Pittsfield, Massachusetts city council president Peter Marchetti is one of three candidates running for mayor. A veteran of nine non-consecutive two-year terms on the council, he ran for mayor in 2011 and lost by under 100 votes to Dan Bianchi. Marchetti now faces former city councilor John Krol and current at-large city councilor Karen Kalinowsky in the race to succeed outgoing two-term Mayor Linda Tyer. Only two will continue on after Tuesday’s preliminary vote. Earlier this month, the trio met for a PCTV debate. When asked if he thought the city is a safe community, Marchetti said yes, but that “there needs to be more action taken with the panhandlers and needs to be more action taken to create a drug war against our dealers.” To explain what he meant by invoking the phrase “drug war,” Marchetti sat down with WAMC on Tuesday before that night’s city council meeting.
MARCHETTI: So, I think that this election is about charting the next course in Pittsfield history. We just finished with COVID- Well, we hope we finished with COVID. But we look like we have turned the corner from COVID, and there's been a lot of devastating impacts from COVID. And a lot of rebuilding that the city needs to do. So, it's really about changing the face of the city on a whole host of issues. You know, we have a downtown that needs a lot of help. And we have neighborhoods and residents that need a little help as well.
WAMC: One thing that came up during the debate, the PCTV preliminary debate, was this conversation about the Wright Building in downtown Pittsfield. Now, obviously, you've been in office for going on 16 years now, and for the last five years, that building has remained dormant since its acquisition by Allegrone. And when they acquired it, it saw the iconic downtown locations like House of India relocate, we saw the shuttering of the bowling alley. You've had time in office to maybe put pressure on Allegrone to do something with that sort of core downtown piece- Any comments on that, why that's been shuttered for so long?
So, I don't know why Allegrone hasn't moved forward. I think from my perspective, and I've talked about this several times, the economy has changed greatly, and something that was a project five years ago may not be viable today. But that will be one of the first things on our agenda come January,
It stands out to me, because there's a lot of conversation about concerns around crime downtown or concerns around parking downtown, when there's a very visible economic obstacle like the Wright Building. So, do you think that that has been obfuscated in conversations about downtown?
I just think that we have kind of still been focusing on COVID, and not really on the rebirth post-COVID. And so, I think that that needs to be a priority, and I think that that's going to come with the next administration.
I was interested by your decision to use the phrase “drug war” in the debate concerning bringing attention to drug dealers in Pittsfield. It's a phrase that has a lot of, comes with a lot of baggage in American history. Can you expand a little bit on what you meant by that?
Well, I think I said a few things in regards to that that kind of opened some folks’ eyes. And I think that as we want to focus on crime, and we want to focus on the issues, I mean, part of it is, if I'm a drug dealer, I have clients. And so, what comes first, eliminating the drug dealers, or getting folks to a place and in their life of rehab where they don't want it? And so I think that we need to, we know the flow, we know they're coming in from Albany, we know they're coming up from New York City, we know they're coming from Springfield, and we need to stop the trafficking and to kind of alleviate some of the pressures put on the on the people that want to use, and it's that struggle for them to want to get help or to want to use and our current mental health and substance use programs are flooded, and we don't have enough resources for them.
So, this would be like an emphasis on increased law enforcement activity around drug dealing to approach the problem from that angle?
So, I think it's from a law enforcement piece, but not to criminalize what we're doing, but to get them help. And so, from my perspective, I think we talk about downtown and we talk about the homeless, and we talk about putting boots on the ground. You know, from my philosophy, I just don't think boots on the ground are going to have much of an impact, because our police officers aren't fully trained on the mental health issues. So, if we're going to take a boots on the ground approach, they need to have a social worker attached with them to be able to do what they're doing. And so, some of it is going to be law enforcement, and some of it's going to be a mental health outreach that we desperately need to do in our downtown.
I just want to circle back to the “drug war” thing. So, I see what you're saying about criminalizing users. But what does that mean, exactly, when it comes to the dealers? When you envision that, what does that look like?
So, I mean, I would be full hard press on criminalizing the dealers, because I think that, you know, we've got two ways to approach the solution, and one is to eliminate the supply, and the other piece is to eliminate the people who are looking for that supply. And, you know, I think from my perspective, as we have, you know, started to approach panhandling and the homeless and all this stuff, until you really focus on the mental health or substance use issues, we're not going to solve them. And so, I don't want to stick put a stigma on users. I want to be able to put them into some form of rehabilitation. And I alluded to at the debate, as you mentioned, also, you know, the sheriff has a proven rehab program where folks have been incarcerated and they come out. I'm not saying to incarcerate the people, but let's utilize that program, maybe create an outpatient program where we know that it already works.
I've spoken with experts in the harm reduction field, and- Any thoughts on that?
Well, I think it's a combination of both, right? So, I'm talking law enforcement, but I'm also talking mental health, social workers. And so, I wouldn't be opposed to exploring the concept of some safe space where we can monitor, and I know there'll be some pushback from some folks that say, well, that's only giving them, you know, permission to do what they're doing. But I think at the end of the day, we need to use all the resources we can to solve the problem.
Another thing from the debate I wanted to circle back to was, in the conversation about drug use in our community, you did point out- The conversation of criminalizing the activity, you did sort of make that connection by saying in the debate that, well, simply buying an illegal drug is a criminal act. Can you expand on that a little bit? That could be perceived as criminalizing that community.
So, I mean, I- I think I also said several times, I'm not trying to give them a record, I'm not trying to make them a criminal, I'm not trying to kind of ruin where they're coming from. I think in some cases, from my perspective, there are two ways for someone to seek help, and one is on their own and the other is some form of guidance. And whether it be from the law enforcement community, or from a social worker perspective, or from a family member. And I think that we need to kind of develop a program that isn't heavy handed police intervention all the way through, the same as why I keep saying boots on the ground is not the best solution and more of a community policing model. And so, if we had more officers who could reach out and provide assistance rather than, here, put out your wrists, I'm going to lock you up.
One aspect of this campaign that sort of began last year with the DA race in Berkshire County – and during the debate, you cheered the efforts of DA Timothy Shugrue – was this conversation about crime. While our Pittsfield Police Department has not released any new crime data over the last seven months now – their last major update, or eight months at this point, it was back in January – we're seeing from the Pittsfield Police Department an overwhelming decrease in crime over the last five years. And despite that information, what we heard all last year from Mr. Shugrue and now what's bleeding into this election now is this concept that crime is out of control in Pittsfield. Can you help me out here? Because I'm at a loss to find any statistics that validate that narrative.
Well, I can and it's kind of odd, but it's perception. We hear, at least I'm hearing on the campaign trail, on a regular basis, that what people are seeing in downtown is being reflected upon as crime. And so, I think there is a portion of the community that want to criminalize panhandling, and they want us to do some kind of intervention with panhandling. And so, I think it's perception. And we need to address the perceptions. And so, part of that is, you know, working through the process of, if I'm just standing someplace, sure, I'm committing a crime, because I guess I'm loitering. But is that really a crime? And what can we do about doing, rectifying that, and finding ways for people to seek the programs they need to be able to put themselves back on the right path.
Well, during the debate, you did call for a more aggressive approach to panhandling.
I did. And one of the things that I have on the agenda for tonight's council meeting is a petition, more from a public safety standpoint, that standing on a median strip, any pedestrian, it's not going to be allowed unless you're crossing the street. Again, I think that we need to do a deeper dive. The folks that are panhandling- Are they homeless people, or are they people looking for a means of employment? And I think that we need to rectify that answer, so that we're not putting placing a stigma on those that are doing it if it's not an accurate reflection.
Well, so which body would sort out what qualified as an appropriate action? And what would the penalty be for crossing that that line, so to speak?
So, that will depend upon how we write the ordinance. The city of Framingham has created one. And so, I think that could be where we're going to begin looking at it and trying to build off of it. It would not be a criminal offense, it would be a civil offense. So, it would be more of getting a ticket than being arrested.
I wanted to go back to your observation about perception of crime in Pittsfield. In my mind, there's a demarcation between leadership as finding narratives, holding on to them, and following them to success electorally, or leadership where you acknowledge that there is a perception and use your role to dissuade people of that perception. And I guess from my vantage point, it seems like the policies you were outlining in the debate were a lot closer to supporting that perception than dissuading people from that perception.
[pause]
I can see where you would have seen that. I think there's a combination of both. And so right now, I think there's a perception that the police department is doing nothing, which I don't think it's the case at all, but that's a perception. And so, I think we need a combination of both. I think we need some action. I think folks need to not be allowed to be hanging out in public drinking at a bus station, but not having them arrested and locked up overnight or whatever the case may be. So, we need to find a happy medium of how we control that flow.
So, heading into the primary – or the preliminary, rather – what do you feel like the major points are going to be on the campaign battlefield? Like, what do you think the overwhelming themes will be that will carry you through this first checkpoint?
So, I think that major themes are leadership, experience, and dedication. I think that when I'm knocking on doors, folks see some commonalities between all of us. Not completely, but in some cases, they see some similarities with one of the candidates and more similarities with another, and so I think it's about, you know, each person's integrity, each person's past record, and experience and leadership.
