Since things have been pretty quiet in Centretown crime wise, I thought I would take the opportunity to talk about a less sensational issue that, despite not having the same appeal as a serious crime story, is quite relevant because it speaks to the importance of everyone taking responsibility to make their environment safer and crime free.
For some of you it would seem as if I am beating a dead horse, but allow me to point out the fact that I am continually solicited to give reactive advice to people who expect me to manage their crisis, despite the fact that they know that I am a full-time crime prevention officer. That means it is my role to empower people by giving them educational information on how to prevent the crisis, rather than become the person who manages it for them.
What has become increasingly clear to me is that my biggest challenge will be in overcoming the natural tendency for people to put their faith in the wrong place and convince them to believe in something different. By this I mean that my challenge is to get people to actually believe that they are a bigger part of the overall solution than I am, despite the fact that they often see me as the “go-to person” when it comes to addressing issues around crime and safety.
To illustrate my point, allow me to discuss how taking ownership of public spaces is a large part of the solution when it comes to making those places a safe and enjoyable place for everyone in the community to use.
Most people may believe that the best way to make a public place (such as a public park, downtown street, etc.) safe is to increase police patrols in that area, or install surveillance cameras to monitor activity in those areas and that this is the best deterrent against illegal or disorderly behavior.
I agree that these can be part of the overall solution, but when you take into consideration their high cost, it becomes obvious that they are only temporary measures meant to restore order until a more sustainable and cost effective approach can be implemented.
Unfortunately, when the problem or crisis no longer exists, few people actually seize the opportunity to engage themselves in addressing the root cause of the problem to ensure that it does not come back.
For example, if police get rid of youth who are constantly loitering, drinking and causing vandalism in the park, community members should immediately take ownership of the park by using it for its intended purpose. They should also encourage others to use the park as well, before other problem youth show up again.
People should remember that the temporary absence of a problem simply gives people an opportunity to change the pre-existing environment in a way that discourages the original problem from resurfacing.
If the reason the youth are loitering is because they are drawn to picnic tables or park benches that are located in secluded areas, then someone needs to contact the city to put in a request to have those structures moved out into the open, to discourage people from using the structures in ways that they are not meant to be used. But then the people making the complaints have to actually use the tables and benches that have been moved out in the open areas of the park!
If lighting or pathways routes are an issue, city officials can respond by conducting a complete safety/security audit of the park or public area to address concerns. You can also contact any Community Police Officer about safety/security concerns related to any public space, but ultimately the best way to prevent public space being misused is to use it yourself in a way that it is intended to be used.
Regrettably, I have seen the opposite.
Instead of people using the space after it is made safe, people stay away because they have the notion that it is not a desirable place to be anymore. Giving up so easily on your public space means that others will eventually find a use for it. If they are from the criminal element, then the cycle continues.
Sadly, I have seen brand new picnic tables and park benches getting removed from parks and city streets because of complaints received from the public that “bad” people to use them. This is not a solution that I endorse, as these structures are meant to enhance and encourage use of the parks and other public areas.
Another example of a short-sighted solution, is the recent removal of new park benches along the newly redesigned upper portion of Bank Street due to public complaints that the benches were attracting unsavory types (homeless persons, suspected dealers, street youth, etc).
As much as this provides immediate relief for those who found this to be a problem, these so-called “unsavory types” simply go elsewhere and find new areas to hang out in. Perhaps they will end up at a local park and find a secluded picnic table or park bench to take over.
I think you see my point. I would prefer the money spent on removing public-use structures be spent on promotional campaigns that encourage people to use public spaces and structures in their communities to their full potential. That would encourage more people to walk, shop and play in all areas of their community and this would give people a sense of ownership of the various public spaces in their community.
This not only empowers people and gives them a higher quality of life in their community, it also goes a long way in preventing the misuse of public areas in their own backyard.