I love the hypothetical situation Moe spins up. The cop deploys a drone to fly across the entire city while a crime is in progress. The drone arrives and is unable to halt the crime.The officer finally arrives at the scene of the crime to collect the drone and possibly witness statements. No crime has been stopped, money well spent.
This was discussed as if Moe really thinks we're getting a self-flying, self-assigning drone for $30k. Even if we could do that I wouldn't want to, but that's also impossible.
To comment on the written vs. audio versions of worcester sucks, I LOVE the articles and am so psyched to see them in my inbox, but am sometimes too overwhelmed by the daily horrors of life for days before I have the mental energy to read them. The podcast is a great alternative ... a bit easier to take because I feel like at least we're all laughing at the insanity of worcester city politics together.
Bill — I get your anger, but the 9/30 City Council meeting was not the six-hour circus you describe. This five-hour meeting was largely well-reasoned, civil, and consequential: the drone pilot report discussion produced useful public questioning and passed 10–0 after councilors aired concerns that will inform the city report; the motion for the city not to enter any 287(g) agreement to cooperate with ICE was discussed for an hour and passed as pre-emptive re-assurance to our community.
Those are real outcomes – and the discussions were informative and re-assuring -- despite Councilor Bergman’s legalistic ‘words matter’ objection that I’m with you did not meet the human needs of the moment. Councilor Toomey’s recitation of FAQ from the front page of the Worcester Police Department website was likely comforting and informative for many in our community to hear.
If we want better – and the Council did well on 9/30 (throw them a bone, Bill ) -- the remedy isn’t vague or endless ridicule. It’s accountability. Let’s hold our leaders to measurable results posted right on the City’s website. Spoiler alert: our City Manager’s evaluation, like the City’s 'FY 25-29 Municipal Strategic Plan' includes few real metrics. They should align, and both should be public benchmarks of progress.
We can still laugh at specific absurdities, but our next act should replace tantrums and name-calling with what really holds the city back: a lack of accountability because our city's goals are vague and our metrics weak. That’s how Worcester actually gets even better.
Good question, Bill — fair point. By “we,” I mean all of us who care about Worcester, whether we’re inside City Hall or just paying attention from the sidelines. The city only gets better when everyone rows the same way — that’s the “we” I was thinking of. Holding the city to clearer goals and real results -- metrics -- is something we can all push for.
Not the young Brazilian mother and daughter whose face was slammed in to the ground by the racist WPD in Eureka St. They arent "comforted" by the BS WPD FAQ! Or the people of color, sex workers and others persecuted by the violent, racist, sexual predator WPD. If you and your ilk are in, I am 100% out. We dont want anything to do with you and your violent racist buddies. Stay the F away!
"Councilor Toomey’s recitation of FAQ from the front page of the Worcester Police Department website was likely comforting and informative for many in our community to hear"
I'm not who you are addressing, and I don't want to be rude, but...she literally verbatim read from an FAQ page on the internet. Public access TV has the program where they read the newspaper for the visually impaired, but there's a reason we don't do that in the middle of City Council.
"our next act should replace tantrums and name-calling with what really holds the city back: a lack of accountability because our city's goals are vague and our metrics weak"
Yes, and yet the longest-serving members of the Council bear the most responsibility for that. We can't make them change their ways in that regard, some of us (maybe also you) have tried for a loooong time. Decades. It's time to just organize to render them irrelevant.
Ha ha, Chris — fair point! Yes, I know she read verbatim. But people often don’t read — whether it’s the City Manager’s May 16 Executive Order on Immigration Protocols or even the FAQ on the Worcester Police Department’s front page.
I think the intent of Councilor Toomey’s recitation was to underscore that the City does not enforce federal immigration laws — which, in turn, reinforced Councilor King’s point that his motion was pre-emptive, and Councilor Russell’s statement that Worcester “never has and never will” participate in a 287(g) agreement with ICE.
As for the lack of metrics, accountability is a collective effort. The Council as a whole needs to make that happen. I don't read much about our candidates pushing accountability. Maybe WorcesterSucks can help get them there!
Its very difficult not to think of you as another evil anti Immigrant racist. The WPD includes violent, racist sexual predators. Thats not my opinion, that the DOJs conclusion. After Eureka St its obvious that the FAQ is pathetic and overtly false. Only an anti immigrant racist would believe the spew from WPD. So sick of you disgusting racists in the comments, on the streets, in the WPD and in the city council.
I love the hypothetical situation Moe spins up. The cop deploys a drone to fly across the entire city while a crime is in progress. The drone arrives and is unable to halt the crime.The officer finally arrives at the scene of the crime to collect the drone and possibly witness statements. No crime has been stopped, money well spent.
This was discussed as if Moe really thinks we're getting a self-flying, self-assigning drone for $30k. Even if we could do that I wouldn't want to, but that's also impossible.
To comment on the written vs. audio versions of worcester sucks, I LOVE the articles and am so psyched to see them in my inbox, but am sometimes too overwhelmed by the daily horrors of life for days before I have the mental energy to read them. The podcast is a great alternative ... a bit easier to take because I feel like at least we're all laughing at the insanity of worcester city politics together.
Bill — I get your anger, but the 9/30 City Council meeting was not the six-hour circus you describe. This five-hour meeting was largely well-reasoned, civil, and consequential: the drone pilot report discussion produced useful public questioning and passed 10–0 after councilors aired concerns that will inform the city report; the motion for the city not to enter any 287(g) agreement to cooperate with ICE was discussed for an hour and passed as pre-emptive re-assurance to our community.
Those are real outcomes – and the discussions were informative and re-assuring -- despite Councilor Bergman’s legalistic ‘words matter’ objection that I’m with you did not meet the human needs of the moment. Councilor Toomey’s recitation of FAQ from the front page of the Worcester Police Department website was likely comforting and informative for many in our community to hear.
If we want better – and the Council did well on 9/30 (throw them a bone, Bill ) -- the remedy isn’t vague or endless ridicule. It’s accountability. Let’s hold our leaders to measurable results posted right on the City’s website. Spoiler alert: our City Manager’s evaluation, like the City’s 'FY 25-29 Municipal Strategic Plan' includes few real metrics. They should align, and both should be public benchmarks of progress.
We can still laugh at specific absurdities, but our next act should replace tantrums and name-calling with what really holds the city back: a lack of accountability because our city's goals are vague and our metrics weak. That’s how Worcester actually gets even better.
Who's the "we" in "our next act"
Good question, Bill — fair point. By “we,” I mean all of us who care about Worcester, whether we’re inside City Hall or just paying attention from the sidelines. The city only gets better when everyone rows the same way — that’s the “we” I was thinking of. Holding the city to clearer goals and real results -- metrics -- is something we can all push for.
Not the young Brazilian mother and daughter whose face was slammed in to the ground by the racist WPD in Eureka St. They arent "comforted" by the BS WPD FAQ! Or the people of color, sex workers and others persecuted by the violent, racist, sexual predator WPD. If you and your ilk are in, I am 100% out. We dont want anything to do with you and your violent racist buddies. Stay the F away!
"Councilor Toomey’s recitation of FAQ from the front page of the Worcester Police Department website was likely comforting and informative for many in our community to hear"
I'm not who you are addressing, and I don't want to be rude, but...she literally verbatim read from an FAQ page on the internet. Public access TV has the program where they read the newspaper for the visually impaired, but there's a reason we don't do that in the middle of City Council.
"our next act should replace tantrums and name-calling with what really holds the city back: a lack of accountability because our city's goals are vague and our metrics weak"
Yes, and yet the longest-serving members of the Council bear the most responsibility for that. We can't make them change their ways in that regard, some of us (maybe also you) have tried for a loooong time. Decades. It's time to just organize to render them irrelevant.
Ha ha, Chris — fair point! Yes, I know she read verbatim. But people often don’t read — whether it’s the City Manager’s May 16 Executive Order on Immigration Protocols or even the FAQ on the Worcester Police Department’s front page.
I think the intent of Councilor Toomey’s recitation was to underscore that the City does not enforce federal immigration laws — which, in turn, reinforced Councilor King’s point that his motion was pre-emptive, and Councilor Russell’s statement that Worcester “never has and never will” participate in a 287(g) agreement with ICE.
As for the lack of metrics, accountability is a collective effort. The Council as a whole needs to make that happen. I don't read much about our candidates pushing accountability. Maybe WorcesterSucks can help get them there!
Its very difficult not to think of you as another evil anti Immigrant racist. The WPD includes violent, racist sexual predators. Thats not my opinion, that the DOJs conclusion. After Eureka St its obvious that the FAQ is pathetic and overtly false. Only an anti immigrant racist would believe the spew from WPD. So sick of you disgusting racists in the comments, on the streets, in the WPD and in the city council.