Worcester City Council to Scrutinize Mental Health Emergency Response Amidst Lawsuit
Worcester City Councilor-at-Large Kathleen M. Toomey has formally requested a comprehensive report from the City Council detailing the response protocols of both the Police Department and the Emergency Communications and Management Department when addressing “mental health-related emergencies.” This directive comes at a critical juncture, just two weeks after three prominent mental health non-profit organizations filed a substantial 52-page federal lawsuit against the city. The lawsuit alleges that dispatching armed police officers to mental health crises infringes upon multiple federal statutes, including the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act. This pressing issue is slated for discussion at the upcoming City Council meeting on Tuesday, March 31.
The plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit articulate a clear disparity in the city’s approach to emergencies. They argue that while paramedics are routinely dispatched to assist individuals suffering from physical injuries, the city fails to deploy trained mental health professionals to respond to individuals experiencing mental health crises. This perceived inequity forms the crux of their legal challenge.
Councilor Toomey’s request specifically mandates that the forthcoming report must enumerate any “initiatives, measures, or programs” currently employed by the city and its Police Department in their handling of mental health-related calls. As the current chair of the Standing Committee on Public Safety, a committee that directly oversees the Police Department, Toomey’s inquiry carries significant weight. Her broader vision for public safety, as articulated when Mayor Joseph M. Petty announced standing committee assignments, emphasizes a holistic approach. “Public safety extends beyond just the Police Department,” Toomey stated. “It also encompasses the Fire Department, Emergency Communications and Management – including Dispatch and the Emergency Management Division – as well as the 311 Customer Service Division.” This perspective underscores her commitment to a coordinated and multi-faceted response system.
Traffic Enforcement: A Recurring Concern
Beyond the critical issue of mental health response, traffic and speed enforcement is also back on the City Council’s agenda this week, following an extensive discussion during a previous session. During the council’s February 24 meeting, several councilors pressed Police Chief Paul B. Saucier to bolster the department’s traffic division. However, Chief Saucier indicated that such an expansion was unlikely due to significant staffing challenges.
Chief Saucier highlighted the city’s ongoing officer shortage, stating that the Police Department is currently operating with a deficit of 58 officers. This number accounts for officers who have retired, those on long-term disability, and personnel deployed with the military. Adding to this concern, Saucier revealed that an additional 50 to 60 officers are eligible for retirement with full benefits in November, a development that could further exacerbate the existing officer shortage and impact the department’s capacity.
Despite these departmental constraints, specific concerns regarding traffic enforcement on certain city roads have been raised by council members.
- District 1 Councilor Tony J. Economou has specifically requested that Chief Saucier increase speed enforcement along Coventry Road. His request targets peak commuting hours, specifically from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and again from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Economou has also advocated for the installation of a speed notification sign on Richmond Avenue, situated between Pleasant Street and Flagg Street, to alert drivers to their speed. - District 5 Councilor Jose A. Rivera is calling for enhanced traffic enforcement at the intersection of Chandler Street and Hamill Road. Rivera’s request emphasizes the need to “ensure motorists do not run red lights at the location,” citing potential safety hazards.
These agenda items, alongside other matters, are scheduled for deliberation by the City Council on Tuesday, March 31, commencing at 6:30 p.m. The council’s discussions are expected to address the city’s operational strategies in response to pressing public safety needs and legal challenges.
