--- title: "ProblemOriented Policing at the Gold Star Market" type: "pdf" year: "2002" canonical: "/projects/1222" --- # Toledo Police Department ![img-0.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-0.jpeg) # Table of Contents - [Toledo Police Department](#toledo-police-department) - [SUMMARY](#summary) - [SCANNING: DEFINING THE PROBLEM](#scanning-defining-the-problem) - [ANALYSIS: CAUSES OF THE PROBLEM](#analysis-causes-of-the-problem) - [RESPONSE: THE PLAN](#response-the-plan) - [ASSESSMENT: THE OUTCOME](#assessment-the-outcome) - [DESCRIPTION](#description) - [SCANNING](#scanning) - [ANALYSIS](#analysis) - [RESPONSE](#response) - [ASSESSMENT](#assessment) - [AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION](#agency-and-officer-information) - [SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS](#supporting-documents) - [YEARLY POLICE INCIDENT/CONTACT AROUND THE GOLD STAR](#yearly-police-incidentcontact-around-the-gold-star) - [EXHIBIT 3](#exhibit-3) - [YEARLY COMPARISON OF SUPPRESSIBLE CRIMES IN THE WEED/SEED AREA](#yearly-comparison-of-suppressible-crimes-in-the-weedseed-area) - [EXHIBIT 6](#exhibit-6) - [PERCENT OF VIOLENT FELONY CRIMES YEAR 2000](#percent-of-violent-felony-crimes-year-2000) - [EXHIBIT 8](#exhibit-8) - [Lagrange Development Corporation](#lagrange-development-corporation) - [Weed & Seed Target Area](#weed-seed-target-area) # SUMMARY In January of 2001 the Toledo Police Department in conjunction with the Lagrange Development Corporation (LDC) addressed a major concern in the Old Polish Village neighborhood of Toledo. Open air drug sales in this area had been wreaking havoc in the community over the past few years, and causing the crime rate to increase across the board. This particular neighborhood had the fortune of being chosen as a Weed and Seed site by the Department of Justice starting in November of 2000 thus giving the Police Department and the neighborhood community development corporation (LDC) extra resources needed to solve this problem. The Weed and Seed Program is funded by the Department of Justice and is designed to assist residents in reclaiming their neighborhoods. It combines an enhanced police presence along with organized community support. Not only is the goal to weed out the bad, but also to seed positive changes into the community through dedicated social service programs and outreach workers. Through regular problem solving meetings between the Police Department and LDC a list of the main problems was developed and a strategy for solving these problems was adapted. The S.A.R.A. model (Scanning, Analysis, Response, and Assessment) was the tool used to get the most effective and innovative solutions. # SCANNING: DEFINING THE PROBLEM It became apparent from the problem solving meetings with the community that the open-air drug sales were their number one concern. The visibility of the drug sales caused a great deal of anxiety and the loitering caused the free flow of vehicle and pedestrian traffic to be blocked especially during the busy lime of the day. The neighborhood citizens were often solicited for drugs and there was an increasing litter problem. Also, since there were two gangs competing for the drug market, gang graffiti began to pop up. The other consequences of the drug problem also began to appear: prostitution, burglaries, and violent crime. There were several locations that were identified as problems but one location, The Gold Star Market, was the worst. It was located right on Lagrange Street which is a main city throughway that connects two parts of town. The specific environmental factors of the Gold Star itself, such as the front parking lot, the bend in the road, the bus stop, and the surrounding areas made this location ideal for open air drug sales. So we had our one main problem. But what could be done? Other approaches had been used in the past with little or no success. How could this be different? # ANALYSIS: CAUSES OF THE PROBLEM The Gold Star Market had become synonymous with drugs in the City of Toledo. People from all over the City would come to this part of town to buy their drugs. The problem at the Gold Star was occurring out in front of the market in the parking lot. It was occurring a!i hours of the day, but the busiest times were from 12:00 PM to 11:00 PM. During these hours the neighborhood was confronted with two sets of offenders. First there were the drug sellers who made the parking lot of the Gold Star their place of business. Many people were seen "hanging out" in the parking lot and around the sides of the building taking turns soliciting people. The store owners claimed that they could not control this without better police presence. The police officers didn't know what to think of the store owners. Either the store owners were working with the drug dealers or being forced to look the other way. The second group of offenders, the drug users, brought unwanted people to the neighborhood and caused crime to increase. An analysis of the underlining conditions that precipitated this problem revealed that the demographics of the neighborhood had changed in recent years. The neighborhood became mostly a renting community and there was an increase in young adults and children.. Also, the location of the Gold Star Market was well suited for the open air drug business. The good news was that the Weed and Seed initiative was ready to tackle this problem head on using a nonconventional police approach. ## RESPONSE: THE PLAN The challenge now was to figure out how to rid the Gold Star of the loiters. Traditional approaches had failed time and time again so this time it had to be something new. Starting in October of 2000, Officers Joseph Heffernan and Terrance Lewis, along with their Weed and Seed coordinator Jennifer Wise, began to attend many community policing training seminars. It was at these seminars that these community partners learned what worked in other cities and the value of brainstorming to solve problems. It became apparent that what the police officers saw during working hours was not a true representation of the problem after leaving the area. So what was really happening when the police weren't there? A surveillance camera! We had heard of the use of surveillance cameras at some of the community policing seminars and thought that this strategy would be perfect for this problem. A camera would let us know who the main players were and give us a better idea of how the drug operation was being run. Fortunately LDC was able to come up with the money needed to purchase the surveillance system (\$2000) and a private business located across the street, the Bavarian Sports Club, agreed to let us set up the system in their building. In April of 2001 the tape began rolling and immediately we started getting results. It became apparent that the drug dealers had quite a sophisticated system of look outs and drug delivery. It also became apparent that some of the drug dealing had to be happening inside of the store. The degree to which the store owners were aware of this problem, and what, if any, drugs were located inside the store was unclear. What was clear was that the store owners were going to have to change. Either they were going to be apart of the solution, or be eliminated for being part of the problem. How could we get the store owners attention? Armed with surveillance tapes that contained dozens of drug transactions a meeting was set up with members from different city agencies and the police department. After viewing a composite tape everybody in the room was convinced that something had to be done. Managers from the Department of Neighborhoods and the Department of Inspections agreed to head up a task force to give the Gold Star Market an inspection that they would not forget soon. On May 1, 2001 members from the task force, which included people from the Toledo Police Department and several other city agencies which had inspection authority, executed a detailed inspection of the property. Many violations were found ranging from building and fire code violations to drug paraphernalia. # ASSESSMENT: THE OUTCOME Changes happened immediately. Prior attempts to get the store owners to clean up their business were ignored, but this approach had the store owners very interested in helping us. The store began to have a visible security presence in the lot, banned certain people from the carryout, and made some physical changes to the building and area. The surveillance camera also enabled the police to make numerous arrests. Shortly after the task force inspection, word leaked out on the street that a surveillance camera was watching the Gold Star. At first this worried us, but this had a very positive and unexpected result. Nobody wanted to be anywhere near the Gold Star anymore. Almost overnight the loitering ended. Another positive effect of this project was that the Gold Star Market began to make more money and the store owners became true community partners. Today there is a very noticeable decrease in the open-air drug sales. By combining resources, two months of "outside the box" police work has accomplished a lasting result that years of traditional police work failed to do. # DESCRIPTION Problem oriented policing has been a priority with the City of Toledo Police Department since the early 1990's. Over the past decade the Toledo Police Department has transformed itself into a progressive agency that has made many changes. These changes have included a decentralization of police operations, development of the Community Services Section, and a close working relationship with numerous Community Development Corporations. Today there are officers that are specifically dedicated to community policing and every officer is encouraged to find problems and solve them. When officers lake the initiative to solve a problem and complete TPD form \#81, Toledo Police Department Problem Oriented Policing Report (see supporting documents), they are recognized for their efforts and encouraged to continue to problem solve. Officer interaction with the community has increased as more and more officers learn the benefits of this strategy. In the fall of 2000 one of the City's premier Community Development Corporations, The Lagrange Development Corporation, secured funding from the Department of Justice to implement a Weed and Seed program in their historic Polish Village neighborhood. This Weed and Seed program was to be a joint collaboration in which the resources from the Department of Justice, the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC), the Lagrange Development Corporation (LDC), and the City of Toledo would be used to assist residents in reclaiming their neighborhood. The goal is to combine enhanced law enforcement and community policing (Weed) with neighborhood restoration, community economic development, social services and neighborhood building (Seed). The Police Department dedicated two police officers to work the Weed and Seed program. These officers (Joseph Heffernan and Terrance Lewis) worked with Lagrange Development Corporation's Weed and Seed Coordinator (Jennifer Wise) to identify problems and use brainstorming techniques, which include the S.A.R.A model, to solve problems. # SCANNING The tools used to identify neighborhood problems included community crime surveys, block watch, and crime task force meetings that include people from the community, LDC, the police, and other city agencies. The data taken from these sources gave us a list of community concerns. The number one complaint by far was the open-air drug sales that were occurring in the neighborhood. This problem was selected due to the visibility of the drug sales and because of the quality of life that was affected by all the problems that open air drug sales caused. These drug sales were occurring primarily on Lagrange Street, which is a main city throughway that connects two parts of town. The local carryouts that were located on Lagrange Street were especially bad problem areas. One location, The Gold Star Market, was so bad that people from all over the city came to this location to buy and sell drugs. Neighborhood citizens were constantly being solicited and the name Gold Star had become synonymous with drug sates in the City of Toledo. The open-air drug sales were causing a great deal of anxiety in the community that seemed to be getting worse all the time. Many residents were afraid to walk the streets and the traditional police responses to the problem were not effective. The constant loitering in and around the Gold Star caused a traffic problem and litter was everywhere. Two gangs began competing for the drug market and graffiti began to pop up. An increase in related crimes like prostitution, violent crime and theft offenses became apparent. A diagnosis of the offender groups revealed two sets of offenders. First there were the drug dealers who were young people ranging in age from 14 to 20 that usually belonged to one of two gangs. Secondly there were the drug users. These people were generally between the ages of 20 to 40 . The drugs being sold were primarily crack cocaine and marijuana. A diagnosis of the physical environment around the Gold Star revealed why this location was ideal for open-air drug sales. The Gold Star was located at a bend in the road and had a large front parking lot which contained a bus stop that was being used as an excuse to loiter. Through communicating with the neighborhood, observing the situation, and diagnosing the environment we had come up with the one main problem. Now we had to solve it. # ANALYSIS In order to solve this problem we needed more information. A detailed analysis was the next thing. Several methods of data collection and information sources were used. First we needed to find out what the citizens of the neighborhood felt about the open air drug dealing, and what they were seeing that was different from what the police already knew. A crime survey was sent out to the community so that their responses could be reported. This was a good way to get feedback that we might not ordinarily receive. Many citizens in our community were frightened of some type of retaliation and the surveys offered an anonymous way for them to express their true feelings. Another data source used to get community feedback was blockwatch and crime task force meetings. Two to three meetings were held monthly where members from the community and people from various organizations came together to voice their concerns and give ideas on what to do about the open air drug dealing. This open forum was useful and a lot of good intelligence was gathered. The high visibility of the problem also aided in the analysis. Although the drug dealers were very creative in their activity, they were still out on the street which meant a certain amount of information could be obtained simply through observation. We also had the use of the police crime analysis unit. Information from this unit was helpful in analyzing past and current call volumes and crime rates. The problem of open-air drug sales in the Gold Star parking lot had been bad for many years. However, in the recent months preceding the target enforcement the calls for service had increased and the number of violators had noticeably grown. It had gotten so bad that people from all over the metropolitan area were coming to the Gold Star to buy and sell drugs. The problem had been addressed mostly through 911 calls for service. These calls were generalty low priority and were often assigned to a district crew after some time had elapsed. The results of this response had little to no impact. Occasionally the police would respond by making sweeps, but unfortunately by the time the police wagons were leaving the scene with their prisoners more people were back at the Gold Star. To make matters worse for the police, very few drugs were being seized during these sweeps. This was due to the sophistication of the drug deliveries. This task of stopping the open air drug dealing at this location also proved very difficult for the vice/narcotics unit. Undercover buys were conducted numerous times with only mixed results. Most of the detectives were known to the offenders and the use of confidential informants were limited because of the ever changing nature of the open-air drug environment. The problems at the Gold Star were bad, and they just kept getting worse. Traditional police responses had failed. The frustration level in the community and the police department were at an all time high. So who were the cause of all this anxiety? Basically there were two sets of offenders. First there were the drug dealers who made this location their place of business. A study of this group revealed that the primary offenders were between the ages of 14 to 20 years old and typically had one of two gang affiliations. The motivation for the drug dealers was the money that they made selling the drugs, and how easily the money came. The dealers could gain enough money for nice clothes and cars with only a minimal capital investment. There was also a status involved in their gang world with selling drugs. When you're a teenager you've gotta be cool. These young people also believed that they had very little to loose because many of them were juveniles and the police were always busy doing other things. Then there were the drug users who often came to this part of town from somewhere else to engage in their criminal behavior. This criminal behavior often included not only drugs but other crimes such as robbery, burglary, breaking and entering, rape, and assaults. The constant loitering caused traffic problems and the drug soliciting kept many residents held up inside their homes. Data from the Toledo Police Crime Analysis unit provided some alarming statistics regarding the crime rate for suppressibte felonies in the target enforcement area. The year 2000 had a total of 87 of these felony crimes of which $25 \%$ were considered violent (robbery, kidnapping, rape, assault). The more we learned about what the results of this problem cost the community, the more concerned and committed we became. There was a lot of harm being done to this once peaceful community. Lowering these suppressible felonies, especially the violent offenses, became a desired result of our stepped up drug enforcement and would serve as a good measure of our success. An analysis of the underlining conditions revealed several reasons that contributed to the problem at the Gold Star. First, over the past few years the demographics of the neighborhood changed. The neighborhood became a mostly renting community with $65 \%$ of the population not owning their homes. This high turnover in neighbors resulted in a real change in the way the neighborhood looked and felt. To go along with this there was an increase in young adults and children. Both local elementary schools were well over capacity. Secondly, the neighborhood suffered from blight, low household incomes, and over a $60 \%$ high school dropout rate. There were many vacant homes and businesses. Kids ran the street all day and never gave a thought about school. Thirdly, this location was physically ideal for open-air drug sales. The Gold Star was located right on Lagrange Street, a busy city throughway. The specific environmental factors of the Gold Star itself, such as the large front parking lot, the bend in the road, the bus stop, and the high crime in the surrounding areas also made this an ideal location. The analysis had started to paint a picture of what we were up against. We believed that we had a pretty good grasp on the nature of the problem, but to what extent was it really going on, and how were they running the drug operation? To what degree, if any, were the owners of the Gold Star involved? The information that was gathered so far concluded that indeed there was quite a bit of drug activity around the Gold Star and that most of the drugs were probably being stashed in and around the building. Since there were two main gangs that frequented the location it was assumed that the main players had to be these gang members. Usually about 12:00 PM the loitering began around the Gold Star and it remained pretty constant until the store closed at 11:00 PM. Lookouts kept track of the police and made surveillance difficult. Our responses would have to deal with these issues. It was time to brainstorm with our community partners to once and for all come up with some responses that would have a lasting result. # RESPONSE A problem solving meeting was held with members from the community and police department to discuss alternative ways to solve the problem around the Gold Star. The solutions ranged from increased police patrols in the area, more vice/narcotic unit involvement, an out of service foot patrol, community pickets, use of other city departments for non-police related enforcement, and finally a surveillance set up that would monitor the activity around the market. More police patrols and undercover work had been tried to some extent before and had only limited success. Having a foot officer work the immediate area around the Gold Star had some possibilities but it was determined that because of manpower issues, and the fact that a foot officer could not be there all the time, that this approach would not have the results that we needed. The use of community activists picketing around the Gold Star raised some safety issues for the participants and would only be effective for short periods of time. The response of using other city agencies to help solve this problem had come to us from studying many other cities that have used a multi-agency approach to problem solving. We had seen many case studies from across the country in which different problems were solved by getting everybody in the city to join forces. In fact, this had even happened in Toledo before, but never in a situation like this. The Gold Star was a business. This meant that, in theory, it had to comply with ALL the ordinances in the city. Inspections could be done at numerous city levels to make sure that everything at the Gold Star was in compliance. The health department, fire department, building code inspectors, and licensing agencies (just to name a few) could help us shut down the Gold Star. Now this showed signs of real promise. The trick would be getting all these other departments to view this as a priority and to work together. We had some experience already working with other city departments and had not always had the best success. We felt the key to getting everybody on board would be to get the different department heads excited about what we were doing. A surveillance camera! Once everybody saw what was actually going on around the Gold Star how could they not want to help. After all, a picture says a thousand words. The response was starting to take shape. A surveillance camera would also give us information that would be vital to solving this problem. A camera would let us know who the main players were and give us a better idea of how the drug operation was being run. It would also hopefully answer the question of the extent of involvement the owners of the Gold Star had in the drug business. The need for a surveillance camera became clear. It could be used to generate the interest needed to get our problem recognized as a priority city wide, and it would give us some valuable intelligence information that would be needed to stop the activity. We were convinced that a surveillance camera would give us what was needed to shut down the open-air drug sates around the Gold Star. However, we were working under some constraints. There was no existing surveillance system that we had access to or money to buy one. Even if we were able to come up with a surveillance system, where were we going to put it? These were two major considerations that had to be dealt with before we could move forward with our response. Fortunately the police department had a very good working relationship with the Lagrange Development Corporation (LDC). This community development corporation was a partner with the police department on many levels. The Weed and Seed program was coordinated out of the LDC facility, and they were very involved in the problem solving meetings that were conducted about the Gold Star. LDC felt strongly enough about this problem that they were willing to pay for the $\$ 2000.00$ surveillance system. This was a significant commitment on their part. Being a community development corporation, they only had a small budget for crime prevention and the camera would take a big chunk out of the budget. The next hurdle was the question of where to put the surveillance camera. From the analysis it was determined the majority of the problem was occurring in the front parking lot of the Gold Star especially by the bus stop. The bus stop had been used as a post for the drug dealers and as safe haven against police who were trying to enforce the "no loitering" in the parking lot. Directly across the street from the bus stop was the Bavarian Sports Club. The police had a good relationship with the Bavarian Sports Club and actually had several officers that were members. A meeting was set up with the club president, Kevin Mantell. During this meeting we explained what we had in mind about solving the drug problem across the street from the club, and conveyed the importance of using this location. Mr. Mantell was very helpful and gave us full access to his facility. In fact, Mr. Mantell stated that his club was actually considering moving out of the neighborhood because of the problem across the street. He stated the club was either going to move out of the neighborhood or spend a significant amount of money on capital improvements on their existing building. The club membership was split on how to spend their money. We told Mr. Mantell that it was important to us that they stay in our neighborhood and that with his help the drug problem would be gone from across the street. He stated that if the situation got better that they would stay and spend their money on the capital improvements. This turned out to be a very important meeting. Not only were we able to secure a place to monitor the drug activities, but possibly prevented a good community partner from leaving the neighborhood. The money for the surveillance system had been granted and the location had been found. Several different security companies were contacted and bids were received quoting different systems and prices. After reviewing all the information it was decided to purchase a Toshiba IK 540A CCD camera with a computer 5.0 mm to 40 mm varifocal/auto iris lens. With this came a Toshiba KV 7168A 168 hour time lapse recorder, a $9^{\prime \prime}$ monitor, and other supporting equipment. In April of 2001 the surveillance camera came in and we were ready for set up. On April 6, 2001 the surveillance camera appeared behind an attic vent in the Bavarian Sports Club directly across the street form the Gold Star Market. All the hard work and planning had paid off. Now we just needed results. There was a lot invested so far and there were plenty of expectations. Before turning on the camera the legality of what we were doing had to be checked. The city law department was consulted and it was confirmed that as long as we were filming in a public place there were no expectations of privacy. Also, by ensuring that the owners of the Gold Star were in compliance with all city ordinances we were not violating any of their rights. Our stepped up enforcement may be unusual, but not illegal. The goal of this response was to rid the area around the Gold Star market of the open air drug sales. We were going to achieve this by using a surveillance camera to gain information on the drug operation so that our traditional police responses could be more effective. We would also use the footage of the problem to bring all the necessary people to the table to attack the problem in a nontraditional way. If this response were a success there would be more drug arrests and a reduction in the crime rate, especially violent felony crime, in the Weed and Seed area. This would be measured by comparing the suppressible felony crimes in the Weed and Seed area from the years 2000 and 2001. As soon as we turned the camera on we filmed a blatant drug transaction occurring. Even we were shocked at what we were watching. Every two days we would go and retrieve the surveillance footage form the Bavarian Club and every tape we reviewed contained a gold mine. We learned that the drug dealers had quite a sophisticated system of look outs and drug delivery. Many people who we assumed were not involved turned out to be key players. An example of this was a female who delivered large quantities of drugs but was never considered a suspect previously. Another revelation was where the drugs were being stashed. It was obvious that some of the drugs were being stashed inside of the Gold Star, but a lot of the drugs were being kept outside in the parking lot, in the garbage, and on unassuming people near the location. It was still unclear the degree to which the store owners were involved. What was clear though was that the owners of the Gold Star were going to have to make some big changes. By the middle of April 2001 we felt confident that we had enough footage to show at a problem solving meeting that would include people from different agencies that all had inspection powers within the city limits. On April 24, 2001 the big meeting took place. It took some time and a lot of coordinating, but we managed to get the needed city department heads to attend the meeting. Involved police officers and affected community representatives also attended this meeting. An analysis of the problem was done and then 10 incidents from the surveillance tape were shown. After viewing the tape everybody in the room was convinced that this was a real problem. Immediately different people began to tell us what they could do. Bob Burger, who was head of the Department of Neighborhoods, agreed to coordinate all the nonpolice efforts and would use what he called 'The Dirty Dozen" task force. This would be a team that was made up of different department heads within the city that had inspection powers. The tape worked great. Involving everybody the way we did and making them a part of solving this serious police problem energized this task force. "The Dirty Dozen" was organized, powerful, and committed. Their efforts, combined with the police, would force the Gold Star into changing one way or another. It was concluded that a combined inspection all at the same time would be the most effective. On May 1, 2001 members from 'The Dirty Dozen" and the Toledo Police Department converged on the Gold Star and conducted a very detailed inspection of the entire property. While no drugs were found at the location, there was many other type of violations. These violations ranged from building code compliance to fire and health department infractions. There was also some questionable property at the store that included drug paraphernalia. Initially the store owners didn't know what to do and the Store was immediately shut down by the city until it complied with some of the more serious violations. It hadn't been easy. It took a lot of effort to bring these forces together to bear down all at the same time. Now it was time to get some results. # ASSESSMENT Events in and around the Gold Star began to change immediately. The owners of the Gold Star suddenly became very interested in helping us find a solution to the drug sales. This was what we were looking for. We were prepared to try and put the Gold Star out of business, but that solution would either leave a vacant property or the possibility of another set of owners that allowed drug sales. Commitments were made to us by the store owners to crack down on the loitering in and outside of their property and to refuse to serve certain known offenders. The Gold Star also made a commitment to make some environmental changes. These included changing the store entrance, an interior design change, lot security, and help with removal of the city bus stop that was located in their parking lot. We also made a commitment to them. A promise on our part was made to step up the police presence around their store and make us accessible to them in case they became victims of retaliation. After the tape started rolling incidents of police contacts with the public around the Gold Star raised to an all time high. Exhibit 1 shows that from May 2001 to August 2001 that there was a 100\% increase in police contacts over the previous year. The increase came from police initiated stops around the Gold Star that were a direct result from the intelligence gathered from the surveillance camera. Exhibit 2 shows the overall increase from 2000 to 2001 in the number of police contacts around the Gold Star (842 in 2000 and 928 in 2001). The drug dealers and drug users were on the run, and drug arrests and drug recoveries were up. Exhibit 3 shows the increase in felony drug arrests in the Weed and Seed area from 2000 to 2001 (up from 31 in 2000 to 46 in 2001, a $48 \%$ increase). Data collected from the surveillance camera and direct communication with the owners at the Gold Star was the reason for this. A very noticeable decrease in the loitering followed. Initially we thought our one-two punch of the surveillance data and owner cooperation cleared out the problem. In reality it was a one-two three punch that solved the problem. We began to hear, "you guys are taping us." We piayed dumb for a while but it soon became clear that the word was out on the street about the camera. We knew eventually it would be found out but we were hoping to keep it secret for a while longer. The news that the camera had been discovered actually had a very pleasant and unexpected result. Nobody wanted to be anywhere near the Gold Star anymore. With the increased police contacts, the owners helping the police, and the threat of the surveillance camera taping the events in the parking lot there was just too much risk for the drug dealers. Without the drug dealers the drug users also left the area. Eventually even the bus stop, the dealer's "loiter free zone", was even removed. The effect was very noticeable and it changed the whole complexion of Lagrange Street. The response could have been a little more effective if we had the ability to purchase a more sophisticated surveillance system, but it served its purpose. Color would have been good to have and there were times that it would have been nice to use a remote control devise to move and focus the camera. Some of the really good stuff happened just outside of the camera. The problem of displacement also occurred. Many of the drug dealers got off Lagrange Street and moved out into the neighborhoods. While the drug business was not as profitable on the side streets, there was still a market for them. Some of the neighborhood residents were angry over the displacement and had to be reassured that we would get them off the side streets too. Overall the feedback we were getting from the community was very positive, and there seemed to be a significant decrease in the open-air drug sales. This was all good, but we wanted some hard proof that our response was also preventing other types of crime. Initially one of the goals was to reduce the number of felony crimes, especially violent felony crimes, which were thought to be related to the open air drug sales. We knew that from 2000 to 2001 our drug enforcement had been a success with a $48 \%$ increase in felony drug arrests, but did this also affect the other felony crimes that plagued the area? The answer was yes. Exhibit 4 shows the comparison by year of the suppressible felony crimes in the weed and seed area. These suppressible crimes are preplanned crimes where a specific crime pattern is developed. These types of crimes are associated with some other underlying cause. While the burglary rate remained the same, the incidents of robbery, breaking and entering, kidnapping, rape, and felony assault all decreased. Exhibit 5 shows the overall decrease for all of these crimes from 2000 to 2001, a 13\% decline. The statistics used for these comparisons came from the Toledo Police Department's Crime Analysis Unit. While the decrease in these suppressible crimes can be correlated to the increase in felony drug arrests and police contacts, there may have been other influences that also affected the results. These other influences, such as some of the seeding activities like food baskets, would be hard to quantify and relate to our results. Of the suppressible crimes the violent ones were the most important to the community. Exhibit 6 shows that, in 2000, 25\% of the total suppressible felony crimes were violent in nature. In 2001 this number dropped to 16\%. See exhibit 7. So not only did the total number of suppressible felony crimes decrease from 2000 to 2001, but the percent of those crimes that were violent also dropped. The first quarter results for the year 2002 also trended down and are being monitored on a monthly basis. It has been a year since the response was implemented and the open air drug sales around the Gold Star have not returned. The Gold Star is still a priority and a zero tolerance policy is always enforced. The response worked better than we ever expected. The camera enabled us to gather the information we needed to make the arrests, it changed the attitude of the store owners, and it actually work as a deterrent once its presence was suspected. The number of police contacts increased $10.3 \%$ from 2000 to 2001 and the number of suppressible felony crime decreased by $13 \%$ during that same time period. See exhibit 8 . This would not have been possible without the surveillance camera. Not only were the drug dealers gone from the Gold Star, but the overall crime rate and quality of life improved. The camera was removed from the Bavarian Club in the fall of 2001 and used in other locations where we hope similar results will occur. However, out on the street everybody still thinks the camera is working. We flatly deny the existence of any such device but are sometimes caught carrying a videotape in our police car. The success of our problem solving can be directly attributed to the amount of support and involvement we had from people outside of the police department. The fact that we had regular S.A.R. A. meetings that pulled together people and ideas from a variety of sources was really the key to solving this problem. # AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION The use of problem solving strategics has become a part of everyday policing for the City of Toledo. In 2000 the whole police department went through an eight-hour training class put on by the TriState Regional Community Policing Institute at the Toledo Police Academy in which the S. A.R. A. model was introduced and officers were trained in its application. All officers are encouraged to work on problems in [his manner and are rewarded for their efforts by receiving acknowledgments which have included letters of appreciation, palm pilots, and training opportunities. In addition to the mandated in-service training Officers Heffernan and Lewis have attended several seminars and other training opportunities which included the 2000 POP Conference in San Diego. The money needed to send Heffernan and Lewis to this type of training came not only from the police department but also from some community partners such as the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC), the Department of Justice, and the Lagrange Development Corporation. Many examples and case studies from other cities were used in adapting the S.A.R. A. model for the Gold Star. All of these resources helped out immensely and were largely responsible for the success at the Gold Star. In April of 2002 Officers Heffernan and Lewis received the Ohio Crime Prevention Association's " Meeting Local Needs Award" for their success in solving the problem at (he Gold Star. The S.A.R.A. model used for solving the open air drug sales at the Gold Star was constantly evolving. It kept getting better the more it was used. Some of the skepticism and reluctance to use the model in the beginning soon gave way, and after a while everybody was getting involved. It was the involvement of some of the key players in the community that enabled the model to be fully implemented. If the Lagrange Development Corporation did not donate the funds for the surveillance camera the problem may have not been solved. The Toledo Police Department's emphasis on relationship building and teamwork enabled the required resources to be acquired and were a big part of the solution. The police cannot do it alone. In today's world of cut backs and budget constraints the future of successful police problem solving strategies is directly related to how well the police are able to implement non-traditional police responses to costly problems. The Project Contact Persons are: Patrolman Joseph Heffernan Weed and Seed Officer, Lagrange Area 3158 Cherry, Toledo, Ohio 43608 Phone:(419)245-1319 Fax:(419)245-1342 E-mail: joeheff1@yahoo.com Patrolman Terrance Lewis Weed and Seed Officer, Lagrange Area 3158 Cherry, Toledo, Ohio 43608 Phone:(419)245-1319 Fax: (419)245-1342 E-mail: tdlewis2160@aol.com # SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ![img-1.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-1.jpeg) # YEARLY POLICE INCIDENT/CONTACT AROUND THE GOLD STAR ![img-2.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-2.jpeg) ![img-3.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-3.jpeg) # EXHIBIT 3 FELONY DRUG ARREST IN WEES/SEED AREA COMPARISON 2000 AND 2001 ![img-4.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-4.jpeg) EXHIBIT 4 FELONY SUPPRESSIBLE CRIMES IN THE WEED/SEED AREA ![img-5.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-5.jpeg) ![img-6.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-6.jpeg) # YEARLY COMPARISON OF SUPPRESSIBLE CRIMES IN THE WEED/SEED AREA ## EXHIBIT 6 ### PERCENT OF VIOLENT FELONY CRIMES YEAR 2000 ![img-7.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-7.jpeg) - **VIOLENT CRIMES** - **NON-VIOLENT CRIMES** ![img-8.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-8.jpeg) # EXHIBIT 8 POLICE CONTACT AND SUPPRESSIBLE FELONY COMPARISON YEAR 2000 AND 2001 ![img-9.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-9.jpeg) # Lagrange Development Corporation ## Weed & Seed Target Area ![img-10.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/02-51/img-10.jpeg)