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