Transcript Development Milestones of the Police

Police-Citizen Relationship
David L. Carter, Ph.D.
Director, National Center for Community Policing
Michigan State University
The information in this presentation was prepared for the WSU Regional Community Policing Institute, by
David L. Carter, Ph.D., National Center for Community Policing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
48824. The information may be reproduced with attribution to both the WSU RCPI and the author.
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
A Perspective
• How does the public develop a
perspective of what the police do?
• How realistic is that perspective?
• How difficult is it to change that
perspective?
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1960s
• Police characterized by…
 Traditional bureaucracy
 Low training standards
 Low educational levels
 Poorly trained leaders and managers
• Attitude: “We know what’s best.”
• Police were confronting unprecedented social
evolution and were not equipped to handle it
 Civil Rights Movement and civil disobedience
 Vietnam War Protests
 Baby Boomers: “Sex, Drugs and Rock n’ Roll”
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1960s
• Riots and aggressive police response
• Police-Community Relations began
• Findings of the 1967 President’s Commission on Law
Enforcement and Administration of Justice
• Media coverage and public response to riots of the
1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago
• Safe Streets Act of 1968: First Federal funding for…
 Crime control research
 Educational incentives for criminal justice personnel
 Emphasis on police training
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1970s
• Police-Community Relations movement flourished-largely at Michigan State via Professor Lou Radelet
• Concept of civilian oversight
• Aggressive police research agenda tested beliefs and
practices: we started learning “what works”
• Police educational levels dramatically increased
• Every state implemented minimum training standards
• Police administrators became better trained
• National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice
Standards and Goals
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1970s
• Crime prevention concept evolved; grew dramatically
• Police-Community Relations became accepted
practice
• Police-media relations improved
• Liability lawsuits (mostly Civil Rights) against the
police grew dramatically--forced police to change
• Greater police awareness of responsibilities to
citizens
• The 1970s was the decade of maturation for
American policing
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1980s
• Police operations became increasingly analytical
 Crime analysis (including calls for service)
 Job task analysis of police officers
 Citizen surveys
• Growing acceptance that policing was more than
crime fighting
• Exploration of new citizen roles…
 Citizens’ Police Academy
 Citizens on Patrol
 Citizen Advisory Councils
 Volunteers
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1980s
• First full exploration of community policing
 Bob Trojanowicz, MSU, Neighborhood Foot Patrol
 Herman Goldstein, Problem Oriented Policing
 Police Executive Research Forum POP Research
in Newport News, VA
 Police Foundation Foot Patrol Research in
Newark and Houston
• Late 1980s--Introduction of Total Quality
Management (TQM) principles to policing
(notably Madison, WI)
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1990s
• Wider experimentation and adoption of community
policing
 MSU National Center for Community Policing
 PERF’s POP conferences, research, and
publications
 NIJ-funded research on community policing
 BJA Community Policing
Training/Technical Assistance
 Harvard Executive Sessions
• Broader innovation and application of youth-based
programs
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
1990s
• Greater integration of TQM with community policing
 Listening to the customer--“customer driven”
 Doing the job right the first time
 All aspects of employees work done with high
quality
• Creation of the Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS) in the 1994 Crime Bill
 Police officer hiring incentives
 Program evaluation
 Experimentation
 Training (to include police and community partners)
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
Lessons
• Citizen quality of life and control of disorder has an
equal--if not higher--priority of crime control
• The police can’t do it all--citizen partnerships and
input are needed for…
 Problem identification
 Problem solving
 Crime prevention
 Maintaining order
• Proactive problem solving is
more efficient and effective than reactive policing
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
Lessons
• Both police and community must be realistic
 Not all problems can be solved to everyone’s
satisfaction
 New problems will always surface
• Citizens must be full partners
 The police cannot treat citizen
participation as tokenism
 Citizens cannot be “fair weather”
partners but must have on-going participation in
activities
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
Caveats for the Future
• Recognize that your greatest obstacle is changing
the organization—This will be a constant challenge
affecting virtually everyone in the organization.
• Developing partnerships with the community
requires proactivity, effort, and communications—
Trust is the glue which will create a bond between
the police and community.
• Invest in the highest caliber of people—Get the
best people, continually train them, and treat them
right.
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
Caveats for the Future
• Politics are inevitable—Policing is a political animal,
so learn to play the game, not dance around it.
• Everything is more difficult than it appears—Do not
over-commit yourself or your organization.
• Be creative, patient, and try some risks—These are
necessary to be a successful public service
entrepreneur.
• Always look ahead—Without a “futures orientation”,
you will always be playing “catch-up”.
The Police-Citizen Relationship:
Caveats for the Future
• Make a commitment for future program
development
• Avoid dogmatism and be willing to make
changes
• Develop a vision--look at the police department,
the community, and crime-related issues not as
they are, but as they might be.
The Future
Changes in the Crime Rate
• From 1991-1997 the UCR Index crime rate has
dropped an average 13% in the United States
• Why?
 Community policing
 Strong economy
 Crime reduction policies and programs
 Decreased number of youth aged 15-21--the
crime prone years
• Is this cause for celebration?
The Future
Concerns About Future Crime
• Drug availability, purity, and use have all increased
during the same years of the crime decrease.
• The UCR crime index does not account for growth in
drug trafficking and use, computer crime, fraud, and
other Part II offenses.
• Despite the crime rate drop, the crime rate remains
nearly twice as high today than it was
ten years ago.
• The number of young people in the 15-21 year old
age group--which commits 5-6 times more crime than
other age groups--is increasing.