Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Elizabeth Smith on October 1, 2009 at 4:10pm

There are several wrinkles to iron out for this plan but a show of hands at last nights meeting showed all in attendance were in favor of the plan with one attendee dissenting. According to one of the attorneys in attendance it is much easier to present a civil suit than a criminal suit. Among those approving of the plan were RPD Chief David Moore and police offficer LeRon Singletary.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on October 1, 2009 at 8:55pm

I was at the meeting last night but left early. My impressions as follows:
The first 30 minutes was Chief Moore talking to/with the group. He praised the group for "all of the hard work we've done" (sort of strange to me since it was only the 2nd meeting). He talked about the need for 'relationship building', partnership, etc. He responded to some questions from concerned citizens re: SLOW police response to calls and LACK of police response to obvious situations that occur when police are present (i.e. LOUD music, littering, groups of people loitering, etc). He agreed that police NOT responding to these things is not acceptable and asked to be informed when this happens. One citizen raised the point that it seems absurd to have to call 911 re: loud music when the police are right there and able to hear it themselves!

Re: the 'street watch' civil suit idea.... it's an interesting idea and my understanding is that CIVIL suits can be brought for "nuisance properties". At this point, street watch is ONLY focusing on drug house nuisance properties - bringing a case to the court will REQUIRE evidence and the evidence will have to come (in part) from CITIZENS. THe way i understand this is that I'd have to give evidence about observing drug activity (i.e. traffic, drug parephenalia, etc) and this evidence would be used to move forward with a civil suit.

I asked whether this focus could include other than 'drug houses' and was told no.

I am all for getting rid of drug houses, but drugs are only part of the problem here. If Adam can get attorney's to do some pro bono work why not also focus on things such as property violations, the 'clubs' on Thurston, littering, etc?? Let's do something about the trashy houses on Thurston - they certainly seem to meet the criteria for nuisance properties. Let's get the attorney's to help take care of all of the other property/code violations that NSC won't/can't do something about!

Finally, I was expecting that we would hear an UPDATE on each and every problem area that was identified in the first meeting but that didn't happen before I left so I am not sure if that 'follow up' thing we talked about in the first meeting is still part of this initiative (or not).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Shawn on October 1, 2009 at 10:27pm

Since I had class til 8pm last night, I was unable to attend the meeting. So thank you for the updates everyone.

I guess I am still processing all the information. Part of me thinks this could be a great tool to help combat these drug houses. But if WE need evidence, then what good is that? Do I stand out front taking pictures!?!

Then part of me is feed up with the 19th Ward residents being required to take on even more responsibility. Like I have the time and energy to file a lawsuit, let along collect evidence. Like Sheri said, isn't that why we pay taxes?

And then on the subject of the lack of Police response, are you kidding me. We DO complain (that's why we are having these meetings) about the lack of response. Our friends that live near Park Ave, never complain about the lack of police response! I can understand that our part of the city might have more activity to respond to. And I think that that can lead to desensitizing to this certain types of activity. But I do feel, that the police have an attitude about the "non-Park Ave areas" of the city, an it's not a good one. Not all cops are like this, but I had the opportunity to have an inside look at the police academy, when a friend of mine enlisted, and saw my fair share of this type of cop. It becomes a "job", and or an ego trip, as it was for my friend. It's disappointing really. So I will bring things up to Chief Moore, but it's a change of culture that's needed, not a talk from their commander.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MacClurg Vivian on October 2, 2009 at 8:04am

I am in the middle of a big proposal for a nonprofit and need to make this brief, but will have more thoughts later.

Re the "Park Ave" friends who never complain. not quite so. As the secretary of the Highland Eastside PCIC for over a decade I can assure you that cititizens attending PCIC (and those who did not) quickly brought complaints to the then NET Lt and Eastside Commander (who use to attend all our meetings til the last Commander was installed, recently it was just the NET Lt, CPO's and maybe a Captain).

At PCIC there were regular complaints (for the purpose of problem solving, usually) about officers failing to do noise depositions from citizens or about cop not handling problems usefully, etc. and concern about the lack of police presence in the n'hoods, slow response to calls.

From my experience a key to getting things addressed was showing up at PCIC regularly, communicating concerns regularly, and the Commander or Net Lt. addressing the issue on the spot and then following up (ie educating them to regulations/policies, letting them know what the standard is) with personnel about changing their behavior. For example, it took them months/a couple years? to educate Eastside cops to enforcing the noise ordinance, for example. Because of this regular communication at PCIC cops and concerned neighbors often talked/met during the month to address issues, a nice model of partnership. Perhaps alot of that is happening here already, and I suspect that many concerned citizens do not attend PCIC, perhaps because they think it doesn't make a difference. Not so. You can make it make a difference.

Although I do not have the details of the purpose of the public safety meetings monthly re Thurston RD. (I have had conflicts on those Weds.) it seems to me it makes sense to have a link between that group and PCIC (perhaps a rep. who is part of the PCIC and updates us on the Thurston issues, as they do affect us all). The same goes for any other public safety group that meets monthly in the SW, they should be somehow linked to PCIC, which was set up for citizens and cops to work together to solve crime and quality of life issues.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Shawn on October 2, 2009 at 8:13am

Your right MacClurg. Direct involvement is key. I was venting my frustrations in my post last night. I wish I could make the meetings, but I have a conflict those nights (school). A HUGE thank you for keeping us updated with the posting of the PCIC meeting minutes.
-Shawn

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Georgia NeSmith on October 2, 2009 at 11:48pm

I would. In a heartbeat.

The reason the NSC route is so frustrating, as was pointed out at the meeting, is that there is only ONE city attorney to handle all the litigation over nuisance properties. The point of this, as I understand it, was to bring in attorneys who would work pro bono on behalf of the complainant. Now there's the rub. Can we get enough volunteer attorney hours to do the job?

It was suggested that currently with the slow economy there are many attorneys with time on their hands. That was said by another attorney, so perhaps he's in the know on that.

As for being able to fine you for a false alarm as opposed to shutting down a drug house...Sheri, you know better than that. How much effort is involved in A) determining that there was a false alarm and B) issuing the invoice?

Versus all of the police hours required to do an investigation of a drug house that A) won't be thrown out because the police violated constitutionally guaranteed rights and B) will provide enough evidence to hold up in court.

Conversely, going the civil route with the nuisance suits -- ONE ATTORNEY handles ALL of those for the entire city. Now, I would be fine with paying more taxes to hire all the attorneys we need...but very few in this city would go along with that as most feel already overburdened tax-wise.

And as I said, yes, I would file that suit. Everybody on Chili Ave. knows I call 911 regularly, and they all saw me walking for two months with the foot patrol detail. While I've experienced some harassment (thugs standing on the corner talking trash, for instance) I have never once felt my personal safety was at risk from them. It was just annoying.

Other than the vandalism I experienced when I first moved in, I haven't even had a porch pot overturned, nor even a scratch on my car.

Finally, yes, it is frustrating to be calling the police all the time. So, here's another route to get rid of the drug house so you don't HAVE to call the police.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Georgia NeSmith on October 3, 2009 at 2:48pm

Sheri, I know I don't live on Thurston. I was just making a point -- much of the fear people have of having their names out in the open like that is more imagination than reality. And I think retaliation would be even less of an issue with the lawsuits for nuisance property. In any case, if people band together there is even LESS chance of being the brunt of retaliation.

As for the issue with the NSC and all the excuses...well, if I say what I really think no doubt someone will chime in with an emotional defense of our fearless NSC administrator. But my experience and the experience of many I know has been that the majority of effort is put into creating an illusion of effort, particularly when the spotlight is on. Once the spotlight is taken away, all reverts to "normal."

I think those of us who are frustrated with the response would do well to start documenting every instance (such as the one you describe above) of inadequate response, and then take that up with the Mayor.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adam McFadden on October 1, 2009 at 11:14pm

u>Chief Moore
Last night we allowed the Chief to address the group because he felt the need to be in the community more to hear from the citizens. He did praise the people in the room because even after two meetings we had given them more details about our community as it pertains to Drug Dealing and Drug House than ever before.

Problem Areas from Last Month
By pinning the board our mayor saw fit to place an additional Camera on Thurston at Rosalind.

We also got RTS to commit to removing the bus shelter at Milton Street. Although they want to now place it at Ravenwood so I am meeting with them again next week.

As for the property's listed on the board we received correspondence from RPD that some of the property are not drug houses and we did not provide enough detail on others. I believe two are being taken very seriously because of known drug activity.

Street Watch

By now many of you have seen the news about the initiative. It's a pilot so that's why we have no short term plans to expand it to include other types of property violations. I am reading the posts and I am confused because the reality of this is if we don't take action nothing will ever change? We do have a NCS office who should be working on this but we only have one lawyer who actually works on the cases for the whole city and believe me she spends most of her time on Bars and Night Clubs and their issues. A citizen filing a civil suit is only one aspect of this. The city also can file the civil suit and have the volunteer lawyer represent the city as well. Remember we have only one lawyer working on this...... My aim is to arm us with as many tools as possible to go after this problem it is not the answer to everything but it is the start of correcting our drug dealing issues. Street Watch also will coordinate the communication with rehabilitation counselors, police, DSS (we are subsidizing some of these properties) also child protective services. Citizens who are afraid to file a suit can have the City be the lead and file. The most important thing about this is additional manpower and speed we can now move at shutting down a drug house. The way we have been going at it takes too long (6 months). That's not efficient and that's not fair to our community.

While we debate who is willing to file a suit the drug dealers are operating business as usual. This will only work if lock arms and fight together anything less than that, they win......

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Sweetland on October 2, 2009 at 2:26am

There are many things to consider about this, but I say give it a try. Now, how does one do it? How does one "have the city be the lead and follow?"

I congratulate you on taking the lead and actually doing more to help.

I was out walking PAC TAC tonight and heard positive comments. Is this functioning now? What are the options? How does one take action?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MacClurg Vivian on October 2, 2009 at 8:15am

Thank you Adam for the report, for those of us who cannot attend it is most helpful.

I completely understand people's frustration, the problems in our SW community are considerable and dangerous. I salute every effort everyone of you have made. Thank you for caring, it does make a difference. Even whe other folk here just hear about it, it gives them a little more hope. And for me as a new resident to the 19th, I am always delighted to hear about every initiative other residents like you are involved with. And I intend to be involved.

One thing I know about the police department after all my years as a volunteer in police initiatives...they are overwhelmed by the problems of the community and under resourced. And this is not their fault. That does not mean we cannot improve upon how policing happens.

Community Policing or citizen-police partnerships are essential to expanding RPD resource in the city and SW. Cops are still adjusting to citizen involvement and it can get a little edgy sometimes between us. Afterall this is a quasi military organization that spent most of its history not sharing with citizens and with pretty tight boundaries. I am wondering if perhaps some folks do not feel they have a partnership with the cops and if it would help to get that in place?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Margy Meath on October 2, 2009 at 8:29am

I don't think that people are debating WHO files a lawsuit. The frustration that you hear is (in part) related to many of us feeling like we have worked incessantly to bring information to various city officials (i.e. police, 911, NSC, etc) and have seen nothing happen. Re: the house that Sheri references above - in addition to 14 active police calls there have been other calls/sharing of information (i.e. smoking pot on the porch, mini bike traffic in/out back and forth to Thurston, noise, unattended children, a weekend house party last summer, etc). It may or may not be a 'drug house' but it's definitely a 'nuisance property' and there is certainly 'drug activity' going on there.

If RPD needs more information on the houses that were identified on the pin board, HOW is that request getting back to the people who identified those various locations? AND, how will other possible locations be identified?

I get it that the city resources are limited, but also believe that the lack of response many of us have seen/experienced from the police and NSC has contributed to people feeling very tired - and some of the people who ARE involved and asked to do more are tired.

Street watch is a great idea - and i see that it's getting quite a bit of press in the past 24 hours. It would be good to see the same level of attention placed on the frustration of citizens of this community and our collective demand that we receive our fair share of city resources for our community. I am looking forward to the first lawsuit and will certainly lock arms with anyone who is involved in truly combatting illegal activity in this community.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MacClurg Vivian on October 3, 2009 at 9:56am

Maybe this group would help us locate a lawyer, I know they are essentially set up to help low income people...but maybe if the RIGHT person asked....?

Volunteer Legal Services Project (VLSP) Some lawyers vol their time.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page