Quantcast
Channel: Savannah Morning News | Latest News
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 15922

OPINION: Savannah City Council should avoid anti-crime gimmicks

$
0
0

In the wake of a handful of high-profile crimes, most recently the Nov. 3 shooting in which eight people were injured at the Coastal Empire Fairgrounds, Mayor Edna Jackson and members of the Savannah City Council have stepped forward to take the initiative in searching for solutions to both juvenile and adult crime in the city.

Following the fairgrounds incident, the mayor and council members, along with Savannah-Chatham Police Chief Willie Lovett, deserve credit for coming together and saying to the larger community ‘we have to find a way to keep our kids from commiting crimes.’

But teenage crime with all of its related issues, of course, is only a piece of the problem. Drugs, a high poverty rate, ready access to handguns, numerous repeat offenders and other factors weave a complex web of cause and effect.

One question is whether the police department simply needs more officers on the street, whether for patrol or for the creation of a street-level anti-drug unit Lovett has proposed. When the talk turns to additional officers, it also turns, as it must, to money.

Lovett has asked for $3 million to create a 30-member drug unit, but council members say they are waiting on a revised budget request that would phase in hiring and costs over several years.

Council members want that so they can determine the impact on the 2013 budget, which must be passed by the end of the year.

The current budget doesn’t include police funding additions, so council would either need to cut expenses or raise property taxes.

In an earlier discussion with council, Lovett proposed an additional $3.9 million to add five juvenile officers, hire more investigators and create a special events squad downtown.

Given the overall community’s perception of crime as a serious problem, the kneejerk reaction is to say “Fine. Let’s start recruiting officers.” But it’s not that simple. Those requests come in the context of a city budget that’s already tight and is unlikely to gain additional flexibility given our slow economic recovery.

The mayor and council have a difficult task in front of them in balancing priorities and making decisions on whether to add officers and, if so, where to find the money.

The one thing we would encourage them to do is stay away from gimmicks and simplistic statements that fail to advance the discussion.

Example? The suggestion from the mayor and others Thursday that a ‘deterrent’ might be to develop a “100 worst repeat offenders” list, which would be broadcast in the community, put on posters and presented at neighborhood association and PTA meetings.

It’s unclear how this posting — or how you decide who the 100 worst offenders are — would deter any repeat criminal from following the path he’s on. Public embarrassment? Not likely to have any effect. It’s doubtful someone who has committed repeated crimes is going to feel bad because his picture’s on a poster. In fact, it could become a badge of honor with a certain piece of the community.

And as with anything that requires compiling data and lists, it would require police department time to formulate and maintain.

The idea grew from Chief Lovett confirming that repeat offenders with multiple arrests are a major problem, but the solution isn’t in gimmicks. It’s in working with other elements of the criminal justice system to find ways to keep people who should be incarcerated from being returned to the streets.

So, please. Let’s move on to working on the difficult answers rather than wasting time on one that might be a temporary crowd pleaser but will accomplish little.

And, no, it’s not the same as maintaining lists of sex offenders or running lists of parents who have failed to pay child support. One is mandated by law for the specific protection of families, and the other does have a potential embarrassment effect.

And Mayor Pro Tem Van Johnson needs to rethink his comments that more officers on the street will not reduce crime.

A body of evidence suggests otherwise. The question isn’t whether additional officers, used strategically, will have a positive effect. The question is whether the city can afford to pay for them or is willing to sacrifice other items in their favor.

And remember: Chief Lovett has told the council it will take about a year to hire and train additional officers even if council approves the funding.

That would suggest getting distracted by such notions as a ‘worst’ list only pushes real answers farther down the road.


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 15922

Trending Articles