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.