The implementation of Rand’s models for planning the organization of fire companies is another example of the city government trying to improve living standards without accurately accessing the needs of city neighborhoods. Because fire companies were closed and spread out, many homes were lost to fires and poor people were displaced. Like with rezoning, strong community networks in lower-income neighborhoods were broken and the people were spread out, making organizing to protest rezoning and reorganization of fire companies harder to do. Perhaps that was the initial plan of city officials, to divide and conquer.

The oppression of the poor seems systematic and intentional at this point. How else could Rand’s models been approved? The formulas used for the Resource-Allocation Model and the Firehouse-Siting Model seem too simple to be used to reorganize fire companies all across the city. Even the models I created in school for how lakes fill up after precipitation and evaporation are more complicated than Rand’s models. The installation of ERS boxes were not even well thought out. How can you ask the public to use new technology to report fires without including instructions or education in languages that people can actually understand?  It’s like Ikea stores in America only giving furniture assembly instructions in German with no diagrams.

City officials seem to have no understanding of the poor and refuse to gain an accurate understanding of how to win at least one battle in the war on poverty. It is only until organized efforts are made and covered by media that the city government listens to what lower income residents need.

Discussion Question: What else can be done for the poor’s voice to finally be heard by city officials?