Pubdate: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 Source: Capital Times, The (WI) Copyright: 2002 The Capital Times Contact: http://www.captimes.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/73 Author: Susan J.M. Bauman Note: Susan J.M. Bauman is mayor of Madison. ANTI-LOITERING LAW NOT THE SOLUTION TO DRUG DEALING The controversy surrounding the city's "Loitering for the Purposes of Illegal Drug Sales" ordinance prompts me to remind citizens of the longtime and long-term commitment by Madison to its neighborhoods. A number of strategies have been implemented over the years that have kept Madison a high-quality city with relatively low homicide and violence rates. These strategies are effective in ensuring that people in challenge neighborhoods continue to have hope and work for a better community. Madison has not changed any neighborhood using only police powers. We have not achieved the status of being a great place to live by implementing "silver bullet" type strategies like the loitering ordinance. Rather, it has been the hard work of residents working in partnership with city departments and groups such as the United Way of Dane County, Madison Community Foundation and several of our corporate citizens that has made sustainable changes to what we formerly referred to as "troubled" neighborhoods. The city's most successful efforts to improve challenge neighborhoods never involved a loitering ordinance. Vera Court, Broadway-Lake Point, Darbo-Worthington and now Wexford Ridge were improved with the commitment of residents, Future Madison and city staff, including police officers committed to making a difference. The formerly notorious Northport-Packers Apartments were changed through strong management, programs establishing tenant screening criteria and successfully involving residents. Madison's strategies to reduce crime and improve neighborhoods began in the late 1980s with the creation of neighborhood police officers whose mission is to uphold the law, but more importantly to be a positive resource for the residents. Neighborhood officers are expected to build relationships, be proactive in preventing crimes and be more sensitive to issues faced by residents. Our strategies continue with the "Broken Windows" concept that requires property owners to repair damage to their buildings. Deteriorating infrastructure in neighborhoods contributes to the belief by drug dealers that nobody cares and they can do business freely in the area. Neighborhood Resource Teams and city staff participation on Joining Forces for Families teams are other successful strategies that provide resources for resident initiatives to maintain or improve the quality of life and provide opportunities for residents. A few other strategies that contribute to reducing crime and drug activity are the creation of planning councils, funding for neighborhood centers and the development and support of neighborhood associations. As I stated in my veto message, over the five years that the loitering ordinance has been in place, I have become increasingly uncertain that the ordinance was having the desired effect. Open-air drug dealing continues, especially in the Cypress-Magnolia neighborhood. While I recognize the value of the ordinance as one tool to combat open-air drug dealing, I am concerned about its adverse impact on a segment of our community. It is clear to anyone who listened to the testimony of residents at the City Council meeting, or reviewed the Police Department report on loitering, that the ordinance has not been a deterrent to open-air drug dealing. Few officers are trained to use the ordinance, while the police acknowledge that the most significant factor influencing the issuance of citations is the number of officers trained to do so. The biggest deterrent to open-air drug dealing in any neighborhood has been the residents organizing themselves and committing their efforts to change their neighborhood. That is the strategy currently working in the Cypress-Magnolia area. We must once again begin to look at the underlying causes that make a neighborhood a welcoming place for the drug trade. This is something the Bram's Addition neighborhood Anti-Drug Coalition is doing for its area. The Bram's Addition residents are assessing the factors that contribute to an area becoming known as a "drug area." They are focusing on changing those factors. Our experience tells us that a lack of screening criteria by property owners, no commitment by residents to do their part and businesses that sell drug paraphernalia contribute to the "drug area" label. As I stated in my veto message, I will support the enactment of the Loitering for the Purpose of Illegal Drug Sales ordinance with a one- or two-year sunset to allow the Police Department to work with residents and other city staff to develop alternative strategies that will more effectively address open-air drug dealing. I have no sympathy for the people who sell hard-core drugs in our community, but I cannot accept making what appears to be a flawed ordinance permanent. I know that loitering citations are issued based on behavior. However, this flawed ordinance has an adverse impact on African-American males. To allow this ordinance to become permanent without an annual or biannual review and City Council deliberation on the impact and alternatives says to the African-American community that we don't care. I do care. Iknow that the loitering ordinance is not the answer to open-air drug dealing. It is questionable whether it is the right tool for the police and whether it should remain on the books of our city for more than a few years. Any ordinance that divides our community the way this one does should not be permanent. We know what the effective strategies to ending open-air drug dealing are. We have successful examples here in our city that don't pit members of our community against each other. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth