").  The photo in my blog profile is from that story.

This kind of overconcentration elsewhere had been associated with significant crime increases ("Alcoholic beverage sales restrictions moving forward in Seattle," 2006).

Ironically, later I opposed a reflexive opposition to taverns and restaurants with liquor licenses, believing it would help revitalize the lagging commercial district, stating there was a big difference between liquor stores and restaurants ("Restaurants and liquor licenses--How much is too much on H Street?," 2005).  Of course, my position was the correct position.

Like a lot of issues, policing gets all mucked up in politics.  The way forward has been shown.  It's just that in most jurisdictions, that's not what police want to do, especially in Chicago ("The federal help Chicago really needs," "A tough truth about police management in Chicago," Crain's Chicago Business).

Quote of the day from Boston Mayor Michelle Wu about immigration policies and the city

“The cities that live in your minds are totally foreign to the residents living in our cities, and we are picking up the pieces of your failures to deliver on your promises under the Trump administration.

From the Boston Globe article "Michelle Wu stands up for cities, not just for Boston":

Bondi’s saber-rattling takes place against the backdrop of Trump’s attempted military takeover of Washington, D.C., in the name of reducing crime. It’s a move he has already threatened to spread to other cities — notably, mostly cities run by Democrats of color.

Some see these maneuvers as an attempt to distract everyone from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, and that may well be a consideration. But Trump’s dystopian view of American cities has long been a matter of record.

DC's Source Theater sold: cause for a cy pres review?

WBJ image.

In a follow up to the blog entry "Lack of a system breeds more of the same: Source Theater, Washington DC, up for sale 2006, 2024," from last December, the Washington Business Journal reports ("Source Theatre building on 14th Street NW sold to restaurateurs for $4.5M,") that the building has been sold to restauranteurs.  

The original asking price was more than $5 million, and CulturalDC, the owners of the property, although it had been acquired with funding from DC government, sold it to the restaurant group because they offered more money than the primary tenant, the Constellation Theatre Group.  From the Washington City Paper ("CulturalDC Sells Source Theatre to Restaurateurs):

“On multiple occasions, Constellation asked CulturalDC for a meeting to discuss a deal and share our funding sources, but they would not accept our invitations. Finally, in April 2025, Constellation sent our Best and Final Offer of $4.1 million. We know the email was received, yet CulturalDC chose not to respond and instead, allowed the offer to expire.”

For years, Source has served as the home base for several performing arts organizations, including Constellation and local opera company IN Series, as well as a site of CulturalDC’s own programming. The public listing for the building had an asking price of $5.8 million; it later dropped to $5 million, according to WBJ. But the price it ultimately sold for was $4.5 million—just $400,000 more than Constellation’s April offer.

President and CEO of Theatre Washington (and former City Paper publisher) Amy Austin expressed grief over the sale, writing via email: “I am sad that the Source Theatre has been sold to a restauranteur/developer and will no longer be available as a much-needed performance space for our ever evolving theatre community. The Source was a special place that holds a collective almost 50-year history of memories and experiences that touched countless audiences and artists.”

The city government evidently is too busy putting money into professional sports, $500+ million for basketball and hockey, and $1 billion for football, to address the matter of the Source Theater, which I believe was acquired with DC funds.  (The reality is that governments only have so much capacity for dealing with such matters, and the Source Theater likely fell through the cracks, because the city doesn't really have an arts and cultural agency in the sense of cities like Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, etc.)

In "When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review" (2016), I argue that the State Attorney General should intervene in nonprofit real estate matters, when the property will lose its non profit use as a result of the sale, for a review if not recession of the sale.  Cy pres provides for independent review of decisions by nonprofit organizations.

The doctrine originated in the law of charitable trusts, but has been applied in the context of class action settlements in the United States. When the original objective of the settlor or the testator became impossible, impracticable, or illegal to perform, the cy-près doctrine allows the court to amend the terms of the charitable trust as closely as possible to the original intention of the testator or settlor to prevent the trust from failing. -- Wikipedia

While the State AGs in New York (Cooper Union College), Pennsylvania (Girard College, Art Museum) and DC (Corcoran Gallery of Art) have taken on such matters, the outcome isn't preordained, and they don't necessarily use the frame of review--keeping the facility open, for arts uses--that I would.

For example, the Pennsylvania AG didn't get involved in the sale of the assets of the University of the Arts, which shut down last year.  Through the sales, some of the properties maintained their cultural use, others will not ("Keeping Avenue of the Arts for the Arts,' Philadelphia Citizen).

Similarly, the DC AG did not push what I thought should happen ("Should community culture master plans include elements on higher education arts programs?" [2016]).

While CulturalDC may have financial problems of its own, hence the sale, I'd say its worthwhile in the public interest for the sale to be rescinded in favor of a purchase by Constellation.

Television station license challenges: Fox, Sinclair

 For a few years I suggested that Fox terrestrial broadcast licenses be challenged, based on the idea that the way they run Fox cable assets are counter to the public interest, making them unworthy of the privilege of using the public airwaves ("Australian Broadcasting Corporation documentary on the Murdoch media empire and Trump".).  Fox cable television programming is severely unbalanced ("Why a Fox News pundit may not have heard bad news about Trump," Washington Post).

Finally, the license in Philadelphia is being challenged ("Fox Television station license being challenged in Philadelphia, on character grounds").  I attempted a submission myself, but the docket for FCC comments is pretty unwieldly and I never finished.

Sinclair Television ("Sinclair’s recipe for TV news: Crime, homelessness, illegal drugs," Washington Post) licenses should be similarly challenged.  From the article:

Every year, local television news stations owned by Sinclair Broadcasting conduct short surveys among viewers to help guide the year’s coverage. A key question in each poll, according to David Smith, the company’s executive chairman: “What are you most afraid of?”

... The answers are evident in Sinclair’s programming. Crime, homelessness, illegal drug use, failing schools and other societal ills have long been core elements of local TV news coverage. But on Sinclair’s growing nationwide roster of stations, the editorial focus reflects Smith’s conservative views and plays on its audience’s fears that America’s cities are falling apart, according to media observers, Smith associates, and current and former staffers who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal company matters. 

... Sinclair’s local network of 185 stations across the country makes it an influential player in shaping the views of millions of Americans, especially at a time when local newspapers are rapidly being gutted — or closed altogether. 

As Sinclair increasingly fills the void, it offers its viewers a perspective that aligns with Trump’s oft-stated opinion that America’s cities, especially those run by Democratic politicians, are dangerous and dysfunctional. “Sinclair stations deliver messages that appeal to older, White, suburban audiences, and they play up crime stories in a way that is disproportionate to their statistical presence,” said Anne Nelson, a journalist and author of “Shadow Network: Media, Money and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right.” 

All of it is fearmongering and feeds into a racialized view of cities.” Sinclair’s large network of local stations tends to cover societal problems in similar ways, experts say. A 2019 study by researchers at Stanford and Emory universities showed that a Sinclair acquisition of local stations resulted in “substantial increases in coverage of national politics at the expense of local politics” and “a significant rightward shift in the ideological slant of coverage.” 

Nelson, who has spent decades studying conservative media and political propaganda, said that local TV news reports traditionally cover local crime stories, but Sinclair’s programming does it “more than usual, and with a particular message.” She said that the lack of local papers has changed the role of local TV news. 

Sinclair’s large network of local stations tends to cover societal problems in similar ways, experts say. A 2019 study by researchers at Stanford and Emory universities showed that a Sinclair acquisition of local stations resulted in “substantial increases in coverage of national politics at the expense of local politics” and “a significant rightward shift in the ideological slant of coverage.”

-- "Local News and National Politics," American Political Science Review