The problem's the process, not the plan

There is a lot to like about County Executive Edward Mangano’s police precinct reduction plan that was passed by the Legislature last week. Its purpose is to update an outmoded public safety system, redirect police energy in the right directions and save the county money. So why is the plan so hard for so many people to swallow? Because it has the same problem that has plagued Mangano’s concepts in the past: It’s the presentation, not the plan.

If you were walking down the street and someone jammed a $100 bill into your mouth, you’d be more offended than pleased, wouldn’t you? Sure, you’d take the money, but the way the gift was presented would corrupt the benefit. The packaging of Mangano’s new policing strategy feels like that: Even if every promised benefit materializes, the lack of information that has been made public, combined with the cocky bluster of the Legislature’s majority, make it hard to support what might very well be an idea whose time has come.

We’ve seen similar public reactions to county initiatives in the recent past. The self-serving Republican redistricting plan was nothing less than cynical gerrymandering, manifested by its rush to be approved, a general impression that has thus far been upheld in court. And Mangano’s attempt to sneak a fastball past voters in the form of a half-cocked Nassau Coliseum proposal was overwhelmingly repelled. But while the cost of redistricting is political capital, and building the Islanders a new home is all about financing, the stakes of a proposal to reorganize policing in Nassau County are much higher.

The protection of the people and their property is the primary function of government. So when you start proposing sweeping changes to those services, it is incumbent on government to provide ample details about how everything’s going to work.

Under Mangano, plans always seem foisted on a public that, at best, will be permitted to vent its spleen at a hearing or two before succumbing to the unstoppable force of GOP control. In this case, that nominal concession to dissent is not enough.